In 1989 Heritage Advocated for Mandatory Health Insurance.. What Changed?..

[Cha]

[AnotherMcIntosh]

1. Some think (but not me) that a few Congresspersons bought health insurance stock before voting

in favor of the mandatory purchase of health insurance.

Nah, that can't be it.

There must be a different explanation.

[Mnemosyne]

4. Apparently they didn't break the law doing it, either. Insane. nt

[Cha]

2. Kicking to get the FACTS OUT!

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Hmm. You're telling me that ObamaCare is a far-right plan?

Interesting.

[bunnies]

5. ...

[Cha]

6. Statement from the Fucking Heritage Terrorists.. if anyone

cares to read their hypocritical shit.

http://heritageaction.com/key-votes/key-vote-no-on-house-spending-and-debt-deal/

[Cha]

7. K&R!

[Puzzledtraveller]

8. The real question is why are we supporting it?

[solarhydrocan]

9. Start pulling on that thread and the whole damn sweater is at risk

[LibertyLover]

10. An African-American Democrat was elected president

and got the mandatory health insurance law passed. That's what changed.

[pampango]

11. That plus the Massachusetts legislature changed the HF idea so much that romney vetoed it

and the liberal Democratic legislature passed it over his veto.

[Bunnahabhain]

12. In case anyone wants to read the Heritage original proposal

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/1991/pdf/hl298.pdf

IMO it's a pretty intelligent take on dismantling the perverse incentives that still exist and the conundrum that the current tax treatment helps those that need help the least the most. I think many of us here have been long time supporters of eliminating the preferred treatment premiums paid by employers have vs. premiums paid by the individual. Unsurprisingly one might conclude the underlying philosophy of the Heritage proposal is somewhat different from that underlying the ACA but both see healthcare as a public good that should be fostered.