Posted on 12/22/2009 6:38:39 PM PST by TornadoAlley3
OKLAHOMA CITY - The voters of Oklahoma will have the opportunity to preserve the existing health care system in Oklahoma under legislation sought by three state legislators.
State Reps. Mike Ritze and Mike Reynolds and state Sen. Randy Brogdon announced today that they will file legislation enacting the "Freedom of Healthcare Choice Act," allowing voters to preserve the existing healthcare system in Oklahoma regardless of congressional action at the federal level.
The legislation will allow a vote of the people to opt out of the proposed federal system.
"It's clear the overwhelming majority of Americans want the current doctor-patient relationship preserved instead of having Washington bureaucrats dictate medical decisions," said Ritze, a Broken Arrow Republican who is also a board-certified family practice physician and surgeon. "The proposals under consideration in Congress are likely to result in reduced access to a family doctor, rationing of services, or even outright denial of care if a pencil-pusher decides it is not a 'best practice.' My legislation would give the voters the ability to protect and preserve their existing health care coverage."
"The United States' health care system is the envy of the world and the people of Oklahoma should have the opportunity to maintain the top-notch care they have received while also avoiding the onerous burdens the proposed federal law would impose on working families," said Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City.
"The proposed legislation in Washington is a massive overstepping of the bounds placed on Congress by our U.S. Constitution," said Brogdon, R-Owasso. "It is time that we the people tell Congress enough is enough - and now Oklahomans will have the opportunity to do so."
Modeled on an Arizona proposal, Ritze and Reynolds' legislation would place language on the ballot to amend the Oklahoma Constitution to declare what types of health care systems could lawfully exist in the state.
The proposed constitutional amendment would
Prohibit any law or rule from directly or indirectly compelling any person or employer to participate in any health care system; Allow any person or employer to pay directly for lawful health care services without paying any penalties or fines; Permit a health care provider to provide directly purchased lawful health services without paying any penalties or fines; and Stipulate that subject to reasonable and necessary rules that do not substantially limit a person's options, the purchase or sale of private health insurance will not be prohibited. The amendment would not change what health care services a provider is required to perform or what health care services are permitted by law.
"This is an issue that could have serious consequences for all citizens and it is only right to allow voters a direct role in the outcome of this debate," Ritze said.
"I was not surprised that the Democrat-controlled U.S. Senate kept the specific language of their bill from the public and most of their members," Reynolds said. "In comparison, the language of our "Freedom of Healthcare Choice Act" will be fully disclosed as soon as it is filed, probably later this afternoon. We welcome any discussion."
PING! Here’s the OK version of GHFA.
Well I definitely liked what Sheriff Joe had to say, “I dont care what the Feds or Napolitano says..I don’t answer to the federal govt. I answer to the people who elected me. I’m an ELECTED Sheriff”.
He couldn’t have done better except to actually slap her right across the face! And those goons in Homeland Security are STILL investigating him at every opportunity. No doubt they will try the same with those conservatives who oppose them with amendments/bills such as this.
“Just how the hell would the Feds try to FORCE a state to adopt a federal law on mandatory health care?”
I sincerely hope Texas never bows down to those thieves. Nothing but a big ponzi scheme and now everyone knows it. No more secrets..everything is out in the open.
In January 2011, we will have a Republican Governor after eight years of doofus thanks to an Indy who ran. Mary Fallin will have served four years in Congress and served as our great Lt Governor before that.
With Mary elected, our legislature will have a friend in the Governor’s Mansion for the first time since Republicans took over both Houses and Oklahoma will be on the move.
We only need one state to actually pass an opt out ammendment to crash the Obamacare plan. Once the first lemming refuses to jump over a cliff, others behind him take notice, until they all come to a halt.
This is amazing..I didn't know...Dah ..and it was sponsored by rep. Baker in my hometown county!!!! I'm on this...
Congratulations to my Neighbors....a mere 10 miles away.
Umm, Huck, you are too wrapped in bad law. “Constitutional Law” in the decades since 1937 is a perverted rebuke to “Constitution Law” before that. The Founders did mean that Conress only had 18 specific enumerated powers. They did not write or intent a hyper-inflatable commerce clause. (Plus those law perverters all seem to have ignored Article I, Section 9, part 6, which is ALSO a commerce clause.)
“Implied Powers”! Yes but that’s just modern idiot’s Dicta.
NO...the commies in the blue states deserve this...they need it...and they should reap the "benefits"!
Ditto. Unless Scalia and the other NY-NJ school boys learn from the good Doctor Thomas.
Well, I sent E-mail and expect I’ll at least find out what the status is on Rep. Matt Bakers House Bill. Plus I’ll be calling as well.
But it surely is an opt out one, and prevents from inforcing on Pa. residents any mandated federal healthcare.
>We are truly a red state.
Nah! I’ll stay and make it less blue here. Send missionaries!
>We are truly a red state. When you have had enough of California, come join us here, we’d love to have y’all! God Bless America.
*******************
Ignore the last post. mistake.
Nah! I’ll stay and make it less blue here. Send missionaries!
To be replaced by Huck law? What form would Huck law take?
Then why does Section II of the Articles of Confederation state, “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and Independence and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States in Congress assembled.”
Reads like the 10th Amendment, right?
Getting this on the ballot will be great ... let’s see how many turn out to vote, and what the political spin is. A huge turn-out with a lopsided victory will send a message across America ... a message more potent perhaps than arranging the chairs for the follow-up WWF supreme court fight.
I hear rebellion in the air ...
Silly strawman argument tossed in with insults to screaminsunshine. There are delegated powers. Period.
Every one of our congressmen/reps/president take an oath to support and defend our Constitution. They are just as responsible to our Constitution as the courts. That our reps lie when take the oath and ignore the Constitution is not the fault of the clear language of the Constitution.
With what would you replace our Constitution?
I've asked him for weeks with what we should replace our Constitution.
It must be miserable to hate the foundation of one’s country.
You contradict our Declaration of Independence. ". . . that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it . . . "
You reject our Constitution daily. Do you now reject the Declaration?
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.