Reply #44: No, it wouldn't. The 10th applies ONLY to things that the constitution did not cover.

[Dark]

Commerce clause is a nice carte blanche for Congress to do whatever they want to the economy, as long as they do it to several states. The General welfare clause is similar, allowing them to collect and distribute money to "promote the general welfare."

The 10th amendment specifically states that only powers not given to the feds in the constitution are delegated to the states. The constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate and tax any commerce that occurs between states. Health insurance, in which the money travels from an individual in one state to a corporation in another, fits that bill. Congress is free to regulate, aka pass laws about, that commerce.

The courts have upheld this position, the broad power of Congress to manage the national economy. How they manage it, be it Laissez-faire or complete communism, isn't addressed in the constitution. The constitution gives that authority to Congress and, through elections, their constituents.

I'm not saying HCR is good or bad. But the fact is that it IS constitutional. The feds have the power to force you to enter into commerce (look at Eminent domain. In that case you're forced to sell, rather than buy. But both are, as far as the constituion is concerned, commerce.)