Missouri vote puts health care back in crosshairs (At least AZ, OK to vote on Commiecare™ in Nov)

STL Today ^ | 8/04/10 | RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and DAVID A. LIEB

[Libloather]

Missouri vote puts health care back in crosshairs
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR and DAVID A. LIEB
Posted: Wednesday, August 4, 2010 5:19 pm

**SNIP**

At least two other states Arizona and Oklahoma have similar measures on the ballot in November. And sponsors of Florida's version are appealing to reinstate it after a state judge struck the measure from the ballot, ruling that a summary for voters was misleading.

In Colorado, supporters submitted 130,000 voter signatures to the state last week for a ballot measure challenging the insurance mandate, about 50,000 more names than are required.

Arizona, Colorado and Florida are states with House and Senate races rated as toss-ups in November. A few years ago, state ballot measures against same-sex marriage helped turn conservatives out in the contest between incumbent President George W. Bush and Massachusetts Democratic Sen. John Kerry. Bush won.

Foes of the health care law also seek to overturn the insurance requirement in federal court.

Twenty states have joined one of the cases, pending in Florida. This week, a federal judge rejected the Obama administration's request to dismiss Virginia's lawsuit, allowing the case to proceed to formal arguments.

Opponents of the mandate argue that the federal government overstepped its constitutional authority by requiring individuals to purchase a particular product, especially one that costs as much as health insurance.

[Libloather]

Prepare to vote.

[FatherofFive]

Yeah, but Arizona is racist and Okies are stoopid. /s

[ak267]

Isn’t there a public vote in Florida (Nov 2nd) as well?

[torchthemummy]

And sponsors of Florida's version are appealing to reinstate it after a state judge struck the measure from the ballot, ruling that a summary for voters was misleading.

Then there needs to be a statutory period where revisions can be made before any expiration date (where supposed "constitutional" adjustments need to be made) is applied. Seems right now the idea is that if an offensive ballot question is supposedly formed the strategy is to wait out the time period and then have a judicial declaration made which rules out the petition process being redone in time.

[VOA]

bump

[Pining_4_TX]

Hey, we is not stupid! ;-)