Bill McCollum On Greta "We Believe The Court Would Knock Down The Whole Bill"

I just saw Fla. AG Bill McCollum on Greta tonight. I taped it and then transcribed it roughly: Greta: "If the court were to agree that the mandate were unconstitutional, would it knock out the entire health care bill or just that one particular provision being tossed out?" McCollum: "WELL, WE THINK THAT IS THE CORE OF THE WHOLE BILL AND I BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD KNOCK OUT THE WHOLE BILL, BUT THE REALITY IS, IT IS A HOUSE OF CARDS, BECAUSE, IT IS ALL PREDICATED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT YOU REQUIRE PEOPLE TO BE INSURED; AND IF YOU CAN'T REQUIRE PEOPLE TO BE INSURED, THEN THE METHODOLOGY OF TRYING TO SOLVE THE HEALTHCARE PROBLEM WOULD FAIL. AT LEAST THIS METHODOLOGY." He said the states are being told to provide additional services, set up ins. exchanges, etc., and the Federal govt. has no authority to do so. He said this is unprecedented. Also said 2-3 more DEMOCRAT AG's ARE GOING TO PROBABLY JOIN THE SUIT AS WELL AS MORE AG's. He said the lawsuit procedure could take anywhere from a few months to two yrs. and does not happen quickly and whoever loses would no doubt appeal.

Yes, the individual mandate is getting the most press, but the line of argument based on the fact that federal unfunded mandates to the states will actually, predictably, inevitability and irrevokably bankrupt the States, to me, is quite strong.

Plus as it stands now the States do not have to pay for Medicaid. They can limit enrollment, limit services, walk away, etc. That’s an important safety valve that allows them to adjust their Medicaid spending to each States’ budget realities. But, at one level, Obamacare circumvents the States’ role in “adjusting” spending by (1) forcing enrollment and (2) going directly to citizens of the State for funding.

There’s a CA case pending right now where Cali-Med (I think that’s the name of Medicaid in CA) tried to decrease services or enrollment. They were sued and the district ct in San Fran said they could NOT adjust their spending because they had to “maintain equal access to healthcare for the poor” - IIRC (I need to get the link for this). (Healthcare is a “right,” you see.)

So that is tied up on appeal at the Ninth Cir. right now! Proving that if the States are given even less flexibility to adjust spending under Obamacare, and therefore even less flexibility to avoid bankruptcy, Obamacare effectively is deliberately bankrupting the states.

Sorry, This post may be a little rambling because I’m still working on my basic load of coffee this a.m.

I didn't get the facts exactly right on that Cali-Med case I posted about previously on this thread. Nevertheless, the principle remains.

Here's a link:

http://www.news-medical.net/news/20100304/Federal-court-rejects-California-Medicaid-cuts.aspx

The San Francisco Chronicle: "A federal appeals court barred California on Wednesday from lowering Medi-Cal payments to doctors and hospitals by 5 percent and from cutting in-home care workers' wages by nearly 20 percent, saying the state's budget crisis doesn't justify violating federal laws that protect the poor and disabled. In four rulings, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected attempts by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Legislature to reduce the state's deficit by paying less to the health professionals who treat 6.6 million low-income Californians, and to hundreds of thousands of workers who care for some of the neediest."

The appellate court said federal law requires "states to maintain poor residents' equal access to basic health care, and forbids cuts intended solely to save money" (Egelko, 3/4).

The Associated Press/Mercury News: State officials said they would appeal the decision. "'We strongly disagree with the court's decision, which interferes with the state's ability to manage its finances and reduce its spending to match its revenue,' Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Rachel Arrezola said. 'We are confident that the U.S. Supreme Court will overrule the 9th circuit's ruling.' Wednesday's decision does not affect California's $20 billion deficit because finance officials did not count on the savings in the governor's January budget, said H.D. Palmer, Schwarzenegger's finance spokesman" (Lin, 3/3).

If this Ninth Circuit is upheld on this, that means federal government can basically CONTROL A STATE'S ENTIRE BUDGET. The State's pot of money is finite. If the feds can require whatever they want out of that pot, and everything else the State wants to do with its money must give way to federal unfunded mandates, then who controls the State budget?

You got it: the feds. The States just become a pass-through with no real power to set their budgets, adjust their spending, disperse the funds they collect, etc.

Yes, unbelievable. That link needs to go viral! The Rats are going to say, “Oh, those evil insurance companies, they are still raising rates. Guess we’ll just have to go ahead and finish them off.”

Of course, every business that can this year is raising rates and taking profits — because this thing is going nowhere with Marxist Obambi in the WH.

If you were told you were probably going to be forbidden by law to adjust rates after Jan. 1, what in Hell’s Bells would you do this year while you still could? Raise rates as high as fast on as many people as possible, against the future freeze and profit-plundering.

This is also why the cost of PRESCRIPTION DRUGS has been skyrocketing THIS YEAR: it’s DEFENSIVE pricing v. what Obambi is going to do to the drug companies in the future.

I'm not sure what you are asking about "how much" At the time I retired, I had dental and vision, and life insurance. I lost my dental and vision at retirement and now pay for my life insurance. I've had United Health Care for decades now. The co pay has gone up constantly, and the actual plan isn't free any more. I have a monthly payment now which wasn't counted on at retirement.

At the time of my retirement, I took a lump sum and manage it myself for income. I have no retirement from ATT. I had a free land phone for life and now they are charging me for it. I still have free long distance. My insurance was the only real benefit I received for 30 years of work. Soon, I fear, I will lose that. I've seen my mom, and my in laws struggle with "donut holes" and co pays and part "B"'s with gubmint insurance. I have had none of that so far. My biggest problems have been finding a doctor and keeping one. I have had around 7 doctors in 9 years and I have no doctor right now. I live in a small East Texas town and docs won't stay here long due to Medicare and medicaid payments. I generally have to drive an hour to see a primary doc. I can go to Beaumont, Lufkin, or Nacogdoches to get help, but I might be dead before I get there. The county hospital was scheduled to close, but they got a last minute reprieve somehow.

A little known fact is Medicare and Medicaid don't pay enough money to support any medical facility and rural docs will close if something doesn't change. The government is a big reason we are in the shape we are now. If a doc gets paid $8 for a medicaid visit, he/she will probably "pad" an insurance payer's bill to take up the slack.( The old $10 aspirin trick) If a guy charges $100 for a visit, he can charge an insurance payer $150 a visit to make up the difference. Then the phone company starts squealing and cutting it's bennies because the government isn't carrying its own weight. This has been going on for years because as a 3rd party, I don't care what the price is, as long as I don't have to pay it. Now it's come to a head because we have been covering illegals, lawsuits, welfare, Medicaid, and on and on with either Medicare or private insurance. Now the government is broke and getting broker, the private insurance company is passing on the costs and companies or individuals can't afford it. The problem from the get go has been the government involvement in insurance. I'm old enough to remember before Medicare. We had a county tax for the county hospital to cover wino's and other poor people. Most average people could afford payments set up for medical procedures or insurance was an after thought sort of price. The spiral started almost immediately and it wasn't long before everyone had to have insurance. Now insurance is unaffordable and the gubmint will eventually ride in on a white horse to save everything with single payer. The government is designed to destroy America, then save it with "socialism". Our founders knew this and designed a government that was hogtied with Article 1 section 8&9, along with Amendment 9 and 10. They thought if you made a list and told the government you can't do anything off the list, that would be enough. WRONG! The crash that is coming will bring the WORLD to it's knees. Many here at FR believe that would be good and we could go back to the Constitution. WRONG! That is the prescription for Fascism. A dictator would step up and "save" us from the chaos. This has been the way since the beginning of time. I think many believe the "patriot's" will prevail, but I don't see a structure that would allow that. Who will follow the grocery manager at Krogers just because he was a Captain in Nam in '67?

Freedom is a delicate thing because most don't love it. When you love something you must cherish it, nurture it, and care for it constantly. We take it for granted. I am convinced now, that America is doomed to lose it, no matter how many guns and rounds of ammo you may have, Fascism will wash over us and no one will even remember what America was like. Even the text books will be expunged. Never forget, we, the people, are the ones that continually vote this crap in and then have to deal with the consequences. As we go on with our Ipods, Iphones and $100 tennis shoes, soon we will be hungry, with nothing, living in a shack, riding a moped, just like 3/4's of the rest of the world. I hope we appreciate our government then.

Sorry for the rant. Sometimes I get carried away.

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.