Are The Tea Party Inspired Campaigns To Nullify Health Reform Running Out Of Steam?

by Igor

1 person liked this

Politico’s Sarah Kliff points out that conservative efforts to repeal health care reform through lawsuit or state referendum — you can see who’s doing what here — are running into roadblocks, as voters are quickly turning against the idea. “By a slight majority, likely voters tend to oppose the health care reform law. But they also tend to oppose the repeal lawsuits as a ‘bad idea’ that would, for a sizeable portion of voters, make them ‘less likely’ to support a given candidate. In short, voters simultaneously don’t want to health care reform but don’t want to challenge it either,” Kliff notes:

The findings are particularly pertinent in Florida, where the Republican candidate for governor, state attorney general Bill McCollum, has been a leader in repeal movement. McCollum lead a coalition of 12 states in filing health care reform repeal lawsuits the day after the bill passed in the House.
The Quinnipiac poll found that the majority of Florida voters (54 percent) say it’s a “bad idea” for McCollum to file a lawsuit challenging health care reform; 38 percent say it makes them less likely to support his gubernatorial bid. Among independents the lawsuit is particularly disliked: 41 percent oppose the lawsuit challenge, while 27 percent support it.
Florida voters generally disapprove of health care reform, by about 48 to 44 percent but trying to stop it in court “is probably not going to help McCollum at this point,” says Brown.

Indeed earlier this week, Bryant Furlow reported that residents in New Mexico are actually discouraging their attorney general from joining the constitutional lawsuit challenging reform. “So far there are more than 750 comments,” AG Spokesman Phil Sisneros said. “Early on, most were clearly for joining the other states’ lawsuit but in the last few days many are urging the AG not to join.” Meanwhile, the efforts of states to pass legislation nullification the law may also be waning. As the Progressive States Network details, of the 40 something states that have introduced nullification legislation, 22 have failed to pass their bills and only 3 have succeeded. Look:

So not surprisingly, taking stuff away from people isn’t very popular. But the failure of these frivolous measures doesn’t mean that Republicans won’t keep on trying or that the public will embrace health care reform. The success of the law will likely depend on the effectiveness of implementation and the very fact that states are resisting the reform and using its unpopularity as a campaign wedge issue, suggests that the road to 2014 and beyond will be a bumpy one.
Americans are still not convinced that the health care law will lower costs — Gallup just found that individuals are no less concerned about paying the costs of a serious illness or accident, or normal healthcare costs, than they were last year — and state and federal regulators will have to work very hard to prove them wrong.

Right Wing Obstruction of Health Care in the States? #ALECFAIL

42: The number of states claimed by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) to have "defended health care choice" through the actual or proposed introduction of health care nullification bills intended to "oppose Obamacare."

3: The number of states where health care nullification bills have actually been enacted.

22 (and counting): The number of states where health care nullification bills or constitutional amendments have failed:

(The states highlighted in blue have enacted health care nullification bills. Measures in Arizona and Florida require approval by voters in November, with 60% of the vote required for passage in Florida. Updated 5/6/10.)

In recent months, the health insurance industry-funded American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has claimed that over 40 individual state legislatures have "defend[ed] health care choice" by being witness to the proposed or actual introduction of their model legislation intending to attempt to nullify the recently passed federal reforms in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Despite their model legislation's patent unconstitutionality, ALEC has persisted in pushing nullification bills in state capitals across the nation, promising those who want to obstruct reform that they will "protect citizens from ObamaCare" and "stop ObamaCare at the state line."

In fact, nullification bills have already been rejected or failed to pass in at least 22 states where ALEC claimed legislators would defy federal law. ALEC style bills or proposed constitutional amendments have failed in Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, West Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, andWyoming.

In other states where ALEC has claimed success, such as Montana, Rhode Island, and Texas, health care nullification bills have yet to even be introduced.

Additionally, nullification proposals have met significant opposition in many other states where they have been introduced:

• In Iowa, the 2010 session ended with the House minority leader conceding the failure of conservative efforts to nullify federal health care reform.
• In Arkansas, the 2010 session ended without action on a non-binding bill intended to "prevent involuntary enrollments in health care insurance programs."
• In Delaware, legislative leaders directed a nullification effort to a committee described in a recent news report as a "favored burial ground for bills."
• In North Dakota, a proposed constitutional amendment failed in 2009.
• In Maryland and Michigan, attempts at nullification through constitutional amendments failed in committee.
• And in Maine, where a nullification bill has not been introduced, legislative leadersdefeated a resolution promoted by conservatives calling on the Attorney General to join a lawsuit seeking to block the implementation of federal reform.

States Moving Forward on Implementation, Not Nullification

At the same time the right wing is focused on grandstanding and political gamesmanship, legislators and officials in all 50 states are moving forward with the hard work of planning the effective implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act at the state level. Many of these efforts began well before the passing and signing of federal reform, and will accelerate in the coming weeks and months as responsible leaders in the states focus on delivering quality, affordable healthcare to their constituents. (For more on implementation, see State Implementation of Federal Reform: Resources.)

Here are just a few of the efforts publicly announced, although others are moving forward in states across the country (updated 5/6/10):

• In California, Assembly bill 1595 and Senate bill 890 establish the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that would implement federal health care reform.
• In Illinois, SB 3047 creates a bipartisan Health Care Justice Implementation Task Force whose primary goal is to monitor the implementation of the federal health care reforms and make recommendations for state implementation.
• An Iowa bill, Senate File 2356, received Senate approval by a bipartisan vote. This health care reform bill sets the groundwork for how potential federal health care funding may be used to benefit Iowans. It includes an insurance exchange and it also expands the state's unofficial public option program for adults below 200% FPL.
• A Joint Select Committee to study Maine's role in the implementation of federal health care reform has passed both the House and Senate and does not require the Governors’ signature.
• In Nebraska, LR 372 would set up a committee to study the potential effect of national health care reform proposals on Nebraska and analyze policy options for responding to and implementing health care reform measures.
• The Texas House established a House Select Committee on Federal Legislation, with a specific emphasis on implementing health care reform efforts.
• Two 2010 bills in Minnesota, HF3709 and SF3296, make conforming and other changes related to federal health care reform; provide funding for health care subsidies; establish accountable care organizations and a publicly administered health plan, expand eligibility for medical assistance, and establish the Minnesota Health Insurance Exchange.
• In Maryland, Gov. O'Malley appointed a commission to make recommendations about the implementation of federal health care reform, which he predicted would save his state $1 billion.
• In Rhode Island, S2552, the Rhode Island Health Reform Act of 2010, would provide for a state-sponsored system of universal health care, including the establishment of a quasi-public non-profit organization through which all public and private purchases of insurance or health care services will be transacted for all Rhode Island employers and individuals.
• In Wisconsin, Gov. Doyle created an Office of Health Care Reform to prepare for the sweeping changes from health care reform that effect in 2014, from creating a state-based insurance exchange to communicating to the public to explain the changes to the state's health care system.
• Gov. Gregoire in Washington signed an executive order declaring the formation of a Health Care Cabinet directed to guide implementation of reform. The group will consist of the state Health Care Authority administrator, the state Health Department secretary, the Department of Social and Health Services secretary, as well as the governor's executive policy director and state budget director.
• New Mexico is preparing to implement federal reforms (including its own innovative high risk insurance pool and a state insurance exchange) through the passage of SJM 1, which establishes a Health Care Reform Working Group.
• In Vermont, the Senate passed S88 by a landslide bipartisan vote of 28-2, a bill which would enhance federal reforms by establishing the goal of universal access to health care through the design of multiple possible plans, at least one of which must include a public option.
• In Colorado, Gov. Ritter signed an executive order to create a board of advisers on health care policy that will oversee the implementation of federal reforms, including setting up a state insurance exchange.
• In New Jersey, the Health Insurance Exchange Act, SB 1288, establishes the New Jersey Health Insurance Exchange as an independent public entity, in but not of the Department of Banking and Insurance, with certain authority to facilitate the availability and choice of health benefits plans offered to employees of small employers that employ between two and 50 employees, and other eligible persons not employed by small employers.
• In Oregon, the state legislature laid the groundwork to implement federal reform in 2009 with the passage of HB 2009, which created the Oregon Health Authority, a state agency which is overseeing the interaction between state and federal health reform.
• In Connecticut, the state legislature in 2009 passed SustiNet, which created a board of directors now charged with making recommendations on the implementation of federal reform.
• In Michigan, Gov. Granholm signed Executive Order No. 2010-4 which created a council to oversee and develop recommendations for the implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
• The state legislature in Montana prepared for the implementation of federal health care reform in 2009 with the passage ofSJR 35, a resolution that created a legislative committee which is now studying opportunities and requirements for state action under federal reform.
• In Louisiana, HB303 would "provides for compliance with federal law" for expanded coverage by the Louisiana Health Plan.
• In Mississippi, SB 2554 created the Mississippi Health Insurance Exchange Study Committee to make recommendations on the implementation of federal reform. It was signed into law by Gov. Barbour on April 14, 2010.

The insurance industry-backed ALEC and their allies on the right aregrossly exaggerating their success at obstruction at the state level. In fact, legislators of good faith and good conscience across the country are focused on making sure costs are kept down and coverage is expanded for their constituents by rejecting nullification and focusing instead on implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

(Additional Sources: NCSL.org - State Legislation Challenging Certain Health Reforms, 2010; PBS NewsHour - States Challenge Health Care Reform)