Arizona Voters Could Block Universal Health Care Efforts With New Proposition
Monday Aug 18, 2008Arizona Voters Could Block Universal Health Care Efforts With New Proposition in Politics and Legislation
Come November, universal
health care and universal health insurance plans will be blocked by Arizona
state law… if the voters so choose.
Recently, a petition obtained enough signatures to put Proposition 101 on the Arizona ballot, which would effectively prohibit any universal health care programs.
That includes any law which would mandate health care coverage or health insurance.
As Proposition 101 puts it, any law “that restricts a person’s freedom of choice of private health-care systems or private plans of any type,” reported the Arizona Daily Star.
The proposition, likely to be a part of an ongoing debate, had controversy written all over it before it was even approved for the November ballot.
When the petition was turned into the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office, the County Recorder Helen Purcell determined some of the signatures were invalid.
Purcell based her findings on 22 possible invalid signatures that the Recorder’s Office checked. Some of these signatures were dated before the petition came out, some had inconsistent dates with other signatures on a petition sheet.
But a Maricopa Superior Court Judge ruled that the petitions were valid, and the Proposition will be up for approval in November.
As a side note, it’s ironic that Arizona, Senator John McCain’s home state, is trying to block universal health care while Senator Barack Obama’s home state of Illinois is trying to pass it?
Believe Government Agency Broke Law By Spending Taxpayer Dollars Campaigning; Opinion By Then-AG Napolitano Could Mean Trouble for AHCCCS
PHOENIX, Arizona (October 1, 2008) — Supporters of the Medical Choice for Arizona initiative will file a lawsuit this week in Superior Court against the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, alleging that AHCCCS broke state law by actively campaigning against the ballot initiative.
Additionally, Prop. 101 supporters are investigating the legality of contributions to the “no” campaign by big health plans with contracts with AHCCCS or other government agencies.
It’s the latest in a series of blows to the opposition campaign, including an investigation by the Goldwater Institute into the actions of AHCCCS in relation to Prop. 101 and two legal analyses showing that opposition claims against Prop. 101 are without merit.
State law dictates that government agencies are not allowed to participate in political campaigns. However, AHCCCS Director Anthony Rodgers recently sent out — on AHCCCS letterhead — a memo on “unintended consequences” of Prop. 101 that supporters believe was a clear attempt by the agency to campaign against the proposition.
Additionally, Banner Health CEO Peter Fine last week sent to Banner employees an e-mail urging them to vote no on Prop. 101, and attached as reference the “unintended consequences” memo.
“If that memo wasn’t meant to be a campaign tool, you could have fooled anyone who read Peter Fine’s e-mail,” said Dr. Eric Novack, chairman of Medical Choice for Arizona. “This is a taxpayer-funded document that is being used as campaign propaganda by the no side, and because of its inflammatory language and claims — which have twice been independently debunked by legal analyses — AHCCCS’ claim that it is not a campaign document certainly doesn’t pass the ‘smell test.’”
The lawsuit is being finalized, and will be filed by the end of the week. It will seek an injunction against unauthorized conduct relating to Prop. 101 and potential damages as a result of AHCCCS’ actions.
Supporters of the Medical Choice for Arizona act are also researching whether the statutes prohibiting government agency participation in elections could also apply to corporations that have significant government contracts — making them, effectively, proxies of the state.
“It’s clear that big government and big health plans are driving the ‘no’ campaign — we saw that last week when an out-of-state company with a big AHCCCS contract became the first contributor to the opposition,” Novack said. “The voters of Arizona deserve to know whether the participation of these organizations is legal, and if it is not, to make sure those organizations comply with state law.”
So far, SCAN Health, a California-based company with a large contract with the state, has been the largest contributor to the “no” campaign with a $50,000 contribution last week.
Ironically, it may be the words of Governor Janet Napolitano that should be most worrisome to AHCCCS officials. She wrote an opinion in 2000, while serving as Attorney General, that municipal government agencies are prohibited from “using resources ‘for the purpose of influencing the outcome of elections.’”
“Even educational materials that do not expressly advocate for or against a ballot issue may fall within this prohibition, depending on the specific facts and circumstances,” Napolitano wrote in the opinion.
Proposition 101 will guarantee the right of Arizonans to make their own health care choices. Lobbyists and special interests will see their power to control and dictate health care choices limited.
Visit www.YesOn101.com for more information.
Posted by Yes on 101 on October 01, 2008 at 03:11 PM CDT #