Idaho Prepares to sue over state's rights regarding healthcare

[Skippy 82]

BOISE, Idaho - Idaho is leading the charge in a states-rights push to defeat a proposal in Congress that would require people to buy health insurance, a key piece of reforms being pushed by President Barack Obama.

Republican Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter used a ceremony Wednesday afternoon to become the first governor to sign into law a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government over any such insurance mandates.

There's similar legislation pending in 37 other states, a point Otter stressed when asked if the bill he signed can succeed, given constitutional law experts are already saying federal laws would supersede those of states in a U.S. District Court fight.

"The ivory tower folks will tell you, 'No, they're not going anywhere,'" he told reporters. "But I'll tell you what, you get 36 states, that's a critical mass. That's a constitutional mass."

The state measures working their ways through statehouses from Missouri to South Carolina reflect a growing frustration with President Obama's health care overhaul, especially in Republican-dominated regions.

The Democratic president's proposal would cover some 30 million uninsured people, end insurance practices such as denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, require almost all Americans to get coverage by law, and try to slow the cost of medical care nationwide.

Democratic leaders hope to vote on it this weekend.

With Washington closing in on a deal in the monthslong battle over health care overhaul, Republican state lawmakers are stepping up opposition.

Last week, Virginia legislators passed a measure similar to Idaho's new law, but Otter was the first state chief executive to sign such a bill, according to the American Legislative Exchange Council, which created model legislation for Idaho and other states. The Washington, D.C.,-based nonprofit group promotes limited government.

"Congress is planning to force an unconstitutional mandate on the states," said Christie Herrera, the group's health task force director.

Still, David Freeman Engstrom, a constitutional law expert at Stanford University Law School, said all these measures face significant legal hurdles. Freeman said there is the question of whether a state has standing to bring the lawsuit, or if that role is better served by an individual who could show they were harmed by the mandate to buy health insurance.

Idaho's law faces an even bigger challenge, he said, by setting up a direct conflict with the supremacy clause in the U.S. Constitution.

"That language is clear that federal law is supreme over state law," said Freeman. "So it really doesn't matter what a state legislature says on this."

Otter already warned U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in December that Idaho was considering litigation.

He signed the bill during his first public ceremony of the 2010 Legislature.

"What the Idaho Health Freedom Act says is that the citizens of our state won't be subject to another federal mandate or turn over another part of their life to government control," Otter said.

Minority Democrats who make up less than a quarter of the Idaho Legislature who opposed the bill called any lawsuits over health care reform frivolous.

Senate Minority Leader Kate Kelly, D-Boise, also complained about the bill's possible price tag. Those who drafted the new law say enforcement may require an additional Idaho deputy attorney general with an annual salary of $100,000 a year.

Kelly said that was irresponsible when Idaho is grappling with a $200 million budget hole.

"For Democrats in the Legislature, our priority is jobs," she said. "We'd rather Gov. Otter was holding a signing ceremony for (a jobs package) meant to put Idaho residents back to work."

At the White House, spokesman Reid Cherlin declined to comment Wednesday night.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35918078/ns/politics/

[なべ 184]

If that doesn't paint a picture of America, I don't know what does.

[Aethix 129]

States should sue. It is clearly unconstitutional to force people to buy health insurance.

[Grandmaster Phoenix 26]

Congrats Idaho. Now, if all of the states followed this example, there might be a silver lining.

[Skippy 82]

there are 37 others preparing the same kind of legislation and cases.

[Chase 390]

It's obvious the people don't want this. So step the puppy back government. And, worst comes to worst, we could all just secede and be done with it.

[Jo-Bengt 0]

^ I can actually see that coming. The South seceded when abolitionists were about to take over. Them banning slavery would've ruined the mainly agricultural economy that the South had.

This is going to tear us apart. We can't afford it. It will ruin our economy, when our economy is already screwed to begin with.

If another Civil War were to break out, look at the statistics. Let's look at this in the form of how the Civil War was: The Union and The Confederacy. The Union was the "main" US, I guess you could say, with our president at it's head. The Confederacy was a little screwed because of their lack of manufacture, but they had experienced soldiers and a lot of hunters, who would be good shots to begin with.

Plus, you've gotta remember people like Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson. There's some leadership right there. The South also had strong leaders and generals, plus an ultimate motivation to defend home.

The Union had numbers and manufacture. Eventually, Grant took over and his strategies defeated the Confederacy.

A quick count tells me that the Union had 17 states, while the Confederacy had 11.

Last I heard, 39 states are filing lawsuits. 39 out of 50. Say these 39 secede, and we can presumably call them the Confederacy. The 11 remaining states with the president at the head would be the Union.

The Confederacy had 11 states and lost. This "new Union" has 11 states.

See a connection? Say a civil war sparks up again. What do you think will happen to those 11 states?

I'm not hoping for war, I'm just speaking my mind from what Lionheart suggested about secession. The blueprints for it are all there. Let's see if history decides to repeat itself.

Also, I'm not really gullible enough to believe that slaves actually had anything to do with the Civil War, but a lot of people seem to love to believe they did.

What? The Union wanted to free the slaves? Horseshit. No puppyin' way I'm about to believe that crap.

[Chase 390]

Obama and other officials just have it in their heads that we have no idea what we actually want and that they know what's best for us. But when the government goes against the majority, as written in our Constitution (and in Thomas Paine's "Common Sense"), it's up to the people to step up and stop it. It's our patriotic duty.

“That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness

[Jo-Bengt 0]

Personally, man, if it does come to secession, I'm sticking with Mississippi, which I hear is one of the states filing a lawsuit.

And, personally, I'd rather side with my homeland, anyway.

There are people who like to demonize Robert E. Lee, but it's known that the real reason that he stayed with the Confederacy was because he couldn't turn on his home state of Virginia.

That'd be like me leading an army to march on my best friends and family. Hell no I ain't about to do that. If someone asks me to do something like that, they can kiss my ass, you know?

[Chase 390]

Pennsylvania Declaration of Rights and Constitution Section V, “And that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish government in such manner as shall be by that community judged most conducive to the public weal

[Jo-Bengt 0]

WE GOT THE QUAKERS MUTHApuppyA!!!

WE GONNA ROLL ON DER HOOD WIT OUR HORSE DRAWN CARRIAGES, PULLIN' OUT OUR OLD MUSKETS N' SHIT. VIP STYLE, BIOTCH. Just don't let the camera's see you, that'd be bad for tradition.

[Chase 390]

Actually,

ALABAMA: .Section 2. That all political power is inherent in the

people, and all free governments are founded on their authority,

and instituted for their benefit;and that, therefore, they have at all

times an inalienable and indefeasible right to change their form

of government in such manner as they may deem expedient.

ARKANSAS: Section 1. All political power is inherent in the people,

and government is instituted for their protection, security and benefit;

and they have the right to alter reform or abolish the same in such

manner as they may think proper.

CONNECTICUT: Section 1. Government is instituted for the security,

benefit and protection of the people, in whom all political power is

inherent, together with the right to alter, modify or reform government

whenever required by the public good.

IDAHO: SECTION 2. POLITICAL POWER INHERENT IN THE PEOPLE.

All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for

their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform

or abolish the same whenever they may deem it necessary; and no

special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted that may not be

altered, revoked, or repealed by the legislature. (Sect. 3 says The state

of Idaho is aninseparable part of the American Union...")

INDIANA: SECTION 2.Section 1. WE DECLARE, That all people are

created equal; that they are endowed by their CREATOR with certain

inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of

happiness; that all power is inherent in the People; and that all free

governments are, and of right ought to be, founded on their authority,

and instituted for their peace, safety, and well-being. For the

advancement of these ends, the People have, at all times, an

indefeasible right to alter and reform their government.

KENTUCKY: Section 4. Power inherent in the people; right to alter,

reform or abolish government. All power is inherent in the people, and

all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their

peace, safety, happinessand the protection of property. For the

advancement of these ends, they have at all times an inalienable and

indefeasible right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such

manner as they may deem proper...

MAINE: Section 2. All power is inherent in the people; all free governments

are founded in their authority and instituted for their benefit; they have

therefore an unalienable and indefeasible right to institute government, and

to alter, reform, or totally change the same, when their safety and

happiness require it.

MONTANA Section 2. The people have the exclusive right of governing

themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent state. They may alter or

abolish the constitution and form of government whenever they deem it

necessary.

MARYLAND Article 1. That all government of right originates from the

people, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of

the whole; and they have, at all times, the inalienable right to alter,

reform

or abolish their Form of Government in such manner as they may deem

expedient.

MISSOURI Section 3. That the people of this state have the inherent, sole

and exclusive right to regulate the internal government and police thereof,

and to alter and abolish their Constitution and form of government whenever

they may deem it necessary to their safety and happiness, provided such

change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.

NEW JERSEY Section 2. All political power is inherent in the people.

Government is instituted for the protection, security, and benefit of the

people, and they have the right at all times to alter or reform the same,

whenever the public good may require it.

NORTH DAKOTA Sec. 2. All political power is inherent in the people.

Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the

people, and they have a right to alter or reform the same whenever the

public good may require.

NORTH CAROLINA Section 1. All political power is vested in and derived

from the people only, therefore, they have the right at all times to modify

their form of government.

PENNSYLVANIA Section 2. All power is inherent in the people, and

all free governments are founded on their authority and instituted for their

peace, safety and happiness. For the advancement of these ends they

have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to alter, reform or

abolish their government in such manner as they may think proper.

OHIO §2 Right to alter, reform, or abolish government, and repeal

special privileges. All political power is inherent in the people.

Government

is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the

right

to alter, reform, or abolish the same, whenever they may deem it necessary;

and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted, that may not

be altered, revoked, or repealed by the general assembly.

OKLAHOMA Section 1. All political power is inherent in the people; and

government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and to

promote their general welfare; and they have the right to alter or reform

the same whenever the public good may require it: Provided, such change

be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States.

OREGON Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all

men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is

inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their

authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they

have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in

such manner as they may think proper.--

SOUTH CAROLINA Sec. 1. That all power is inherent in the people, and all

free gov- ernments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their

peace, safety, and happiness; for the advancement of those ends they have at

all times, an unalienable and inde- feasible right to alter, reform, or

abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.

TEXAS Art. 1, Sec 2 : All political power is inherent in the people, and

all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for

their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the

preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this

limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter,

reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think

expedient.

(But Article 1, Section 1 says: "Texas is a free and independent State,

subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance

of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the

preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the

States. ")

VIRGINIA . Section 3. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for

the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or

community; of al lthe various modes and forms of government, that is

best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and

safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of

maladministration; and, whenever any government shall be found inadequate

or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an

indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or

abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public

weal.

WEST VIRGINIA: Section 3. Government is instituted for the common

benefit, protectionand security of the people, nation or community. Of all

its

various formsthat is the best, which is capable of producing the greatest

degree ofhappiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the

danger of maladministration; and when any government shall be found

inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community has an

indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish

it in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.

(Sect. 1 :The state of West Virginia is, and shall remain, one of the United

States of America. The constitution of the United States of America, and the

laws and treaties made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme law of the

land.)

WYOMING 97-1-001. Power inherent in the people. All power is inherent

in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority,

and instituted for their peace, safety and happiness; for the advancement of

these ends they have at all times an inalienable and indefeasible right to

alter, reform or abolish the government in such manner as they may think

proper. (But also, an inseparable part of the federal union...)

A lot of states agree with me, that the government is for our safety and it is up to the people to change it and abolish it in a manner they see fit. The "people" are the majority, and the people don't want this UH bill to pass. It's up to us to stop it. Bitch and complain. Don't stop bitching and complaining. Call your senators, call the white house. Get this shit done away with.

[Max 10]

^ I can actually see that coming. The South seceded when abolitionists were about to take over. Them banning slavery would've ruined the mainly agricultural economy that the South had.

Not to nitpick, but not freeing the slaves...

Nevermind.

[DocHobo 0]

lol... Civil War because of healthcare...?

[Skippy 82]

No civil war because healthcare wasn't about healthcare, it was a decided [power move, a step towards a socialistic society, A step that is the breaking point of many americans. It has nothing to do with healthcare, or just about as much as the civil war actually had to do with slavery.