• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Healthcare, Texas, 10th Ammendment

Ben H

Well-known member
http://reason.com/blog/show/135033.html
Texas Gov. Rick Perry Invokes the 10th Amendment

Amanda Carey | July 24, 2009, 6:01pm

Government-run health care may be inevitable, but Texas Gov. Rick Perry says his state still will have none of it. When asked recently about President Obama's plan for the nation's health care system, Perry had this to say:

I think you’ll hear states and governors standing up and saying 'no’ to this type of encroachment on the states with their healthcare. So my hope is that we never have to have that stand-up. But I’m certainly willing and ready for the fight if this administration continues to try to force their very expansive government philosophy down our collective throats. It really is a state issue, and if there was ever an argument for the 10th Amendment and for letting the states find a solution to their problems, this may be at the top of the class. A government-run healthcare system is financially unstable. It’s not the solution.

Perry's states' rights argument, while predictable (and reminiscent of the Mark Sanford era of stimulus money refusal), is one that other states should consider looking into as well—although it might be a little too late for Massachusetts.

But I'm guessing that like Sanford, Perry will be forced into accepting whatever health care change Obama and Congress deem wise.

Refresh your memory of the 10th Amendment here.

Reason's entire archive on Rick Perry here.
[/quote]
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
good post Ben H, I appreciate allot of you're posts.


why not let a state- a blue state like Massachusetts- be the petri dish and try out the plan- see if it works before trying to convert the whole nation.
look at chips thing in Hawaii- broke them in like 7 months and they had to drop the program.
But only if a state chooses to be the guinee pig.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
good post Ben H, I appreciate allot of you're posts.


why not let a state- a blue state like Massachusetts- be the petri dish and try out the plan- see if it works before trying to convert the whole nation.
look at chips thing in Hawaii- broke them in like 7 months and they had to drop the program.
But only if a state chooses to be the guinee pig.

Massachusetts already has MANDATORY health care insurance- and subsidizes lower income folks/families so that all are covered.....

Mitt Romney got this enacted when he was the Governor of Massachusetts...Another of those evil liberal mandates :???:
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
my point exactly OT-
doesn't matter what side tries it, when has government run healthcare been sucessful??
why is this time gonna be any different?? whether they rush it through or take their time to get it "right"
 

MsSage

Well-known member
Another of those evil liberal mandates
Untill you stop and look and read you will keep thinking anytime a conservitive is agaist something it is because its liberal......WAKE UP and put your hatred aside my GAWD its eating you alive. Do you not see how hatefilled you are? I am not trying to be mean and nasty just asking an honest question.

I will admit this admistration has me scared BUT I read and think about everything they want to do in the HOPE it is for the betterment of this country.....much to my cringe its only setting us up for disaster. Loss of our rights and total finacial colapse.
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Massachusetts already has MANDATORY health care insurance- and subsidizes lower income folks/families so that all are covered.....

Yes they do OT. I was working for Stone & Webster Engineering when they passed the legislation. My insurance rates were tripled because SWEC is based out of Boston. It didn't do didly for me in Texas except cost me money.

Right now most of us are paying dearly to keep California afloat with our tax dollars.

If Texas opts out of the Obama boondoggle, we should not have to pay your way OT with our tax dollars.

Best thing for Texas is for us to just leave the U.S. completely until they come to their senses.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Arizona isn't putting up with Maobama's crap;

PHOENIX, Arizona (June 22, 2009) — The Arizona Legislature today passed a bill that refers the Health Care Freedom Act (H.C.R. 2014) to the November 2010 ballot.

The Health Care Freedom Act will ensure Arizona residents may pay directly for any legal health services and choose not to participate in a government or privately run health care system.

“Protecting the rights of individuals to be in control of their health and health care must be a fundamental component of health care reform, so the Arizona legislature is to be congratulated for giving all Arizonans the opportunity to make certain our voices are heard,” said Dr. Eric Novack, Chairman, Arizonans for Health Care Freedom.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Nancy Barto, will be placed on the ballot as a referendum.

The Healthcare Freedom Bill provides for two fundamental rights:

The right to spend your own money to seek out and receive health care services that are otherwise legal.
The right to choose NOT to participate in any health care system, of any type.

The basic aim is straightforward: while nearly everyone agrees that some changes are necessary in our health care system in the United States, supporters of the bill believe very strongly that the rights of individuals to make their own health care decisions must be protected. In other words, individual freedom should be the starting point from which health care reform should be considered.

“Representative Barto, Chairman of the House Health and Human Service Committee and Senator Allen, Chairman of the Senate Health and Medical Liability Reform Committee along with Senate President Bob Burns and Speaker Kirk Adams are all champions of freedom,” Novack said. “Their long-term vision may save us untold grief with the uncertainty of what the federal government might soon do regarding the healthcare system in the United States.”

The Health Care Freedom Act incorporates some of the same principles as Proposition 101 in the November 2008 election, the Freedom of Choice in Healthcare Act, which lost by less than 9,000 votes. However, the Health Care Freedom Act is designed to provide additional clarification and address issues raised during the campaign and the legislative process.

Specifically, the Health Care Freedom Act contains more concise language, developed with significant input from many stakeholders, including AHCCCS, to protect our state’s safety net health care system, workers’ compensation rights, and Medicare beneficiaries.

Dr. Novack went on to the state that the people of Arizona have been well served in this area because rarely does a state legislature have the opportunity to get ahead of an oncoming tidal wave.
“Since we do not know, but have many hints, as to what may be legislated by the federal government, HCR 2014 is the most significant thing any legislature could do to protect the rights of the individual regarding personal choices in their health care decisions,” Novack said. “We are confident that the people of Arizona will vote to ensure their own rights and support the Health Care Freedom Act.”

Dr. Novack will testify, Tuesday, June 23, 2009 in the U.S. House of Representatives, Energy and Commerce subcommittee on health.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Problem with these states trying to stand up to Obama is that they will still be taxed for the health care even if they do not choose to take it
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Problem with these states trying to stand up to Obama is that they will still be taxed for the health care even if they do not choose to take it

Yep, and their economies will be crippled along with the rest of the country.
 
Top