Sage commentary for sure...
Lots of restrictions on the federal government were written into the constitution.
The Supreme Court has over the years gutted the notion that there is any limit on the power of the Federal govt.
Putting medical freedom into the constitution might not necessarily preserve freedom.
A big problem here is that people want medical freedom for themselves, but they also want the government and taxpayers to foot the bill.
We all know that he who pays the fiddler gets to call the tune.
Exactly, Les! The constitutional solution might not be the best solution, judging by recent history's track record of ignoring constitutional safeguards. Regarding who calls the tune nowadays, I am afraid it is the one who enjoys the tune.
BTW, I have been seeing stories in the news that a lot of folks are waking up to the downside of the current medical reform and choosing to forgo the "benefits." Most of those are healthy people who either find it more cost effective to pay the penalty for not having insurance, or who believe their current health premiums have a good chance of remaining cost stable. Good idea to speak up regarding the economic downside of the plan, since that is its real Achilles heel.