More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Rep. Jay Inslee

Rep. Jay Inslee

Posted: March 23, 2010 06:16 PM

Why Is AG Rob McKenna Suing the Federal Government to Stop Health Care?

What's Your Reaction:

Well, that didn't take long.

Sunday, I was so pleased to vote for health care reform. This morning I was honored when President Obama signed the bill that provided insurance coverage to 32 million Americans, and proud of all you for helping me push the final vote through.

But even before President Obama could put pen to paper, Washington Attorney General Robert McKenna announced that he was hell bent on tearing down all of this progress.

By announcing that he would join a partisan group of Attorneys General from states like South Carolina and Texas in suing the federal government to stop health care reform, he's made it clear this isn't about people -- it's about scoring cheap political points with the extreme right wing.

This is unacceptable. My colleagues and I fought over 2,000 insurance lobbyists in Washington DC to get health care reform passed -- and now we have to fight Washington State's Attorney General too?

When Rep. Kind, Rep. Braley, Rep. McCollum, and I were representing the House Quality Care Coalition until 3am Saturday night to negotiate a solution to longstanding inequities in Medicare and cobble together the votes to pass the bill, we were doing what was right for America.

Meanwhile, all weekend, right-wing Tea Partiers attacked our efforts and stopped at nothing to try to kill this landmark bill. I knew we'd be in for more of these attacks -- but I didn't expect it to come from our own Attorney General.

We have fought too hard and have come too far to give up now. This legislation delivers critical reforms, like providing health insurance for an additional 32 million Americans, eliminates discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, and corrects reimbursement disparities that have been costing Washington families for decades. That is a big win for all of us, and I won't let Rob McKenna take it away.

If you agree that we can't give up critical reform that was 30 years in the making for one politician to try to win the support of right-wing extremists, then sign this emergency petition right now.

Click here to tell McKenna that he does not represent us and we want him to end his attempt to block health care access for Washingtonians right now.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 330
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
carolm62
06:32 PM on 03/28/2010
Rasmussen Reports say 55% Favor epeal of Health Care Bill

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_favor_repeal_of_health_care_bill

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on the first two nights after the president signed the bill, shows that 55% favor repealing the legislation. Forty-two percent (42%) oppose repeal. Those figures include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal and 35% who Strongly Oppose it.

In terms of Election 2010, 52% say they’d vote for a candidate who favors repeal over one who does not. Forty-one percent (41%) would cast their vote for someone who opposes repeal.
Not surprisingly, Republicans overwhelmingly favor repeal while most Democrats are opposed. Among those not affiliated with either major party, 59% favor repeal, and 35% are against it.
Most senior citizens (59%) also favor repeal. Earlier, voters over 65 had been more opposed to the health care plan than younger adults. Seniors use the health care system more than anyone else.
12:47 AM on 03/29/2010
You shouldn't cite a Rasmussen poll if you want to be taken seriously here on Huffpo.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
carolm62
05:27 PM on 03/28/2010
From the Seattle Times:

"THE politically orchestrated hiss at Rob McKenna has not been convincing. Washington's attorney general has the clear authority to argue that the new health-insurance law violates the Constitution, and to sign on to a lawsuit to that effect.

Opponents ask, "Who is McKenna's client?" It is the people who elected him. Note that a Survey USA poll suggested that more Washington voters agree with him (44 percent) than do not (40 percent).

Opponents ask how much the lawsuit by 13 state attorneys general costs the people of Washington. It doesn't cost them any extra money. The state of Florida is paying for it.

Opponents imply there is something outrageous in challenging a new law. It is not outrageous. It is part of the American system. Think of the Tim Eyman tax initiatives. Almost all the ones that passed have been challenged.

The main challenge here is on one point — whether the federal government can require people to buy a private product: health insurance.

The argument centers on the U.S. Constitution's commerce clause, which gives Congress the power "to regulate Commerce ... among the several States ... " The lawsuit argues that requiring a citizen to buy insurance goes beyond regulating commerce. It is, says McKenna, "forcing people into the stream of commerce."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/editorials/2011453136_edit28mckenna.html

cont...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
carolm62
06:13 PM on 03/28/2010
continued from the Seattle Times :

The law calls its mandate a tax. But if you comply, your money goes to the insurance company. You pay the government only if you don't comply — which means, McKenna says, "It's not a tax. It's a fine."

We think McKenna has a good case, and one the progressives who condemn him ought to appreciate. These critics are so often right about the dangers of corporate power, and particularly the rapacity of insurance companies.

But if it's federal power, and it's for a social purpose, and Barack Obama is presiding over it, they set their judgment aside. They accept a 2,000-page bill on its label only. They accept its promise, almost surely vacant, of cost savings. They overlook the deals cut with the insurance and pharmaceutical interests. They shrug off the "cornhusker kickback." And to those who invoke the Constitution, they become shrill.

This page supported Obama, and we still like him. But we also support checks and balances on federal power, and review of this law by the Supreme Court.
photo
sweatermoose
"Spitwads are not free speech."
10:36 PM on 03/24/2010
I just wrote a letter to Rob McKenna. I am absolutely shocked that he would do something like this. Apart from Sam Reed, I do believe he is the only Republican holding high office in Washington State. How on earth does he think that he could run for dog catcher and get elected in this state again? Has he lost his mind? This is not Alabama. This is not Mississippi. This is Washington, and I hope whatever he's getting in exchange for being part of this is really great, because this man will never hold statewide office, or county-wide office in King County again. This is political sui cide.

Go Jay Inslee! Go Governor Gregoire!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
carolm62
01:12 AM on 03/28/2010
Washington polls say the majority agree with him. Even the liberal Seattle Times agrees with him.

Too bad for your theory, huh...?
01:59 PM on 03/28/2010
You must live outside the state of Washington. The Seattle Times has never been liberal..... ever.
02:28 PM on 03/28/2010
Case in point carol, yesterday there was a rally of about 800 people in support of McKenna at the capitol. The TImes noted this and they also have an editorial agreeing with his case. No where do they even mention, anywhere, that he received petitions that well over 18,000 people signed, asking him to drop the lawsuit. The Times, instead, glorified McKenna. So much for its "liberal" leanings.
05:36 PM on 03/24/2010
We now have at least one thing that Obama can't blame on Bush.
09:25 PM on 03/24/2010
While on the recent republican "rewriting history" tour, Mary Matalin noted on television that "Bush inherited 9/11 from Clinton." How's that one for blame?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
carolm62
01:17 AM on 03/28/2010
In a way she is correct. Bush inherited the conditions that Clinton created, part of which involved Bin Laden. And Clinton inherited his conditions and so on down the line. That is why US foreign policy never changes, no matter which party is in power. They have to deal with the conditions that exist -- not a blank slate.

Note that we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and we aren't leaving either for years to come....
05:34 PM on 03/24/2010
I don't care if I had 5 days to review this monstrocity they call a bill, it's too long and not easy to decifer all the nonsense. What a joke.
12:59 AM on 03/25/2010
Your reading comprehension might improve if you learned to spell and to express yourself with clarity. You actually may be a victim of your own deficiencies, no matter how you perceive yourself.
05:10 AM on 03/25/2010
Another intelligent response from the echo chamber.
photo
dfranz
With Liberty and Justice for all
11:49 AM on 03/24/2010
I guess Rob McKenna is showing his stealth neocon self.

I actually voted for McKenna. He was my only Republican vote. I did so because he came across as a rational person making responsible nonpartisan decisions during the Governor's election.

I was wrong as were many other Democrats who voted for him. Washington State is solidly Democratic. President Obama won here by a landslide. McKenna has just committed political suicide. I do not see him being reelected. The Governor is working on trying to remove his funding to do this, but the damage has been done. He does not represent the views of the majority in my state.
01:07 AM on 03/25/2010
My wife and I voted for McKenna, which was likewise our only Republican vote. He is toast in WA State. I emailed him and suggested that if he were an honorable man, he'd resign and pursue his agenda off the taxpayer's payroll.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
carolm62
01:23 AM on 03/28/2010
Correction. Seattle is solidly Democratic. The rest of the state is solidly Republican.

I theorize that there is something about the pollution in big cities that causes the people there to want to forcibly take stuff from other people. There doesn't seem to be this problem out where the air is clear.
01:29 PM on 03/28/2010
If only square miles could vote, your comment would be relevant. However, PEOPLE vote. And more PEOPLE in WA are Democrats than Republicans, by a pretty long shot.

RINO Rossi got as far as he did by refusing to state his position on the issues and posing as a "moderate." Rob McKenna has been using that strategy, and if he had continued, I am absolutely certain that he would have been the next governor. But instesd, he filed this lawsuit.

Thank you, Rob, for pulling back the curtain and showing us that you're just another teabagging Republican. Maybe this silly suit will prevail and maybe it won't, but either way, he'll never hold statewide office again, and that's a fact.
photo
dfranz
With Liberty and Justice for all
01:46 PM on 03/28/2010
I theorize that when you live in an urban environment you realize we all live in a society and are tied to a common bond. When our neighbors all feel secure it makes for a more productive and safer community.

Over 75% of the states population lives west of the Cascades. We see eastern Washington as our own welfare state as they receive much more state money for police, roads, schools etc than they ever contribute.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
OneLiberalLady
Liberals rock!
10:26 AM on 03/24/2010
Faceboook has a page where you can opt out of McKenna's lawsuit - at least symbolically:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=info&ref=nf&gid=102763306425603
A Google search reveals a number of efforts to impeach him as well.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
OneLiberalLady
Liberals rock!
09:54 AM on 03/24/2010
Jay,
As a proud Washingtonian I am appalled. I have signed your petition and passed it on to friends. How McKenna could take this step in a state with two Democratic Senators and 6 out of 9 members of Congress Democrats is totally beyond comprehension.
Thanks for your hard work getting the bill passed.
Signed,
One Washington Woman
11:50 AM on 03/24/2010
Ditto Representative Inslee, from another Washington woman.
photo
dfranz
With Liberty and Justice for all
12:08 PM on 03/24/2010
I guess I'll just have to fan you both!
03:10 PM on 03/24/2010
Why is it that you are so opposed to someone challenging the constitutionality of a bill, liberal lady? If it is constitutional, you have nothing to worry about. Are you OK with the challenge if the reasoning is because the bill would bankrupt your state and double your state income tax? I am not saying the bill does double it. But there are two major camps of AG's. One is challenging constitutionality. Personally, I am OK with EVERY bill passed being challenged in this way. It does nothing but ensure that the Congress doesn't overstep its bounds. That whole checks and balances thing that the Constitution set up. The other group is concerned that the bill places extreme hardship financially on the states to implement. So they are challenging the bill on that ground. Again, this is part of the job for an AG. Protect the citizens of the state from economic hardship.

Either way, the reactions against this AG are emotional and fail to take these considerations into account. You are upset that something you want passed is being challenged. I understand that, but you either have nothing to worry about or what you want passed gets struck down by the Constitution. Either way, things happened the way they are supposed to.
04:36 PM on 03/25/2010
Because it is a gigantic waste of the taxpayers' time and money. The lawsuit is worthless, because there is a provision for states to opt out, as long as they provide adequate health care coverage to their citizens.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:36 AM on 03/24/2010
I find it almost amusing AGs are suing to prevent healthcare reform, because if they were truly honest in their beliefs, they would also file suit over SS and Medicare. Every American who is employed is forced to contribute to SS and Medicare, which is bascially the same thing as healthcare reform. The only difference is that, gasssppp, we have to pay to have coverage from private insurance companies because a public option like SS and Medicare is too socialist. The GOP has been met more than half-way on healthcare reform, yet they still resort to lawyering to deny healthcare because they want Americans to die. Its not about profits because the healthcare industry will make more money, not less, and its not about socialism because GOP supports the biggest of big government and record debt and defecits.

Make no mistake about it, real Americans need to fight just as hard to save American's lives just as hard as Teabaggers are fighting to have Americans die, otherwise the GOP will win and Americans will die. The GOP is fighting to cause more than 4 times as many deaths than happened on 9-11, only the GOP is trying to make this happen year in and year out, yet another example of GOP compassion and patriotism.
01:41 PM on 03/24/2010
"The road to H*** is paved with good intentions". You're right, SS and Medicare have HUGE unfunded liabilities... now we've added another huge entitlement. Although a noble idea, the bill leaves a lot to be desired, including how to pay for it. That's where mostt of the AGs come in, because this bill foists an obligation on them that the states can't meet.
Your opinion that "Teabaggers are fighting to have Americans die" is about as shameful an accusation as I've seen, and it's a load of BS. I challenge you to come up with a SINGLE shred of evidence to support your assertion.
02:00 PM on 03/24/2010
Excellent exF14RIO. I was also going to comment on the load of garbage that is a claim that Republicans or Tea Party folks just want people to do. It is tired rhetoric like this that makes people like hawk irrelevant in today's political discourse.
01:40 PM on 03/28/2010
The whole "SS and Medicare have huge unfunded liabilities" meme is a convenient way for Republicans to throw out big scary numbers about programs that they do not like, numbers that most people do not understand. But I do.

My best recollection is that the silly "infinite horizon" estimate for SS is $11 trillion in "unfunded liability"--which means that in an infinite number of years, if nothing changes, that's what it will cost. So do you think nothing will changes over an infinite number of years? Do you know what the US economic growth rate will be in the year 2600? I don't and you don't either, and no one else does.

But SS is paid for by payroll taxes, and the present value of payroll tax revenue over an infinite time horizon is $275 trillion. So either there's no problem at all, because we'll bring in 20 times the revenue that the system needs (and it would pay for Medicare too), or we're having a ridiculous discussion about fictitious numbers estimated over an absurd length of time. You choose.

And as a note, this HCR bill is FULLY PAID FOR, and represents no "unfunded liability" of any kind. For you to bring that phrase into the conversation is just a "guilt by association" fallacious argument. In fact, it will lower our budget deficit by over a trillion dollars over twenty years. And you know it.
09:28 AM on 03/24/2010
This healthcare reform is only one more form of government intrusion into our lives! Why can't the idiots see that? Or is this what you really want? Do you want government to "own " you? Little by little the US government and King Obama is taking over every aspect of our lives. This reform is just another step to that end.
Many or rather, THE MAJORITY of us can see this and don't want it. We are very proud of the Attorneys General of 14 states, and hopefully more, who are taking these steps to try to stop this outrageous out-of-control government.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kaimara
09:37 AM on 03/24/2010
Sorry to bring this to you, it may come as a shock but you are not the majority nor do you speak for it. We sadly live in a world where rarely are we forced to hear points of views we do not like and it breeds ignorance. The only people who have consistently shown that they are for government intruding upon the lives of it's citizen's is the Republican party. Patriot Act, Terri Shavo (Spelling?) Case, Preventing Gay Rights, if that's not taking away liberties I don't know what to say.

Lets GET ANGRY CAUSE GOVERNMENT IS TRYING TO HELP PLACE CONSUMER PROTECTIONS IN THE HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY, when i read your post that's all i could conclude. MUST BE A SOCIALIST PLOT TO MAKE US ENGAGE IN DEALS WITH PRIVATE CORPORATIONS. ./sigh
10:06 AM on 03/24/2010
Refer to any poll you can find and you will see what the MAJORITY thinks of this healthcare reform.
And if you dig deep and actually find out what this reform will mean to all of us, maybe you wouldn't try to make it a Rep/Dem issue.
10:30 AM on 03/24/2010
Oh, let us not forget Terry Schiavo and how Jeb Bush took a private, personal tradegy to the courts and media circus to promote his pro-life stance.

And to the next poster, how about you go go take a poll at tent cities and homeless shelters and ask them if they could use some medical care. The MSM doesn't dare ask them what they think.
10:01 AM on 03/24/2010
Let me guess.... the Texas education board is going to rewrite the definition of "majority" now, too?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
michiganms
09:24 AM on 03/24/2010
AG Mike Cox of MI (Republican) is doing the same thing -- mainly because he wants to run for Governor. I am totally against this and if Mikey thinks he's advancing his career, he's dead wrong.
09:15 AM on 03/24/2010
Gee. If the mandate is unconstitutional, then maybe the bill should be re-done to eliminate the insurance company role and just make it a single payer system.
11:03 AM on 03/24/2010
Correct. the Supreme Court has ruled that the "socialist" SS and Medicare programs past constitutional muster. If the court thinks insurance companies are having their rights violated just rewite the bill and do it without them. It seems to have worked ok before.
01:18 PM on 03/24/2010
That does seem to be the thrust of the argument, doesn't it?
09:10 AM on 03/24/2010
"With this law, the federal government will force citizens to buy health insurance, claiming it has the authority to do so because of its power to regulate interstate commerce. We contend that if a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person – by definition – is not engaging in commerce, and therefore, is not subject to a federal mandate."
10:29 AM on 03/24/2010
Health Care is already being paid for by Taxpayers when the uninsured show up at the Emergency Room. I for one, want everyone paying something - especially the youth. The Republicans should love this idea - that you have to PAY something for your own Health Care!
11:32 AM on 03/24/2010
Careful, Republicans don't like facts when they disagree with their beliefs.
09:43 AM on 03/25/2010
The Emergency Room uninsured would be easy to fix. Just simply deny treatment; after all, why should WE have to pay for this? Healthcare providers offer a service for which they SHOULD be paid. So how did someone elses treatment become the Govt's obligation (meaning, OUR obligation)?
02:06 PM on 03/28/2010
From the bill---the explanation:

(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following findings:
(1) IN GENERAL.—The individual responsibility requirement provided for in this section (in thisvsection referred to as the ‘‘requirement’’) is commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce, as a result of the effects described in paragraph (2).
(2) EFFECTS ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND INTERSTATE COMMERCE.—The effects described in this paragraph are the following:
(A) The requirement regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature: economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased.
~~~~~~~~~Cut sections B/C/D/E/F/G/H to save words~~~~~~~~~
(3) SUPREME COURT RULING.—In United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association (322 U.S. 533 (1944)), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that insurance is interstate commerce subject to Federal regulation.


And there you go. Read the bill: http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act-as-passed.pdf
09:05 AM on 03/24/2010
Since you didn't bring up the actual reason for the suit, I thought i should:

"With this law, the federal government will force citizens to buy health insurance, claiming it has the authority to do so because of its power to regulate interstate commerce. We contend that if a person decides not to buy health insurance, that person – by definition – is not engaging in commerce, and therefore, is not subject to a federal mandate."

Kenneth T. Cuccinelli, II
Attorney General of Virginia
09:17 AM on 03/24/2010
I have said this way too much in the past 2 months, but I'll say it again. I am embarrassed to be living in Virginia right now.

I'm so glad my Governor and AG are so busy and spending money reversing anti discrimination laws and starting lawsuits over health care reform instead of spending that money creating jobs. Or using that money instead of cutting our education budget. And to think they both campaigned as moderates...
09:25 AM on 03/24/2010
So constitutionality is clearly not important to you. As a Virginia Resident and a proud Jeffersonian liberal, I am glad that we are addressing this bill's overreach of federal power.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kaimara
09:27 AM on 03/24/2010
I guess the Attorney General Of Virgina has poor reading comprehension since there is no mandate forcing people to buy insurance, just as there is no mandate forcing people not to smoke , but there is a tax on these options,smoking or not having insurance, to discourage them. I'm tried of hearing the word force, there's an option to take the fee hit or try and find a coverage plan that affordable for you, which mean the options are actually greater than 2 since not all insurance is the same.
09:33 AM on 03/24/2010
The president disagrees with you

We’ve got a philosophical difference, which we’ve debated repeatedly, and that is that Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it.

-Barack Obama