Posted on 08/13/2010 6:19:55 AM PDT by Libloather
State files lawsuit hoping to kill national health care
BY HOWARD FISCHER - CAPITOL MEDIA SERVICES
August 12, 2010 6:47 PM
PHOENIX — Some of Arizona's state and federal lawmakers filed their own lawsuit Thursday in hopes of killing the new national health care law.
The lawsuit, financed by the Goldwater Institute, makes some of the same challenges to the law as are being considered by a federal judge in Florida in the claim already filed by 20 states, including Arizona. That includes contesting the ability of Congress and the president to force individuals to obtain health insurance and impose new spending requirements on states.
“I think their lawsuit is terrific,'' said attorney Clint Bolick.
But he said Arizona has a different story to tell, one he thinks may result in an easier case to prove against the federal government.
The new lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Phoenix, also has something not in the multi-state claim. It specifically challenges a little-known provision in the federal law creating an Independent Payment Advisory Board.
“That is a centerpiece of the federal health care bill that no one else has challenged and is very, very vulnerable to legal challenge,'' he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at yumasun.com ...
(AP:PHOENIX) An Arizona-based government watchdog group has filed a lawsuit against President Barack Obama and others in an attempt to derail the federal health care law.
The sweeping health care law, passed earlier this year, requires most Americans to carry health insurance through an employer, the government or by buying their own insurance.
The Goldwater Institute filed the lawsuit on behalf of a small Tempe computer business owner, GOP members of Arizona's congressional delegation and 29 Republican state lawmakers.
Goldwater Institute litigation director Clint Bolick said Thursday the lawsuit is intended to bring down one of the most sweeping invasions of individual liberty and state sovereignty.
"The federal health care bill is a sledgehammer to solve a problem that needs the precision of a scalpel. This is the most overbearing and intrusive way possible to try to address America's rising health care costs," Bolick said.
This is an excerpt.
http://news.ino.com/headlines/?newsid=68972737471280
BTT
Near the end of the Yuma Sun article excerpted in the original post is this sentence:
“The lawsuit also includes Tempe resident and business owner Nick Coons, saying the new federal law illegally forces him to purchase health care coverage and share his medical history with others.”
I’ve been wondering for some time why none of the lawsuits filed before have addressed the provisions that require mandatory electronic medical records for **everyone**, and the provisions in the law that allow federal government agencies to share them for any reason.
Many people pay for private insurance (or self pay for their care), and do not receive any federal health care or subsidies for my health care. What business does the federal government have with their medical records? Even in developing “best practices” guidelines, there’s no need for anything more than aggregate (not personally identifiable) data to determine the cost and effectiveness of various treatments.
Medical history is extremely personal and private, particularly if it includes mental health history (which it will). The personal consequences can be very great if that medical history is leaked - a chronic medical condition or a history of certain mental illnesses can make you essentially unemployable. A political candidate’s chances for election could be destroyed by a timely release of medical data to the press. With a searchable electronic database of everyone’s records available to multiple government agencies, those abuses will be rampant. In my opinion, the medical records provisions comprise an unconstitutional search and seizure.
I’m glad to see the medical records provision is finally being brought up in in a lawsuit.
Keep in mind that if ANY part of the health care bill is declared unconstitutional the WHOLE BILL becomes unconstitutional due to the fact that San Fran Nan failed to include a provision preventing that. Botox does that to someone’s brain I hear.
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.