The Goldwater Institute filed a federal lawsuit Thursday to block national healthcare reform, arguing it violates the rights of a Tempe business owner, Arizona lawmakers and even members of Congress.
The suit attacks the plan on several fronts, arguing it tramples individual rights and that Congress won't have proper oversight of a health care system that it doesn't even have the authority to create. It also violates the First Amendment rights of 29 Arizona lawmakers who signed onto the suit, said Goldwater attorney Clint Bolick.
"We believe that the lawsuit that we filed this morning is the strongest challenge yet to the federal health care law," Bolick said Thursday.
The Phoenix-based Goldwater attacked the bill, which is backed by President Barack Obama, as the most sweeping invasion of personal liberty in U.S. history.
The lead plaintiff is Nick Coons, 31, owner of RedSeven, a Tempe-based computer repair company. The suits says he carries only catastrophic insurance coverage to save money and because he is healthy. The plan covers costs of $5,000 or more and Coons pays for other medical care himself.
Coons said he invests money he saves on insurance to grow his company. He argues he shouldn't be compelled to pay for medical coverage he likely won't need.
"I think I would have standing in this case because I don't have health care coverage that the bill would consider adequate," Coons said Thursday.
Coons would face significant fines starting in 2014 if he didn't buy a health plan approved by the federal government. The fine would likely offset what he saves now, he said.
The suit argues Coon's medical privacy would be violated by forcing him to disclose medical records to an insurance company, and that those documents could be accessed by the federal government without his approval.
Coons is also part of a Goldwater suit against Tempe's incentives for the recently opened Sea Life Aquarium at Arizona Mills mall. He is running for Congress as a Libertarian in District 5, challenging Democratic Rep. Harry Mitchell.
The suit had 29 Arizona lawmakers join, including House Speaker Kirk Adams. The health care bill prevents them from trimming Arizona's Medicaid benefits as they try to balance the state budget, Bolick said. If they defied the law to cut spending, the state would risk losing $7 billion in federal funding.
That violates First Amendment rights and the ability of lawmakers to act on behalf of their constituents, Bolick said.
"We believe this amounts to coercion," Bolick said.
The East Valley lawmakers in the suit are Sen. Chuck Gray and Reps. Cecil Ash, Andy Biggs, Steve Court, Laurin Hendrix and Warde Nichols. They are all Republicans.
U.S. Reps. Jeff Flake, Trent Franks and John Shadegg are part of the suit, which argues the Republicans won't have the right to repeal the health care bill. The plan aims to contain costs through the powerful Independent Payment Advisory Board that lacks meaningful oversight by Congress or courts, Bolick said. Congress can repeal the law only during a brief time in 2017, Bolick said, which violates the separation of powers doctrine.
The suit, Coons v. Geithner, was filed in the U.S. District Court in Phoenix. It names U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Obama and others as defendants.
Bolick has argued and won two cases before the U.S. Supreme Court. He predicted hearings will begin quickly and the case will go in Goldwater's favor. The U.S. Supreme Court has the strongest federalist stance in a lifetime and has recently blocked federal intervention in areas reserved for states, he said.
Bolick said other suits against the federal law and the variety of challenges posed by Goldwater could produce a death of a thousand cuts to the sweeping health care package.
"We hope to bring the entire thing down," Bolick said.
Butters posted at 11:12 am on Sat, Aug 14, 2010.
Medicareblogger, what you fail to understand is that a CLEAR MAJORITY of America's citizens were and continue to be against Obamacare. There was no transparency as backroom deals were done. A copy of the bill was NOT distributed to many members of the house in time for them to study it before casting a vote. Some of the dems who voted for it admitted they hadn't read the bill before casting their votes in favor of it. That's properly representing your constituents? What is up with that?
Nasty Pelosi got caught BIG TIME in another one of her lies to the American people when she said that the healthcare bill would be posted online at least 72 hours prior to calling for a vote. It wasn't and citizens did not have a chance to review it and then contact their representative to voice their concerns about it.
This is NOT how our federal legislative system is suppose to operate. Too many of the politicians in Washington are not representing or serving the very people who elected them. How disgusting for the democrat members of the house and senate, to kneel before Obama, Nasty Pelosi and Wacked Out Reid, to kiss their backside instead of doing their jobs. Those same losers are now in a panic because many of them are going to lose their cushy overpaid jobs, with some already seeing the writing on the wall and claiming they are "retiring", because they KNOW they don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting reelected.
Medicareblogger, interesting that you don't seem concerned about what should have been done in the way of tort reform, to stop the massive amounts of frivilous litigation being filed against doctors and hospitals, resulting in massive awards that are being paid for with huge increases in the cost of malpractice and healthcare insurance premiums.
The dems outright lied when they claimed the republicans brought no ideas to the table. They brought plenty, but the DNC members made sure they weren't addresed. As I said, they will pay dearly in the voting booths for their traitorous behavior. We currently have a government that is by the self centered and certainly not for the people, instead of having a government run by the people and for the people. If this doesn't change soon, what is left of the USA as many of us know it, will be gone and replaced by a socialist nation that will go bankrupt like the former USSR did in the late '80's. What good is healthcare if we don't have jobs because of the anti-business spend, spend, spend, extremely poor attitude of the liberals? We need less of government control, not more of it.
Paris43 posted at 10:48 am on Sat, Aug 14, 2010.
It is unfortunate we have Liberal Leaches walking among us, BUT WE DO!
I wish everyone who believed in having ‘Free Socialized Health Care” would visit a country where socialized medicine is alive and well….better yet, perhaps move there for your “FREE” healthcare.
If America would start by deporting the illegal in this country, (no, not just the Mexican’s) this would take a massive amount of people off welfare, (and their free healthcare) and leave a large opening for those citizens who rightly deserve free healthcare through our welfare system. It is unfortunate but we have generations of people, (legal citizens) in this country who do not work, never have, never want to; they eat, sleep and ‘produce’ (more of the same). Only to their children, to the age of 18, should this healthcare be provided.
WE SHOULD BE LOOKING TOWARD BRINGING OUR COUNTRY “UP”, NOT PULLING IT DOWN TO THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION LEVEL OF SOCIALISM. This is my Country and I want it left “FREE” of Socialism.
Medicareblogger posted at 7:02 pm on Fri, Aug 13, 2010.
Publius: As I said, big brother is already here and it is the insurance industry. They have your personal information and they make decisions about your life based on their profit margins. So you think government is the big bad guy. But you trust for-profit insurance companies?
Medicareblogger posted at 6:54 pm on Fri, Aug 13, 2010.
Publius: You are both misinformed and paranoid. The insurance industry did not fight the reforms because they knew they would be getting 40 million new customers thanks to the government. A single payer system would have been the most cost efficient way to go, but Obama and the Dems chickened out - or sold out - to insurance companies. So the healthcare reform continues the for-profit system and generally has tweeked the status quo.
Insurance companies will have to accept everyone and they will have to spend 85% of their premium revenue on their clients - but in a trillion dollar business, this still leaves room for billion of dollars of profit. Did you not notice that the insurance industry didn't really fight the health care reform law? They made a deal (just like the pharmaceutical industry) with the administration to keep their profits.
Your expectation that the big bad government is going to take over health insurance is pure paranoia.
Publius Valerius posted at 5:10 pm on Fri, Aug 13, 2010.
Medicareblogger, your understanding is inaccurate, and incomplete.
Forced catastrophic coverage will, along with limits on premia, drive market participants (insurance providers) from the space, leaving only government as the sole coverage provider, as government is not subject to competitive forces or economic incentives. Likewise, people with minimal coverage will be forced into plans with much higher coverage including catastrophic.
This is simple economics, something which you seem to have failed (if you studied at all).
Your understanding of privacy law is somewhat flimsy, too. You state
"Any insurance company, with his permission, has access to his medical history."
With his permission. If (when) we go to single-payer, socialized medicine (this is the first step, see above), then all of his information will be compulsorily maintained by the government, regardless of his wishes. Yes, there already is substantial info available depending on documentation source, but that does not preclude opt-out privacy (Obamacare does). It will become mandatory to register, and that information and subsequent power given to government can be used to coerce any number of intrusive, dangerous outcomes.
Obamacare is incredibly dangerous, and will have catastrophic effects on healthcare delivery and availability in this country. This lawsuit is essential and well-constructed in its aims.
Medicareblogger posted at 10:43 am on Fri, Aug 13, 2010.
Mr. Coons seems to be misinformed about the health care reform insurance requirements. I am an insurance agent and my understanding is that an insurance exchange will be set up to offer a variety of coverage options for small business owners like himself. I haven't read anything that says high deductible plans will be eliminated. He will be free to choose a $5,000 deductible plan, but that plan will be better than what he has now because it will be required to cover preventive care that is not subject to a deductible. Most reputable insurance companies like BCBS and Health Net already meet these standards.
Also, concerning Mr Coons concern about insurance companies having his medical information, it is already widely available. When he applied for health insurance, he gave the company permission to access his information - and it was available in a central database. Any insurance company, with his permission, has access to his medical history. And if one insurance company should look deeper and request medical records from his doctors (with his permission) that company might find a reason to reject him. This information will go into the central database so if he applies to another insurance company he will be red flagged - and likely rejected automatically. My point is that health care reform is not changing anybody's access to his information. Big brother is already out there - but it's the insurance industry.
One more thing: If Mr Coons or his wife or his child should be diagnosed with diabetes or some other illness, he might change his tune. For example, until the reform, a child born with an illness could be refused coverage by his insurance company, forcing him to pay all costs out of his pocket. This is something that has already changed due to the reform law.
As an insurance agent, I think the reforms will free small businesses and entrepreneurs to think about growing their businesses rather than how they are going to get health insurance. How many people will quit their stinking jobs that they keep just for the health insurance? People will be able to pursue their entrepreneurial or artistic dreams if they know they can get health insurance. I think the reforms will open up many possibilities for entrepreneurs who might not be as young and healthy as Mr Coons.
Butters posted at 10:07 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
Ofuque2, I'm glad Goldwater Institute is filing suit. They don't just jump on any cause. When they get involved, they do thorough due diligence and usually win their case.
What a pathetic excuse for anyone to accept the horrible healthcare bill being forced upon us and against our will as though it's okay because at least the dems "did something". There are doctors who have are in the process of shutting down their practices. Many other doctors are no longer accepting Medicare, forcing elderly patients to seek treatment elsewhere. Why? Because Bumbles and partners in crime made a bad system even worse.
The full effects of the healthcare bill have not yet been felt, but if it isn't tossed, many more Americans are actually going to suffer because of it. The state is raising the costs of healthcare coverage to its workers in January. So are many municipal governments. Private employers are doing the same or dropping coverage altogether, so their employees can get "subsidize" healthcare. You know what that means, ofuque2? It means that working Americans will not only be paying for their own healthcare coverage, but they will be paying MORE in taxes to pay for the coverage of those who don't have it or can't afford it. It's going to create a very chaotic system, one that will be dysfunctional and full of corruption.
Our government can't even do a simple thing like send troops to our border by August 1st, which has now come and gone. Do you really believe that our federal government can oversee a national healthcare system, let alone do it professionally?
Do you really believe that illegal aliens, who are well known for stealing the identities of America's citizens, won't be getting heathcare paid for by America's legal working citizens? They have already been doing that at emergency rooms across America. They treat it as though it's Urgent Care, except that Urgent Care facilites require payment on the spot. Why go there when you can give bogus identity information at a hospital emergency room and let others pick up your tab.
Ofugue2, you're in for a very rude awakening this coming January. If the tax breaks are not extended, you're going to see a whole lot less money in your paycheck each week. You can thank your beloved demodopes. They love to spread around the wealth. Your wealth that is, not theirs.
Accuracy posted at 9:56 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
Legal action against Obamacare
In Missouri, the lieutenant governor and three other citizens have filed suit against Obamacare. The Thomas More Law Center filed a suit challenging suit on behalf of four Michigan residents, and in Iowa a man has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Yes.... In Arizona, the Goldwater Institute has filed a suit against the United States President, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Treasury and the Attorney General.
In addition to those cases, attorney generals in 21 states have signed on to lawsuits against the health care law. But not Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, who says he’s for Obamacare and he will not join the challenging efforts.
Clint Bolick, Director of the Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation at the Goldwater Institute said, "I am confident that Obamacare will die of a thousand cuts."
snipes posted at 8:44 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
This is so typical of the Goldwater Institute: They'll shove their nose into places it doesn't belong, and make a lot of libertarian noise (but ultimately accomplish nothing).
Where are they in Mesa? Do they rail against the endless City Hall giveaways? Riverview ... Waveyard ... Gaylord ... Cubs?
Nope. Instead they show up trying to create a stink when the City Council denies a permit to a sleazy ex-con trying to open an illegal tattoo parlor.
Thanks Goldwater! /sarcasm
Poorman posted at 8:13 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
Thank god Goldvasser was never president.The Goldwater Institute is for anything they think is good for them. Barry was a good ham radio oper.,and a fairly good General,thats about it.
wdgnas posted at 7:49 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
What's the point of having the Goldwater Institute file their own lawsuit?
as always it's never a good idea unless it's mine, dammit...
ofuque2 posted at 7:30 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
This is just more political wrangling by the conservative right. No one has done anything to revamp healthcare in our country. Now, when someone tries, the conservatives jump all over it just to protect their buddies in the insurance industry. I know exactly what the Goldwater Institute is. It's just another organization that helps the rich get richer and supports big business. They do NOT care about the middle class. Unfortunately for many of us, we ARE the middle class.
IceCat posted at 6:58 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
How many states have filed suit against the health care program. 19? What's the point of having the Goldwater Institute file their own lawsuit?
Masterrogue666 posted at 5:42 am on Thu, Aug 12, 2010.
Butters: Good job pinning their ears back...
Butters posted at 11:28 pm on Wed, Aug 11, 2010.
Dbl11s & az2008, I know it's hard for your liberl mind to do, especially since you've been drinking that demodope Kool-Aid for so long, but do try to get your facts straight BEFORE you attack an very good organization such as The Goldwater Institute.
The Goldwater Institute is a Phoenix, Arizona-based conservative public policy research organization established in 1988. The president is Darcy A. Olsen. The Goldwater Institute advances public policies with emphasis on lower taxes, limited government spending, school choice, and a reduction in government management of the economy. It describes itself as "an independent government watchdog supported by people who are committed to expanding free enterprise and liberty," [8] and it is devoted to the principles championed by the late Senator Barry Goldwater such as "individual rights, economic freedom, and a government of strictly limited powers." In addition to its Arizona staff, the Goldwater Institute has a number of affiliated senior fellows who are not in residence, including Carrie Lukas, Dan Lips, Randy Barnett, James Gwartney, Alan Kors, and Gordon Tullock.
In 2008 the Goldwater Institute won the Templeton Freedom Award for Initiative in Public Relations. The Goldwater Institute celebrated its 20th anniversary on October 2, 2008, by honoring Czech Republic President Václav Klaus with the Barry Goldwater Award for Liberty. Former Navy SEAL and Lone Survivor author Marcus Luttrell also gave a stirring speech about his experiences in Afghanistan. In 2008, 2009 and 2010, the Goldwater Institute was named "Best Capitol Watchdog" by the Arizona Capitol Times and its readers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwater_Institute
If nof for organizations like The Goldwater Institute, our citizens would be choking and gagging on all the regulations, taxes and just about everything else the demodopes would like to force down our throats.
Quote of the day from Nancy Pelosi, Demodope speaker of the house. "You have to vote for the healthcare bill before you can find out what's in it." It's stupid comments like this that scare me and exactly why this obamination of a heathcare bill will be tossed, along with Obama in 2012, and many of the demodopes this coming November.
az2008 posted at 4:29 pm on Wed, Aug 11, 2010.
Just a publicity stunt to get donors to open their wallets.
The people at Goldwater Institute rail against government, and how "free markets" should work. But, at the end of the day, they enjoy their homes which are protected by zoning regulations (limiting how others may dispose of their own property), built to standards set by building codes (imposed upon those who might be willing to build to lower standards and use the saved money for other purposes.).
That's the problem with libertarianism. The rhetoric sounds good until they're forced to admit that they'd get rid of what everyone takes for granted in a civil society. (Or, admit that they really like government *when it works to their benefit*. In other words, their high-sounding, absolutist rhetoric is empty.).
dbl11s posted at 3:03 pm on Wed, Aug 11, 2010.
I'm a little concerned that a group that is not elected and doesn't disclose its funding is allowed to inject itself into the dealings of tax paying citizens.
While I'm not totally in agreement with the legislation, I have recourse thru my elected representation.
I also find it strange that agroup that has denounced some court rulings as being made by activist judges use those same courts to inject their will,or is it the will of their contributors.