Florida voters can’t strip down Obama health-care bill, judge rules

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/323146

 By Warren Richey Warren Richey   – Tue Aug 31, 8:22 pm ET

The Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a ballot initiative that sought to amend the state’s constitution to establish that Florida residents have a right to refuse to purchase mandatory health insurance – including under President Obama’s reform effort.

The state high court voted 5 to 2 to exclude the referendum issue from the November ballot.

The action is a victory for supporters of the Obama health reform program and a setback for opponents, including state lawyers leading an effort in federal court in the Florida panhandle to have the national health insurance program declared unconstitutional.

Florida was slated to be one of four states voting in November on constitutional amendments barring forced participation in a health insurance program. The three remaining states are Arizona, Oklahoma, and Colorado.

Missouri conducted a recent statewide vote posing the same question. It passed with 71 percent of the vote.

“The ballot language put forth … contains misleading and ambiguous language,” the Florida justices said. “Currently our only recourse is to strike the proposed constitutional amendment from the ballot.”

In a dissent, Chief Justice Charles Canady and Justice Ricky Polston said the court should resolve the case the same way it resolved a 2004 ballot question dispute.

The court rejected the disputed language in the ballot summary, but then ordered state officials to publish the full text of the amendment on the ballot instead.

“We should do likewise in the case now before us,” the chief justice wrote.

The five-justice majority rejected Justice Canady’s approach.

“If we were to place the entire text of the amendment on the ballot we would be ignoring the legislature’s explicit language that the ballot summary and title be placed on the ballot,â€

At issue was whether the summary of the ballot question as written by state lawmakers was inaccurate or confusing.

It read in part: “Proposing an amendment to the state constitution to ensure access to health care services without waiting lists, protect the doctor-patient relationship, guard against mandates that don’t work, prohibit laws or rules from compelling any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system…”

Four Florida voters filed a lawsuit challenging the language. A circuit judge found the ballot language misleading and ordered it off the ballot.

In an appeal to the Florida Supreme Court, the Florida Secretary of State did not defend the language of the ballot initiative. State officials conceded the summary was misleading. Instead, they argued that the court should simply substitute the text of the amendment for the summary.

The majority justices refused, denouncing the ballot’s written text for containing “classic examples of a ballot summary ‘flying under false colors.' "

The adopted constitutional amendment nowhere addresses “waiting lists,” or the “doctor-patient relationship.” The justices added that the reference to “mandates that don’t work” was an apparent swipe at Mr. Obama’s health-care reform program. The justices said it was the “type of political rhetoric that this court has condemned in other cases.”

“The ballot summary should tell the voter the legal effect of the amendment and no more,” the court said.

Aside from the initiative process, six states have passed laws rejecting mandatory health care participation by state residents. Lawmakers in 26 states rejected similar laws.

What were the 6 States that  passed the law?

Is their time to get a fixed version on the ballot for November?

That's what I'm thinking...and who was the genius that tried to put in the ignorant wording in the first place?  Just put "should Florida residents be forced to buy Federal Health Care or face time in prison if they refuse?"

+1



 

+2

It's too bad that some douchebag wrote the summary in such an inflamatory way. This is something we need to vote on, now. The government has too much power over our lives as it is for us to be forced to purchase a government program. I can't wait til November when we can start un-changing the "change."

I just read the 900+ page PDF of the bill.  There's is a lot of good in it. But I'm not please with "penalties" if you do not get coverage.  That's just wrong.  Starts at $95 & year over year will increase to a max of $750.
There's stipulations for people with no or little $, but still not right.  I hope the next administration changes aspect of the bill.

There is NO good in a bill that forces a person to buy something they don't want.

Kinda like if you were forced under penalty of fine to buy a certain type of food....

Have you took the time to read it? It's not perfect by a long shot, but a lot of what they are forcing crook health care providers. & insurance companies to do has some good in it.  
I know on a gun board I'm sure my thinking isn't shared. Oh well.

This is a stupid amendment. If the AG's lawsuit is successful, it won't matter. If the AG's lawsuit is unsuccessful, it won't matter because of the supremacy clause.

The only thing this amendment will do is put some money in a few attorneys pockets for defending it in court. And they will lose, no matter what.

Once again, there is NO good that can come from a bill that FORCES people to BUY something.

Healthcare is a personal choice, and when I was young, I would not have paid for it. I happened to have it supplied by my employer as a condition of employment, per their contract with me.

But if healthcare is something that one WANTS to pay for, for whatever reason, then they have the OPTION to buy it.

It is actually possible to buy with your own money a reasonable amount of health insurance.  

I am more worried that with a nationalized system of healthcare we will see rationing, long waits for services of all kinds (including in the ER with life threatening conditions), and a severe lack of practioners.  Just like every other country that has put in place something this stupid.  For a pretty good (and entertaining) explanation of this and a bunch of other liberal red herrings read "The Last Centurion" by John Ringo.  He explains this stuff a lot better then I do.

I am not saying health care in America was not broken before obama and his merry crew of idiots came along, I am saying it is more broken now and will probably get people killed once it really  gets going.

You can look at Canada, & some countries overseas that do have a universal health care system. They don't have those problems.
Not sure why we in the US seem to think it's a certain thing to happen.

You should look closer, Canada has major problems with length of time to get care and number of health care professionals.

Do some digging and you will find that many Canadians come to the US for life saving operations that are just not available in Canada in a timely enough manner to save their lives.

Recall the judge and get another…