Rabbi Yosef Gavriel Bechhofer
הרב יוסף גבריאל בקהופר
Excellent shiur. I'm been a big fan of your your classes and have enjoyed listening to what I download from torahanytime and your other download sites for several years. May you continue being a marbitz torah for many years.In this shiur you briefly touch on whether the recipient of any funds for medical purposes needs to repay the giver. I would think this is a very crucial issue towards understanding whether a national health insurance policy ocnforms to halacha or not, and is not a tangential topic. If halacha requires repayment, then the original obligation on the tzibur or individuals is basically to provide a no income verification loan, no questions asked and with no preconditions as to when to repay - however, the obligation to repay exists, and any law not requiring such repayment needs to be examined from a halachic perspective to determine whether it exceeds the govenment's ability to impose taxes. On the other hand, if no repayment is ever required then the halacha somewhat resembles what Obamacare entails, as you discuss in this class.
Thank you for your kind words of chizuk!If I am correct in affirming Justice Roberts' definition of the new legislation as a tax, it is not refundable, as Beis Din via Hefker BD Hefker, or a government via Dina d'Malchusa Dina, erases prior rights.
It's my understanding that the only aspect of the legislation that has been called a tax by the Court is the penalty paid by those who do do not have insurance. The actual insurance premium paid by those who have policies is a regular insurance expense, and is not a tax, even in light of the Court's decison.Relooking over my original comment, however, I think my point isn't valid. How an insurance company pays out to recipients is not a subject for policy holders to object to other than as an abstract issue.