Senator Julianne Ortman & MNGOP Senators Reject Federal Health Care BIll
If Obamacare passes, it will see swift opposition in the form of legal challenges to its constitutional validity and from the states. Minnesota Republicans today have already let their opposition be known. This just in from the MN Republican Senate Republicans:
Minnesota Senate Republicans today took a stand against the impending federal health care overhaul moving through Congress. Senator Julianne Ortman of Chanhassen introduced a legislative resolution that would formally request Minnesota’s congressional delegation to stop the passage of the federal health care reform bill, HR 3590.
The resolution also engages Minnesota’s Attorney General in preparing to file a lawsuit to protect and defend the residents of the State of Minnesota from an abuse of constitutional power or illegal action by the federal government upon the passage of this bill.
“The legislation being considered by Congress is unconstitutional and threatens the rights of Minnesotan citizens,” Ortman said. “The State of Minnesota has a responsibility to act now to protect and defend itself and its residents from an abuse of power by the federal government.”
Ortman referenced several unconstitutional elements in the bill, including an individual mandate that would force U.S. residents to buy health insurance. Proponents of HR3590 argue that the Commerce Clause contained in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the authority to impose this mandate; however, Ortman sees this as a clear abuse and violation of the Commerce Clause.
“The Commerce Clause authorizes Congress, in a limited role, to regulate commercial activity that affects interstate commerce,” said Ortman. “It has never been used to force anyone to buy anything; it is used to regulate economic activity, not inactivity.”
Ortman suggested that the way the Commerce Clause is being abused is analogous to twisting the 1st Amendment of the Constitution to force someone to speak, rather than to protect individuals’ right to free speech.
Another element of the bill that violates the Constitution is the use of a capitation tax on individuals who do not comply with the mandate to buy health insurance. Regarding the use of this tax, which Congress calls a ‘shared responsibility penalty,’” Ortman said, “This tax cannot be implemented proportionally in a way that meets the constitutional requirement for the use of a capitation tax. The Supreme Court is unlikely to stretch the contours of the Constitution to suffer such an unlawful capitation tax when other financing and enforcement options are available that would not offend the Constitution.”
Members of the Senate Republican Caucus cite various other offenses in the bill, including the fact that the CBO projects a 10–13% increase in premium costs by 2016 as a result of the scheme. Senator Amy Koch (R-Buffalo) said, “This bill is overwhelmingly unpopular. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 53% of respondents oppose the plan and 46% strongly oppose it, while only 43% favor it.”
The resolution was introduced in the Senate Wednesday morning.
Share this post
