The Alaska Houses of Representatives approved a bill Monday intended as a rebuke to federal health care reform efforts.
That much is clear, but the actual impact of the bill is far less certain.
Voting 23-16 largely along party lines, House members voted to make it the policy of the state of Alaska to oppose the insurance mandate in the Affordable Health Care and Patient Protection Act.
House Bill 1, sponsored by Rep. Carl Gatto, R-Palmer, is intended to respond to an encroachment on state rights by the federal government in health care reform.
“It is the policy of the state of Alaska that a person has a right to accept or decline any mode of obtaining health care and services,” Gatto said, describing the bill.
He acknowledged the bill would be difficult to enforce, but said there were already court rulings supporting his contention that the federal health care reform effort is unconstitutional in a court case involving Alaska.
“The judge said it was illegal under the Commerce Clause to require people to purchase something that they didn’t want to purchase,” he said.
With that ruling, the entire law became illegal, he said.
Rep. Alan Dick, R-Stony River, said the bill would be Alaska doing its part to resist federal intrusion in what should be up to states to decide.
“The federal government is very heavy-handed in all of our lives,” he said.
Democratic Rep. Les Gara, D-Anchorage, defended health care reform, saying Republicans, many of whom now opposed the individual mandate, had once supported it.
“It’s been misrepresented as some sort of Democratic idea to mandate health insurance,” he said.
Gara passed out to House members a copy of a U.S. Senate bill, co-sponsored by Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, that called for an individual health care mandate. That bill was introduced in response to Hillary Clinton’s health care reform attempts during the presidency of Bill Clinton.
“Originally this was a Republican idea supported by Ted Stevens,” he said.
In addition, Republican Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health care reform also involved an individual mandate, he said.
Gatto said Alaska is not able to now decline to implement the federal reform as it is currently the law of the land. The judge who ruled it unconstitutional has stayed his ruling while it is on appeal.
House Bill 1 now goes to the Senate.
• Contact reporter Pat Forgey at 586-4816 or at patrick.forgey@juneaumpire.com.
Comments (7)
Add commenthere we go again - Ok then
here we go again -
Ok then let the fools who want out of this Health Insurance reform out,
and these fools can all be at the mercy of their insurance company.
Its not right to make the rest of us pay for their ignorance.
Gatto no supprise
Given the great legislation with Gatto's name attached this session this is not coming to anyone as anything more than another of his nationalized conservative bills. There must be a handbook from the RNC of dumb ideas to introduce to your legislature.
Meanwhile the State has already played the political posturing games with the Florida decision. To date the only decision has been the state of Alaska can do nothing until the Supreme Court hears the case.
Gatto once again believe the State can out legislate the federal government. He is wrong and he knows it. No state law can ever usurp federal legislation.
This kind of health care
This kind of health care system doesn't work unless everyone is required to have insurance. It's the same with auto insurance. Given a choice, most of us healthy people won't elect to pay for insurance, because we feel we don't need it. And if everyone just signed up for it when they DID need it (on the way to the ER), there wouldn't be enough money in the system to cover everyone's costs.
The only real alternative is a single-payer system like what Canada or the UK has. And honestly, that would be a more efficient and more effective option, but that, of course, would be socialism, and socialism is bad because it would be un-American to believe otherwise.
The single payer system is
The single payer system is the best way to go and so we should just expand Medicare.
Medicare is socialism and its been working very good right here in the United States for the last 50 years
U.S already is a "Mixed" economy
A mixed economy (or balanced economy) is an economy that includes a variety of private and public control, reflecting characteristics of both capitalism and socialism. Most mixed economies can be described as market economies with strong regulatory oversight, in addition to having a variety of government sponsored aspects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
hypocrites
I would take them more seriously if they would opt out of their taxpayer funded state health insurance. Would they do that? Of course not. It's much better to have it both ways, pass a meaningless bill while still keeping your government helath insurance.
Gatto, of course
Why does it not surprise me that Gatto's name is attached to this.
He's like a Repub parrot..."Awwwk! Health care is unconstitutional! Awwwk!"
"Bust up the state employee unions...awwk...now that I already have my union pension! Awwwk!"