This is in regard to David Webb’s letter in the June 10 Spokesman-Review. He wondered what the difference was between requiring one to have auto insurance and requiring one to have health insurance. The difference is that one is not required to buy a car.
If the government can require that one buy health insurance, can it also require that one buy life insurance? Some families end up in dire straits when a breadwinner dies with inadequate life insurance or none at all, and they must have public assistance just as people who have no health insurance do. When a loved one dies, there are often financial obligations involved which families cannot meet. Medical bills often must be paid, and the remains must be dealt with.
Accepting the argument that requiring health insurance will keep the public from having to pick up the tab for those who cannot afford health care opens the door for using a similar argument for many other purposes.