GOP pushing for state constitutional amendments blocking mandatory health insurance

[steven johnson]

It's nice to know the GOP is wrapping their self interest as states rights.

In more than a dozen statehouses across the country, a small but growing group of lawmakers is pressing for state constitutional amendments that would outlaw a crucial element of the health care plans under discussion in Washington: the requirement that nearly everyone buy insurance or pay a penalty.

Opponents of the measures and some constitutional scholars say the proposals are mostly symbolic, intended to send a message of political protest, and have little chance of succeeding in court over the long run.

So far, the notion has been presented in at least 10 states (though it has already been rejected or left behind in committees in some of them), and lawmakers in four other states have said they will soon offer similar measures in what has grown into a coordinated effort at resistance.

Mark A. Hall, a law professor at Wake Forest University who has studied the constitutionality of mandates that people buy health insurance, said, "There is no way this challenge will succeed in court," adding that the state measures seemed more "sort of an act of defiance, a form of civil disobedience if you will."



Lawmakers in Some States Press to Outlaw Mandatory Health Insurance

[Sinistrous]

1. If they get that (largely symbolic) ability to purchase insurance across

state lines, wouldn't these hokey amendments then be in violation of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution?

[beyurslf]

2. LOL. I hope my state is not on the list of this waste of time.

[RM33]

3. I don't get it . . .

I thought that there was an opt out clause that lets states stir clear of Obama Care. If states don't like it, why join? They don't have to.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

4. Obama Care. You mean that bill that was passed by the Democrat Party?

:eyes: