US News Metro Long Island Politics

Sports NFL MLB Olympics NBA NHL College Football College Basketball WNBA

Entertainment TV Movies Music Celebrities Awards Theater

Lifestyle Weird But True Sex & Relationships Viral Trends Human Interest Parenting Fashion & Beauty Food & Drink Travel

Health Wellness Fitness Health Care Medicine Men’s Health Women’s Health Mental Health Nutrition

Science Space Environment Wildlife Archaeology

Today’s Paper Covers Columnists Horoscopes Crosswords & Games Sports Odds Podcasts Careers

Email Newsletters Official Store Home Delivery Tips

Switch between CA and NY editions here.

California should stop forcing young people to buy health insurance

See more of our coverage in your search results.

California’s gubernatorial candidates agree on at least one thing: The state has an affordability crisis.

Whether the proposed solution is cheaper energy, lower taxes, new housing construction or tougher regulation of large corporations, both Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Xavier Becerra are competing to convince voters they can make life in California less expensive.

Young Californians have good reason to be skeptical.

The average Gen Z salary in the state is around $49,000, an amount that no longer guarantees financial security. Rent consumes a growing share of income, roughly $2,100 a month in California. Student debt remains a burden, up to tens of thousands of dollars. Groceries, transportation and utility bills continue to climb. And the price of fuel in the Golden State is far more expensive than in the rest of the country. Building savings — or even keeping up with monthly expenses — can feel increasingly difficult.

Against that backdrop, California continues to enforce a policy that receives surprisingly little attention in affordability debates: the individual health insurance mandate.

Recall that when the Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare) passed Congress in 2010, it included a provision forcing people to buy health insurance or pay a penalty.

The Supreme Court, in a controversial 2012 decision, redefined the penalty as a “tax” to preserve the constitutionality of the law.

The purpose of the penalty, known as the........

© New York Post