Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Republicans Seek to Repeal Healthcare Bill and/or Challenge it in Court.

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said Monday that he was joining with attorneys general from at least 11 states who are mounting a legal challenge to the health care overhaul that Congress passed Sunday. So far, all of the attorneys general challenging the bill — which President Barack Obama is expected to sign into law today — are Republicans. But Suthers said the legal action isn't about politics.

TPJ: Sure. It has nothing to do with the fact that Republicans said "no" from day one of this reform. It has nothing to do with the Republican Senators and Representatives who said that they'd do whatever it takes to stop the reform. It has nothing to do with politics when there are no Democratic attorneys genera signing onto this lawsuit. Sure. So, they want to repeal the health care bill. What parts? Getting rid of ending pre-existing conditions for children? Re-opening the "donut hole" and yanking the new insurance plans for the 30 million this bill will help. "I know you just got health care but, just kidding!! We're going to take it away." Oh and you'd be repealing the savings that the bill provides. "Small businesses could see up to $3,000 in savings (per employee) on their health care costs."

Republicans would also have to repeal: Seniors receiving a rebate to reduce drug costs not yet covered under Medicare, young people being able to stay on parents coverage until 26, Early retirees will receive help to reduce premium costs, and Insured Americans will be protected from seeing their insurance revoked when they get sick, or facing restrictive annual limits on the care they receive. Not to mention the $1.2 trillion the bill shaves off the deficit. That's a terrible platform for the election year. Vote for us and we'll end progress!!

As for taking this to court on the basis that the mandate to buy insurance is unconstitutional based on the 10th amendment, the federal government mandates that we do all kinds of things: Car manufactures are mandated to buy the materials for the mandatory seat belt law as imposed by the federal government and The EPA mandates companies buy cleaner products to protect the environment. Plus, you can't work in this country without buying Medicare insurance. So I don't see their lawsuit holding much water. And it seems that our friends on the right conveniently forget that the federal government is to "promote for the general welfare" as listed in the pre-amble to the Constitution. Welfare includes health. These lawsuits have nothing to do with improving the health of the American people. They are about lawsuits from a party that is playing politics with your health.

And what ever happened to the Republican mantra of reforming the lawsuit process so that frivolous lawsuits meant to politically grandstand are reduced? They clearly want the Supreme Court to overturn this piece of legislation passed by a majority of the democratically elected Congressional leaders. Isn't that looking for activist judges to "legislate from the bench?" And haven't they claimed that they are dead-set against "legislating from the bench" by activist judges? Absolutely. Ironically one of their main talking points against the health care reform was that it will cost too much. Yet, is taking this lawsuit to the supreme court really a good use of tax payers money? Where is the Tea Bagging outrage on fiscal responsibility?!!

---End of Transmission---

2 comments:

Kvatch said...

Oh...I don't know. I'm sort of in with the 'Thuglicans on this one.

This health-care reform bill is a disaster, and I find myself hoping that the 10 states suing the Feds over it will win so that we can move on to universal coverage in a form that the states (and the GOP) can't touch.

How sick is that?

Handsome B. Wonderful said...

I wanted single payer and/or the public option but you don't think it's better than nothing? I guess I figure the insurance companies can't be beaten in one fell swoop as much as I wanted that to happen.

I was against this bill too until I saw that it was a "toe in the door" toward REAL health care reform. It's a lot easier to improve the bill from here than to start all over again.