Posted on 08/03/2010 8:25:09 PM PDT by tobyhill
Missouri voters have strongly approved a new law that rejects a key provision of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul.
Tuesday's vote approving the ballot measure is seen as largely symbolic because federal law generally trumps state law. But it could portend trouble for the Democratic Party in November's midterm election.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
So much stuff has been thrown out for no “standing” with this bunch but with this vote it has standing they cannot just ignore.
I was another voter for it.
Big Media is having a coronory tonight.
Pray for America
Yes the voters symbolically rejected the mandate on themselves, but they did not reject the mandates on insurance companies such as those regarding pre-existing condition exclusions. That mandate is popular because it looks like it gets them something for free; but like most business mandates like minimum wage, it comes with an unstated cost (unemployment for minimum wage, higher premiums and more uninsured for Obama care.)
How about the mandate to hospitals forcing them to provide free health care passed in the 1980s? You see anyone questioning that?
nice interactive map on Prop C (county by county voting)
In St. Louis county..... 61% “YES”.
Only places to reject it were the cities of St. Louis and KC.
After I voted they gave me a little stick on that says "I voted." I wore mine to the bank, the grocery store and the gas station. Then I stuck it on my fridge when I got home.
LOL
One step at a time....people had be awakened first.
Good on you! It was a historic vote so the little stick/sticker is a keeper!
Blessings!!! (((( dearest BARLF ))))
AP = American Pravda
What happened to all the polling saying people didn’t care about this issue anymore. Listen to MO Republicans....WE DON’T WANT IT!!! You get power...you better spend every waking moment to REPEAL IT!
That’s not a proposal; it’s an inevitability.
Thank You for sending that message, I hope on 8-28 in Washington there are Millions of people to send another one
Excuse me, while I scream...
AAAAAAAAAAAEEEEEEEEE!
This LINE is boilerplate liberal CLAPTRAP!!!!! I have heard, seen, read it SO MANY TIMES the past 19 months, it has become OLD HAT!
Ever since this lamebrain B. Hussein Obama took office and began passing his CRAPPY LEGISLATION with a DEMOCRAT congress, the Associated Press and their "subscribers" like PMSNBC, CNN, and local "news" organizations have used the line "federal law generally trumps state law" over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.
Such slavish devotion to such a phrase indicates the media's lack of knowledge regarding our Constitution AND the mindset of the American people.
I find some agreement with your comments here. One of the things I don’t particularly have an answer for though, is the pre-existing illness issue.
Right now we have a lot of people out of work, many of them with no insurance coverage. What happens to them, if they come down with an illness right now? Just by the luck of the draw, they are temporarily uncovered. I can’t say as I think it is right they should have to deal with a serious illness without any help.
I don’t think it’s right that the insurance companies should have to pass elevated costs off to other insurance policy holders. I don’t think it’s right for someone to face death or other serious ramifications just because they were laid off and can’t find other work either.
So while I agree with you, I do have some reservations. Do you see a resolution to this, that I am missing.
There is no freedom market resolution to this. The current system is so socialized it will only lead to more socialism. What good will a tax cut/credit do for unemployed when seniors and government employees are in a huge pool that can demand cost shifting to them the individual? The unemployed are screwed in an employee based system with so many gov workers.
But my point is that most Republicans are compassionate conservatives. They like the mandates on businesses to be giving to others, but want to deny that it comes at a cost to someone. It's like wanting increased spending without tax increases. Someone always pays sometime someplace
MD specifically taxes my hospital bill to pay (pool) for uninsured bills. This evens out the redistribution across hospitals so areas with lots of uninsured don't have to give away the most. Unfortunately I live in a good area with less uninsured so that plan hits me more.
I agree with your response.
It is a mess, and I do understand your point about Compassionate conservatism and wanting taxes to be cut.
It’s a valid point.
I’m in California so I know what you’re talking about.
In LA the county hospitals are just about dedicated exclusively to the illegal immigrant. Something like 90% of the births and 70% of all other services are to illegal immigrants.
It truly sucks.
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.