On several occasions, I have warned that government funded health care is becoming a Trojan horse for increasing government micro-management of your life. The logic is that by paying for your health care, the government can argue it has a financial interest in your not eating fatty foods, not smoking, wearing a bike helmet, exercising, etc, decisions that would otherwise only affect the individual themself.*
For those who often accuse me of exaggerated paranoia when it comes to government intervention, check out this from the UK:
People who are grossly overweight, who smoke heavily
or drink excessively could be denied surgery or drugs following a
decision by a Government agency yesterday. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) which
advises on the clinical and cost effectiveness of treatments for the
NHS, said that in some cases the "self-inflicted" nature of an illness
should be taken into account.
Sorry, but I told you so. What's next? Is an unwanted pregnancy "self-inflicted"? How about an STD from unprotected sex? The rulers of this process in England might argue that "Oh, we would never include those things" but technocrats in the US have seen parallel things happen as they have lost political control of their similar institutions in the US.
It gets me to wondering whether the Solomon Amendment may be the new template for government control of individual lives. In both Universities and state governments, the Feds use the threat of withdrawal of federal funds to coerce actions (think 55 mile speed limit, title IX, military recruiting on campus) that the Constitution nominally does not see to give them authority over. Now, there is the distinct possibility that federal funds to individuals (Social Security, Medicare, unemployment) could be used to increase federal authority and coercive micro-management at the individual level.
*Update: Yes, I do know that "themself" is probably not correct grammar. I sometimes use they, them, themself as a grammatically frowned-upon but I think less awkward substitute for he/she, his/her, and his-or-herself when trying to be gender-neutral. Sometimes I just use the traditional male pronoun, sometimes I use the female pronoun generically since women will complain about "he" used generically but men will not complain about "she", and sometimes I mix them up. There is still some consensus building to do in coming up with gender neutral pronouns, though this person defends the singular "they".