VA Attorney General: If We Lose, Government 'Will Be Able To Order' People To Buy Anything

By Nicholas Ballasy | December 15, 2010 | 1:40 PM EST

Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II was elected Attorney General of Virginia on November 3, 2009. (Photo from Cuccinelli’s official Web site)

( - Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli told that the federal government will be able to “order” individuals to purchase any product or service if the individual mandate in health care law is determined to be constitutional by the Supreme Court.

Federal judge Henry Hudson for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that the individual mandate was unconstitutional on Monday. Cuccinelli predicts that the case will ultimately lie in the hands in the Supreme Court.

“Unfortunately, it could affect an awful lot of different areas because then Congress has an incredibly broad power. They can try to affect and direct the economy just by ordering people to buy particular products,” Cuccinelli told in Richmond after the ruling in his case was announced.

Cuccinelli then provided an example of the power he says the government would have should he lose the case over the individual mandate in the health care law, which requires every individual to purchase health insurance.

“I drive a car, you know, brand X, maybe I don’t like brand X, those are the ones that don’t do as well in the market because they are not as good cars and those are the ones that seem to get subsidized,” he said.

“Well, instead of giving direct subsidizes now or buying the stock of GM, we’ll order Americans to buy product XX which if we lose this case, the federal government will have to power to do that, to positively impact the economy by ordering people to spend and that is an incredible power that the founding fathers would have never have envisioned for the Congress and the President and yet that’s exactly what they’re attempting to exercise in this legislation.”

Although the federal judge denied an injunction, Cuccinelli said he is comfortable with the declaratory judgment issued.

“I’m comfortable with it in the terms the judge stated it. He imposed a declaratory judgment,” he said.

“He acknowledged that the secretary had said you don’t need an injunction here judge because we will obey the outcome of your order, naturally and so the judge took them at their word and so long as they abide by the order, which I have every expectation that they will, it has the same functional outcome. So we’re perfectly comfortable with that; should any problem develop, we know who to go talk to and we’ll be in that judge’s courtroom again.”