Posted on 11/13/2012 4:47:11 PM PST by Jemian
MONTGOMERY – Governor Robert Bentley on Tuesday announced that Alabama will not set up a state insurance exchange under the federal health care law.
“I am not going to set up a state-based exchange that will create a tax burden of up to $50 million on the people of Alabama. As governor, I cannot support adding such a tax burden onto our citizens,” Governor Bentley said. “The Affordable Care Act is neither affordable nor does it actually improve health care. Congress and the President have said they want to work together to solve the fiscal crisis facing this country, and I suggest they start with this health care bill.”
“I have been speaking individually and in group settings with governors from all over the country, and I feel that a significant number of these governors will take a similar stand,” Governor Bentley added. “That will send a clear signal to all of our elected leaders in Washington that the health care bill should be changed.”
“I also will not expand Medicaid under the current structure that exists because we simply cannot afford it,” Governor Bentley said.
The suitcase full of cash helps too, I'm sure.
Yep! It’s worse than Alabam/Auburn. Seriously, tho....you would not believe how he agrees with me on some issues. I’m making ‘baby steps’ with him. He grew up with socialized medicine his whole life. It runs deep.
FWIW-
Yep! No doubt about it.
Would all NC freepers make sure Pat McCrory gets this info (I’ll do what I can) - I hear he would be just as happy if Bev Perdue made the decision in her final weeks (friggin wimp McCrory).
SC freepers - where is Nikki H on this?
Even Bob McDonnell in Virginia is doing the right thing - all GOP governors need to.
“MONTGOMERY – Governor Robert Bentley on Tuesday announced that Alabama will not set up a state insurance exchange under the federal health care law.”
...
“I also will not expand Medicaid under the current structure that exists because we simply cannot afford it,” Governor Bentley said.”
There have been a number of threads up on FR today about the “secession petitions” and if they represent the beginning of a real Civil War.
No. They don’t.
But actions such as this by Gov. Bentley of Alabama are gettin’ much closer to the real thing.
Especially when a group of states (particularly contiguous states) starts pushing back against the federals in the same way.
Next up: watch for several of these governors to get together in a _coordinated effort_ to thwart ObamaCare.
There may not be fighting yet, but these are certainly “fightin’ words”....
Deo Vindice!
“....operating an Obamacare exchange would be illegal in 14 states. Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia have enacted either statutes or constitutional amendments (or both) forbidding state employees to participate in an essential exchange function: implementing Obamacare’s individual and employer mandates.”
If that’s the case, watch for the federals to send in a task force of bureaucrats, IRS types, etc., to each of these states to “set it up for them”, whether they like it or not...
What will happen next?
Roberts ain’t brilliant........
FWIW-....perhaps Napalitano believes Roberts likes his ego stroked....like @ the Georgetown Cocktail Parties
“The Supremest could still stop a lot of the freedoms we are losing, including Obamacare”
Yes, they could declare the mandate penalty/tax an unconstitutional poll tax. I won’t hold my breath.
You should read the entire article - here’s a good part of it that will answer your question .... the last part of the article deals with the Medicaid expansion. This is one of the best articles I’ve seen, explaining the exchanges.
FROM ARTICLE:
First, states are under no obligation to create one.
Second operating an Obamacare exchange would be illegal in 14 states. Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia have enacted either statutes or constitutional amendments (or both) forbidding state employees to participate in an essential exchange function: implementing Obamacare’s individual and employer mandates
Third, each exchange would cost its state an estimated $10 million to $100 million per year, necessitating tax increases.
Fourth, the November 16 deadline is no more real than the “deadlines” for implementing REAL ID, which have been pushed back repeatedly since 2008.
Fifth, states can always create an exchange later if they choose.
Sixth, a state-created exchange is not a state-controlled exchange. All exchanges will be controlled by Washington.
Seventh, Congress authorized no funds for federal “fallback” exchanges. So Washington may not be able to impose Exchanges on states at all.
Eighth, the Obama administration has yet to provide crucial information that states need before they can make an informed decision.
Ninth, creating an exchange sets state officials up to take the blame when Obamacare increases insurance premiums and denies care to the sick. State officials won’t want their names on this disastrous mess.
Tenth, creating an exchange would be assisting in the creation of a “public option” that would drive domestic health-insurance carriers out of business through unfair competition.
Eleventh, Obamacare remains unpopular. The latest Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that only 38 percent of the public supports it.
Twelfth, defaulting to a federal exchange exempts a state’s employers from the employer mandate — a tax of $2,000 per worker per year (the tax applies to companies with more than 50 employees, but for such companies that tax applies after the 30th employee, not the 50th). If all states did so, that would also exempt 18 million Americans from the individual mandate’s tax of $2,085 per family of four. Avoiding those taxes improves a state’s prospects for job creation, and protects the conscience rights of employers and individuals whom the Obama administration is forcing to purchase contraceptives coverage.
Finally, rejecting an exchange reduces the federal deficit. Obamacare offers its deficit-financed subsidies to private health insurers only through state-created exchanges. If all states declined, federal deficits would fall by roughly $700 billion over ten years.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/333040/obamacare-still-vulnerable-michael-f-cannon
This amendment to the Alabama constitution was just passed this November 6, election day.
Good for Alabama!
Loving me some Alabama.
BTW, the last Democrat in any elective office for the state was defeated....zero Democrats in office. The Alabama supreme court is also 100% Republican. Baldwin county, across the bay from Mobile, all their county elective offices are also 100% Republican.
Didn't SCOTUS specify that the states could NOT be penalized in any way for not participating?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.