[Vision2020] South Carolina lawmakers seek to 'nullify' Obamacare

Tue Dec 18 17:22:12 PST 2012

The PPACA complies with the Hyde Amendment.  Unfortunately.  So, it discriminates against the reproductive rights of women in the same way that the Hyde Amendment does.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-patient-protection-and-affordable-care-acts-consistency-with-longst

Saundra

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Donovan Arnold
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 5:13 PM
To: Moscow Cares; Moscow Vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] South Carolina lawmakers seek to 'nullify' Obamacare

Oh, that reminds me to ask, does Obamacare cover abortions in case of incest?

Donovan J. Arnold  

From: Moscow Cares <moscowcares at moscow.com>
To: Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:48 PM
Subject: [Vision2020] South Carolina lawmakers seek to 'nullify' Obamacare

Courtesy of GoUpstate (Greenville, South Carolina) at:

http://www.goupstate.com/article/20121215/ARTICLES/212161019

-------------------------------------

State lawmakers seek to 'nullify' Obamacare

Bright says U.S. Supreme Court does not have final say

Two Spartanburg County lawmakers are seeking to void Obamacare in the Palmetto State through a pair of pre-filed bills, but an expert says the pieces of legislation have little chance of success.

In similar bills pre-filed this month, Sen. Lee Bright, R-Roebuck, and Rep. Bill Chumley, R-Woodruff, want to invalidate President Barack Obama's health care law through nullification, which they argue will allow South Carolina to reject the federal law.

The Supreme Court upheld the federal law earlier this year in a 5-4 decision.

But Chumley said his bill would overrule the nation's highest court.

“The principle behind nullification is that we as states are the final voice on this,” he said. “It's just time for us to exert our rights as a people, as a state to determine that this (law) is not what our Constitution says we can have.”

Bright's bill, the “Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act” also would make Obamacare “altogether void and of no force” in South Carolina under similar logic. Bright said the Supreme Court may have power, but it does not have authority to force Obamacare on states that choose not to have it.

“Just because the Supreme Court says something is constitutional, it doesn't make it constitutional,” Bright said. “Under the logic that once they rule, that's the rule of law, if the Supreme Court ruled tomorrow to dissolve the states, what would be the recourse?”

Calling Obamacare a “freedom and liberty robbing” law, Chumley's proposal also would make it a felony for any federal government employee or contractor to implement the health care law in South Carolina.

Anyone doing so would receive up to a five-year prison sentence and a $5,000 fine under the bill, which Chumley named the “South Carolina Freedom of Health Care Protection Act.”

Bright's bill would make it a misdemeanor to implement Obamacare. The maximum penalty would be up to one year in prison and a $1,000 fine.

PICK AND CHOOSE

The two proposals follow a controversial and disputed strain of American history. States have attempted to nullify federal laws before. The critics of nullification say that states cannot pick and choose which federal laws they want to follow.

“That went out after Appomattox Court House where Robert E. Lee gave his sword over to General Grant,” said Ron Romine, professor of political science at the University of South Carolina Upstate and chairman of the Spartanburg County Democratic Party. “We have a United States of America.”

Chumley compared the measure with voter-approved measures that legalized recreational marijuana use in two states and the numerous states that have legalized same-sex marriage. Marijuana is still illegal under federal law, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act legally defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.

The Supreme Court, however, has not ruled on the discrepancies between state and federal law in these two arenas.

The Supreme Court did uphold the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Obamacare's official name.

“There's a good argument that it (Obamacare) is not constitutional, but that's not what the Supreme Court said, so the states have no legal recourse on that ground,” said Robert Jeffrey, a professor of political science at Wofford College.

Jeffrey said there are more practical ways to undermine the federal law. Gov. Nikki Haley has already said she will not establish a South Carolina health care exchange, which is part of Obamacare.

She also has said she does not intend to expand South Carolina's federal-state Medicaid program. Medicaid expansion is a part of Obamacare and is intended to extend health insurance to more low-income Americans, but the governor has said growing the Medicaid system is not the best way to accomplish that goal.

In Jeffrey's eyes, nullification requires a bit of extra effort.

“If you're going to nullify, you‘re going to have to be able to raise an army,” Jeffrey said.

---------------

Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgk76AKHzfc

---------------

South Carolina House Bill 3101

http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess120_2013-2014/bills/3101.htm

-------------------------------------

Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .

"Moscow Cares"

http://www.moscowcares.com/

Tom Hansen

Moscow, Idaho

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net/
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20121218/a649256d/attachment.html>