Free Markets, Free People


Missouri says "no" to ObamaCare

In the most telling poll of all – a vote – the citizens of Missouri overwhelmingly voted not to participate in ObamaCare. 71% voted for Proposition C which prohibits Missouri from compelling people to pay a penalty or fine if they fail to carry health coverage.

Of course that obviously doesn’t mean that percentage isn’t going to or doesn’t carry health coverage. Instead it is a grassroots rejection of the premise that the federal government has either the power or authority to make them. And they’ve just prohibited their state from enforcing such a law.

 However:

The Missouri vote is likely to have little immediate practical effect because the mandate doesn’t take effect until 2014. If federal courts uphold the federal law as constitutional, it would take precedence over any state law that contradicts it.

And, of course, I loved this:

Opponents included the Missouri Hospital Association, which said that if the mandate isn’t enforced some who can afford insurance will get a free ride and pass the costs on to those who are insured.

Really? You mean like what is done now under Medicare and Medicaid?

But I think this Missouri state senator may have the best point:

“This really wasn’t an effort to poke the president in the eye,” said State Senator Jim Lembke, a Republican. “First and foremost, this was about defining the role of state government and the role of federal government. Whether it’s here in Missouri with health care or in Arizona with illegal immigration, the states are going to get together on this now.”

States have been getting the short end of the mandate stick for decades.  Yet many of them work under two constraints the federal government doesn’t.  One, most of them are required by law to have a balanced budget.  Unfunded mandates of the sort imposed by ObamaCare take a wrecking ball to that sort of requirement.  Secondly, the states can’t print money at their whim.  Therefore they must borrow any money to fulfill the mandates.

This and the Arizona law may be the first shots in a long war that sees the states again asserting their rights.  It will mostly be fought out in the courts and its outcome is going to be critical to the America we are a part of in the future. 

If the courts side with the Obama administration, then there’s just about nothing the federal government can’t do or  which it can’t involve itself.   And as we’ve seen in the last 18 months, it doesn’t take long, if the circumstances are right, for it to intrude to levels never before seen.

But regardless of the outcome in court, the Missouri vote is important.  The “Show Me” state is a rather purple state, so I think most expected the vote to be somewhat close with those rejecting ObamaCare winning out.  Instead, we see a huge margin rejecting the premise.

It should send a signal to both parties, and it should certainly have Democrats quaking in their boots about November.

Whether or not the parties will heed the message remains to be seen, but the voters of Missouri have pretty much voiced what I think the majority of this country feels – “thanks, but no thanks”.  Back off, downsize and cut spending.  And stay out of our lives and our health care.

~McQ

[tweetmeme only_single="false"]
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

13 Responses to Missouri says "no" to ObamaCare

  • And yet Erb, regarding ObamaCare in a previous post stated:

    “Yet its popularity has been steadily increasing since passage, and the GOP is getting little traction trying to repeal it.”

    I guess the people of Missouri had been privy to the Democrat Talking Points – er, uh, I mean Erb’s (AKA Lying POS) memo.

    • I suggest that this is an issue of “political class” v. “country class”.  There have been quite a few polls about this sort of thing lately, and the divide between the two groups is pretty stark.

      The nobles just loved the corvée.  And who wouldn’t?  Good roads for all!  The peasants, however… not so much.

    • And yet Erb, regarding ObamaCare in a previous post stated:
      “Yet its popularity has been steadily increasing since passage, and the GOP is getting little traction trying to repeal it.”

      The crickets are noisy in Maine today.
      But it won’t be long before that slips down the memory hole and we’re told that he’s “\been right all along about joining the rest of the industrialized world.

      • {chuckle} You dense righties actually think the Missouri vote means anything? Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?

        I have advanced degrees and godlike powers of political science. I understand economics to a degree you can only imagine. Stop laughing! And, from my faculty lounge up here in Maine, I have my finger on the pulse of politics throughout the nation and the world.

        This allows me to construct a multiple truth that is unassailable. And my multiple truth for Obamacare is that healthcare is a moral right (though not a natural right because those don’t exist, and don’t start up with trying to find contradictions in any of that), and other industrialized economies have something like it (and don’t start up with people in Canada dying in emergency rooms after being left alone for hours or the NHS in Britain running out of money and rationing care). Therefore we need it too, and we’re going to get it because other wise leftists in Washington passed it, and you thick righties should just shut up and take it.

        I don’t know why you guys disagree with me and insult me so much. I’m a left libertarian! That means I’m libertarian like you! Stop laughing! I am too libertarian, and I distrust big government. Stop laughing, I said! You sound you’re going to hurt yourself.

        Yes, I distrust big government, even though I supported Obama and I support Obamacare, and I supported taking over the auto companies and the finance industry, and naturally I think government should pretty much run all major forms of education. And there’s no contradiction there. None at all. That’s because post-modernism allows those positions be kind of like quantum positions, and they can superpose and stuff. Like electrons that are waves and particles at the same time, you know. Did you know quantum physics is the source of post-modern multiple truths? I read that in an article by Alan Sokal.

        And the truly wonderful thing about multiple truths is that I can pop into Qando, and just write a couple of lines asserting one of my completely valid multiple truths, and you guys get all lathered up and spend huge amounts of time sputtering over how wrong I supposedly am. That way, you never really get to talk about the issues without looking at them from my point of view, do you?

        See, you thought I was just a clown who didn’t know what he was doing. But all I have to do is issue a single comment and at my command you will get completely distracted from everything else and waste tons of time. That ought to prove once and for all who the smart one is in this whole affair.

        • There’s some multiple truth in what you say…
          I was disappointed you left out “globalization” and “re-balance the economy”, though.  Those are two of my favs…

      • Elliot, he has to wait for the cellar-dwellers at Media Mutters and Unthinking Points to wake up and spin the Missouri vote.
        Waiting for your ammo must be frustrating.

    • In all fairness to Scott, Ezra Klein (he of journolist fame) had a column on June 30 with four polls showing very slight increases in the popularity of Obamacare.  But, these were all adult polls:
      http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/06/more_polls_show_health-care_re.html
      Missouri just gave us a terrific look at  why likely voter polls are much more important than “all adult” polls.

  • McQ – 71% voted for Proposition C which prohibits Missouri from compelling people to pay a penalty or fine if they fail to carry health coverage.

    Yet, many of these same people will vote to elect / re-elect democrats in November.  The inability of some people to equate cause (voting for democrats) with effect (being screwed by an ever-growing federal government) is bewildering to me.

    McQOne, most of [the states] are required by law to have a balanced budget.

    Pish and tish!  Health care is a right.  A RIGHT, I tell you!  You can’t trample on people’s rights just because of some silly (and probably racist) requirement to have a balanced budget!  And, as most any justice of the Supreme Court would tell you, the law in other countries doesn’t require provinces, districts, shires, departments etc. (which are just like American states, you know) to have balanced budgets.  So there!

    / sarc

    [T]this was about defining the role of state government and the role of federal government. Whether it’s here in Missouri with health care or in Arizona with illegal immigration, the states are going to get together on this now.

    I wonder how Lembke defines “get together”.  Hate to say it, but that sounds unconstitutional to me:

    Art. I sec. 10No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation…

    Now, what the federal government would or could do if several of the states DID get together to oppose Obamacare is an open – and rather frightening – question.

    McQ
    [T]he voters of Missouri have pretty much voiced what I think the majority of this country feels – “thanks, but no thanks”.  Back off, downsize and cut spending.  And stay out of our lives and our health care.

    The cynic in me says that the people of Missouri said no such thing.  I’d wager that a generic question along the lines of “do you think that the federal government should guarantee a basic level of health care to all Americans?” would be answered with a resounding “YES!” by a large majority.  The devil is in the details: HOW does the government do this without coercing some people to pay for others?  The best that can be hoped for is the least amount of coercion: don’t beat the slaves too hard and they’ll actually work harder.

  • Thank you, voters of Missouri!!!
    States do, indeed, seem to be reasserting their role in a Federalist system, albeit it haltingly and perhaps too late.  Some, of course, have a longer, stronger history of standing on their own.
    Interesting…

  • Now the states need to find the cajones to reject the mandated shift of Medicaid funding out of DC to the states.

michael kors outlet michael kors handbags outlet michael kors factory outlet