April 8, 2010

Rep. Wasserman Schultz Insists ObamaCare Doesn’t Mandate Individuals to Buy Insurance

Filed under: Healthcare — Cato Uticensis @ 3:51 PM

Talk about being clueless, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D.-Fla.) insisted that the new health care law she voted for last month does not mandate that individuals buy health insurance, despite language in the law that plainly says otherwise.

At an April 5 town hall meeting in Fort Lauderdale, a constituent asked Wasserman Shultz where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandate that individuals buy health insurance. She responded that the new health care law did not require individuals to buy health insurance.

In a written statement to CNSNews.com on Wednesday, her press secretary, Jonathan Beeton, said it was true that the health care law did not mandate that individuals buy health insurance and that Wasserman Schultz stood by her assertion at the townhall meeting.

“We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance,” Wasserman Schultz said at the townhall meeting.

“Yes, this is accurate,” Beeton said in his statement to CNSNews.com. “You have a choice of insuring yourself with affordable coverage, or paying an assessment that will offset the burden you place on other insured Americans and taxpayers by not being insured.”

Read rest here>>>



Promoting Limited Government,Constitutional Rights and Personal Responsibility

Conservative Books and Conservative Book Club

Related posts:

  1. Does Obama Know the Difference Between Liability Insurance and Collision Insurance
  2. Fact Check: Your Premiums Will Rise Under Obama Care
  3. 20 Ways ObamaCare Robs You Of Your Freedoms
  4. Congress Passes Unconstitutional Health Care Bill
  5. Paul Ryan Plans to Push “Repeal and Replace” ObamaCare

1 Comment »

  1. Just some more of the supposedly conservative talking points and twisting of the truths.I you Hate the President so much why go and see his pics.The repug really need to run on repeal,maybe then the wing-nuts will see what liars they are they need to have 2/3 of the senate for a presidental veto.

    Comment by JKM — April 9, 2010 @ 5:23 AM

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree