If and when President Obama signs legislation revamping the nation’s health care system, several Republican-led states appear likely to fight a key provision of the new law in court. Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter on Wednesday became the first governor to sign a bill setting up a possible court showdown, The Idaho Statesman reported. The new law directs the state attorney general to file suit if a mandate to buy health insurance is part of any federal law that emerges from Congress.
“How can somebody mandate us because we're breathing to buy health insurance?” Republican Representative Jim Clark told The Statesman. “Now we’re saying in code: We’re not going to stand for that.”
Critics of a health insurance mandate say it differs from existing legal requirements for drivers to buy car insurance because driving is a choice. Buying health insurance, they say, is essentially a tax on being alive.
More than 30 other states are considering legislation similar to the bill Otter signed. In another critical state, Virginia, the office of the attorney general on Wednesday vowed its own lawsuit if Congress approves health care legislation this week, as Democrats hope.
Republican Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II believes the proposed health care bill violates the U.S. Constitution because it assumes powers that are delegated to the states, The Washington Post reported. But the paper noted that “it is not clear whether Cuccinelli and other state attorneys general would have standing to sue over the federal reform and whether such suits would find favor with the federal courts.”
Like Idaho, Virginia has passed its own legislation vowing to fight any health care mandate, but The Idaho Statesman reported that the law went into effect without the signature of Governor Bob McDonnell, though he had initially vowed to sign it.
As it has on the federal level, the fight over health care in the states is breaking down along partisan lines. In Georgia, Democrats in the state Senate on Wednesday blocked Republican efforts to pass their own law rejecting a federal health insurance mandate, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.
“Today’s Take” provides a quick analysis of the day’s top news in state government.
Powered by
By Grace Polaris on Mar 20, 2010 12:02:06 PM
obama said that the "American people don't care about the process (lying, cheating, stealing, bribing, threatening) that he and the Progressives have gone through to enact this bill, they just want the results".
I find this a rather interesting comment because even in cases of local law, violations of process will throw cases out.
Example: If police have reason to believe that, a person is selling drugs in their home and the police knock on the door and demand to come in, etc.And the police come in the house and discover large stashes of drugs and they arrest the suspect, the case will not stick. First no Miranda rights were read to the suspect, secondly, there was no warrant. The case would be thrown out for process violations.
Process is the foundation and paramount to the legal premise of law at all levels.
Then there is the substance of the bill,there are so many constitutional violations, for a starting point, our laws require that equality of law is applied. One of many examples of violations AKA inequality of law, is as follows:the American people will be subject to monthly invasions of privacy from the IRS; the IRS will have the power to go into private bank accounts and retrieve money and/or fine and/or imprison Americans that donât have government-mandated health care.While illegals/anchors, SEUI, and obama elites and "Special Interest" groups will not have to met this requirement.This group of obama friends, will also not be required to pay for their health care as it will be another burden placed on the American tax payers.
The process of law as well as the legislative policy set forth by the health care reform bill violate our Constitution, we don't need the Supreme Court to tell Americans that fact, most know it.Therefore, the American people as well as the State governments must not accept this mandate ever.
Report as Offensive
Health
By Katrina Pavlovich on Mar 19, 2010 5:34:56 PM
Health Care is not a right given by our Constitution, it is up to each individual to first take care of themselves to avoid the need for health care and I have NEVER had a doctor prevent anything - get educated and take care of yourself and it should be your choice if you want to buy health insurance.
Go Idaho, I am so proud of our state government that has taken a stand against this joke of a bill that does more for those in Washington then it will ever do for any individual. Also, driving is a choice you can take a bus, train etc your CHOICE.
Kill the Bill.
Report as Offensive
debate v. rhetoric
By Paul Donovan on Mar 19, 2010 8:56:04 AM
A "tax on being alive"? This kind of rhetorical nonsense, along with the disinformation campaign (remember "death panels"?), has fatally degraded the debate.
Report as Offensive
Health Insurance
By Wendy Barrott on Mar 19, 2010 8:21:01 AM
In this country driving is not a choice. To participate in the economy you must drive. To drive you must have insurance. People need insurance for access to preventative care. Affordable health insurance will improve the health of our citizens.
Report as Offensive
law suits regarding forcing Americans to purchase healthcare insurance
By Mona Bradway on Mar 18, 2010 3:59:40 PM
I would like to see Connecticut join other states in instituting law suits against the Federal Government if this bill passes.
Report as Offensive