Even if Democrats manage to pass health reform legislation, if it contains an individual mandate it could prove unconstitutional, U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley said Thursday.

During an interview with KAYL radio in Storm Lake and the Marshalltown Times Republican, Grassley said that even though he’s never studied law and is not a constitutional expert, he still believes mandating insurance coverage could be a violation of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

“[The 10th Amendment] says something like anything that’s not specifically delegated to the federal government is reserved to the states and the people thereof — all those rights and powers,” Grassley said, later adding: “So states, if they want to mandate you buy something, they can do it.  But that doesn’t give the federal government the right to do it.”

Therein lies the difference between mandates for health insurance and mandates on car insurance, Grassley said.

“When it comes to driving, driving under law in — in every state and under court decisions in those states is a privilege, so you don’t have to drive,” Grassley said. “But if you want to exercise that privilege, it’s got a condition. And that condition is has — have insurance.”

The provision of the bill in question would require all Americans to carry health insurance or face financial penalties, though waivers or discounts would be provided for lower-income Americans. Grassley has been accused of flip flopping on the issue of individual mandates after seeming to voice support for the idea this summer.

Lately, though, Grassley has been highly critical of the idea, questioning whether the federal government has the authority to mandate citizens buy something.

In an Op-Ed published by the D.C.-based news site Politico, University of California, Irvine School of Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky said arguing the constitutionality of individual mandates is ridiculous.

“Congress clearly could do this under its power pursuant to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution to regulate commerce among the states,” Chemerinsky wrote. “The Supreme Court has held that this includes authority to regulate activities that have a substantial effect on interstate commerce.”

He said an “an unbroken line of precedents stretching back 70 years” has given Congress power to regulate activities that effect interstate commerce.

“People not purchasing health insurance unquestionably has this effect,” Chemerinsky said.

Grassley said that even if the individual mandate is Constitutional, there is still disagreement on whether it is the right thing to do.