[Vision2020] Legislative Report, Feb. 6

[Tom Hansen]

Rep. Ringo (aka "The Lady from Six") -

Two things:

1)  One approach to consider, that has been brought up here on the Viz
that hasn't seen any floor time in the state House or Senate, would be to
meticulously scrutinize corporate tax breaks.  You know the ones I am
talking about, right?  The tax breaks offered to entice corporations to
expand/develop in Idaho, thus providing more and more jobs; the jobs that
fail to materialize in exchange for the tax breaks that continue from year
to year to year to . . .

How long must unemployed Idahoans be required to financially cover these
corporate tax breaks?

2)  HB 391aa, the Idaho Health Freedom Act (as amended).

http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2010/H0391.htm

This bill (as amended) appears to be headed for, hopefully, a heated
debate and vote on Tuesday.  Its implied intent is to eliminate a
potential requirement that all Idahoans procure health insurance.

"The power to require or regulate a person’s choice in the mode of
securing health care services, or to impose a penalty related thereto, is
not found in the Constitution of the United States of America, and is
therefore a power reserved to the people pursuant to the Ninth Amendment,
and to the several states pursuant to the Tenth Amendment. The state of
Idaho hereby exercises its sovereign power to declare the public policy of
the state of Idaho regarding the right of all persons residing in the
state of Idaho in choosing the mode of securing health care services."

What bothers me about HB 391aa is its potential consequences upon low- and
no-income (pronounced "unemployed", see para. 1, above) Idahoans.

It is my opinion tha this bill's intent is to deny the current health care
reform originating in Washington, DC., reform whose intent is to provide
for low- and no-income families.

What are your feelings concerning HB 391?

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho