Current conditions
Fair
Complete forecast sponsored by
Prop C sees little resistance
Friday, July 23, 2010 at 12:02 a.m.
Supporters of a ballot initiative to block a federal mandate requiring individuals to buy health insurance have gotten a boost over the past week.
There are less than two weeks before the initiative, which would change state law to prevent its residents from being punished for not purchasing health insurance, is put before voters on the Aug. 3 primary ballot. It will be the first time voters will get a chance to weigh in on federal health care reform through the ballot box since the legislation was passed in March.
Supporters of the initiative achieved a victory last week, as a Cole County judge shot down a lawsuit against the initiative, which was filed by two Missouri residents. Their attorney said they would not file an appeal.
And money has been pouring in for a committee running a pro-Proposition C campaign, which has been active in spreading their message.
Missourians for Health Care Freedom had reported to the Missouri Ethics Commission on July 15 that it had received more than $23,000 in contributions during the last two weeks of June, mostly from the campaign committees of Republicans in the Legislature.
A $5,000 donation from the campaign committee of State Sen. Brad Lager, R-Savannah, was the largest donation from a Missouri state legislator.
This week, the group received $25,000 in donations from four individuals, each giving $5,000 or $10,000.
Patrick Tuohey, treasurer for the group, said financially the group has been “just as active” in the two weeks following the finance report deadline.
The group has been using its funds to produce yards signs, and hopes to get radio spots on the air in the coming days. Mr. Tuohey said 5,000 yard signs have been distributed across the state, and the group plans to order a second printing.
“I’m very excited Missouri is going to be the first state in the country to vote on a part of President Obama’s health care plan,” Mr. Tuohey said.
Meanwhile, organized opposition to Proposition C has been virtually non-existent in the state. Democrats in Jefferson City did not solidly back fellow Democrats in Washington when the decision to put the initiative on the ballot was put before the Legislature.
When the measure was passed by the Legislature, it was approved by three Senate Democrats and 22 House Democrats, including Rep. Pat Conway, D-St. Joseph.
The individual mandate portion of the federal health care law will take effect in 2014. There have been doubts raised that Proposition C, if approved by voters, could trump federal law. But approval of the initiative could put some steam behind Republicans running for re-election in November, as well those who have been calling for a repeal of the health care law.
Share Your Thoughts
Expand
Policy
Comments are the responsibility of the person posting them. Comments will be removed if they: threaten someone or degrade them on the basis of gender, race, class, national origin religion or disability; ...
... contain abusive, vulgar or sexually oriented language; spread rumors or lies; or are written in all caps. Please stay on topic. Brief quotes are OK as long as the source is given. Comments must be 250 words or fewer. Newspressnow.com moderators also reserve the right to remove comments for any reason they deem worthy.
pops says...
"There have been doubts raised that Proposition C, if approved by voters, could trump federal law."
Wait a minute.....what about states rights? This debate goes all the way back to the birth of our nation...
July 23, 2010 at 8:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
weese says...
I liked this article up to the last paragraph. That being said Prop C is a good thing, and we shouldn't have a problem trumping federal law considering we do have States Rights. However, why would we want to repeal the entire healthcare reform? It's got some great components. Such as, removing the ability for health insurance companies to deny coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. Letting kids stay on their parents insurance until their 25.
July 23, 2010 at 9:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pops says...
I agree, weese....don't throw the baby out with the bath water. There ARE some good parts to the health care reform bill....and two of them you mentioned. However, I think Prop C is basically only removing the penalty for those who choose NOT to have health care coverage...not to just block the bill totally. As I understand it, the federal mandate would require you and I to have health care coverage, and we'd be slapped with a hefty fine if we didn't. I think that's really the only part that Prop C was addressing....but, of course, I could be wrong.
Personally, I think a "child" should be allowed to stay on their parent's insurance as long as they're still at home. I had a daughter who lived with us past 21, and even though she was still at home, and still a dependent, she was kicked off. My feeling is....if someone lives at home, and is still be supported by their parents, they should be able to stay on the insurance. In fact, I feel that I should be able, by law, to designate who I want covered on my policy.
July 23, 2010 at 9:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
weese says...
I don't think we've ever agreed more pops. Haha, I think you should be able to cover whomever you want as well. I'll post a link to the ballot below. What do you think the second part of Prop C is all about?
http://www.buchcomovotes.com/ballots/...
July 23, 2010 at 9:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Orliandor says...
From the ballot:
" Modify laws regarding the liquidation of certain domestic insurance companies?"
Anyone know what this portion pertains to?
July 23, 2010 at 10:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Graphix says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
July 23, 2010 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | )
StJoeMike says...
Don't worry.. If Proposition C, is approved by voters, and trumps federal law.. The Mighty Obama will just sue the state and force Prop C to be overturned.
July 23, 2010 at 12:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
liberal_lamont says...
Pops, you do have the right to say who is or isn't on your plan.
And the company has the right to tell you to piss off.
I'm sick of hearing about people complaining about health care and it's associated costs when 55% of Americans have credit card debt beyond $10,000 and car loans exceeding $15,000.
You creeps think you should be able to do everything but take care of yourself. Somehow that's your neighbors problem.
People think it's ridiculous that an operation might cost $25,000 but boy they got no problem spending that, or more, or cars, decks, living room outfits, entertainment meccas in every home.
Priorities man. Most people ain't got none.
From now on I'm going to be on the side of insurance until the American people address their problems. I know things are borken in healthcare but nothing, including the insurance industry, is as broken as the American home/family. Fix it and then you can start to point fingers.
July 23, 2010 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
liberal_lamont says...
Gimmie, gimmie, gimmie. Puke, puke, puke.
July 23, 2010 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pops says...
You called some of us "creeps". Does that apply to me, too?
July 23, 2010 at 1:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ELH says...
@ Orliandor: "From the ballot: " Modify laws regarding the liquidation of certain domestic insurance companies?"Anyone know what this portion pertains to?
Here is the full text of the bill: http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/...
The second "bolded" area is what you are asking about. It will allow an insurer that is organized as a stock company to voluntarily liquidate under the conditions set forth in the bill.
July 23, 2010 at 1:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wsy10 says...
Why should people be able to opt-out of having health insurance? You know who is paying for people without coverage now? We all are!! EVERYONE pays when a catastrophic illness occurs and the person has no coverage. If someone wants to opt-out, then they should have to sign a form saying they are COMPLETELY responsible for all of their medical expenses when they get sick. If they want to take that risk of not being covered and wind up with a horrible disease like cancer or something, just how far do they think their own funds would go to pay for their care? I think Proposition C is ridiculous and will NOT be receiving my vote.
July 23, 2010 at 1:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Orliandor says...
Thanks, ELH.
July 23, 2010 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
weese says...
LL, you just made my blood boil. Thank you for that I was getting a little cold in this office. Now, will you please quit making blanket statements please. I'm an out of debt 20 something and don't have health insurance. It's not offered to me. Is it still okay for me to be charged 25k for a life saving procedure? Hell NO! It's not okay to profit off saving lives.
July 23, 2010 at 3:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hussien says...
Obama spent an entire year on healthcare and did nothing. I was for a public option that you could PAY FOR not be given like 40 million people get on Medicaid. But when Captain transparent and the democrats (no GOP allowed)met with big health insurance and drug companies behind closed doors, that got squelched. So what did we get? A working person still has to spend a 3rd of his income for crappy health insurance, more of his money goes to paying for freeloaders healthcare, and on top of that..he will be forced to buy the same over priced garbage. And employers will balk at hiring anyone if they will be forced to pay for their health insurance. They will pay the fine..its cheaper. And after it all got done, the stock on drug companies and health insurance went up...alot. 30 million new customers forced to buy the same crap they were offered before Obama saved the day. Way to go Barry..some plan you have there. Maybe you will get another Nobel Prrze..Moron.
July 23, 2010 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
liberal_lamont says...
Yes, IT IS!
What the hell is your own life worth? Talk about making blood boil...
Where in the hell do you get off thinking someone is required to keep you healthy???
Where??? Where do you people get this ridiculous notion?
As for the "blanket statements," there were none. I made a statement about specific groups of people, not all people.
If you don't use debt then I don't see how I could have offended you by my debt comments. It seems you have a hammer and everything looks like a nail.
I can't think of something more worth $25,000 than a life-saving operation.
WHAT FREAKIN PLANET ARE YOU GUYS FROM???
July 23, 2010 at 5:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
liberal_lamont says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
July 23, 2010 at 5:38 p.m. ( permalink | )
pops says...
It's just you used the word "creeps" and didn't specify. I just wondered. I have zero credit card debt, no credit cards, no car payments, and try to live within my means. I do have a good job and I do have health insurance. If you don't intend to hit everyone with your barbs, perhaps you need to narrow your target just a bit?
July 23, 2010 at 6:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
liberal_lamont says...
I guess you guys seem to think doctors should have school paid for, right? I mean, how dare those people have absolutely no life for 10 years to get their foot in the door, then they have the nerve to charge you for services.
Some nerve these creeps have! It's Friday, it's hotter than heck out and I've got a ton of yard work to do. Plus I'm picking up my new hot tub tonight, I'm pretty excited. You socialists have at it...
And if you think health care should be free then that is exactly what you are - a socialist. Move to Venezuela, France or England already. I hear they're doing wonders with their healthcare system. Come to think of it, I wonder if other countries have an abundance of American doctors as we have doctors from ALL OVER THE WORLD HERE.
They must all be money grubbers, though. Too bad...
July 23, 2010 at 6:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Trixie says...
So call me a radical, socialist, nazi, criminal. To my way of thinking, iIt's all about fairness. I work but my employer doesn't provide health insurance, therefore I pay for my own insurance (think individual policy) and I am thankful that I can afford it. But I want to know that my insurance company will not drop me if I get seriously ill or raise my premiums a gazillion percent because I needed a course of antibiotics. Is that too much to ask?
July 23, 2010 at 7:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalearch says...
No, your insurance company shouldn't be able to drop you or raise your rates. They sold you insurance on sort of a gamble that you wouldn’t get sick, so when they lose that gamble they shouldn’t be able to back out.
But I also believe that insurance companies should not be forced to insure someone with pre existing conditions. That’s like saying a car dealer must buy every car that is offered to them and pay market value – even if the motor and transmission are out and all four tires are bald.
July 23, 2010 at 8:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hussien says...
There is a vast difference in setting and enforcing standard insurance laws. (and I have been denied coverage and sought help through a state agency and found out my rights) and mandating everyone have coverage. And handing out more welfare at the expense of others. You think all this is going to save us big on premiums if everyone is insured? Guess again. You will pay the same premiums and you will pay double elsewhere to pay for the health insurance of someone else. Your not listening to the new Health CZAR Obama slipped in there. It is redistribution of wealth at its finest.And if your among the working people, you will be required to pay for your insurance and also get your money redistributed to those that don't work like you do so they can have your plan to.
July 23, 2010 at 9:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Trixie says...
Dalearch - when we buy individual insurance, it's for one year - every year the premium increases because we get older - and every year they have the option of dropping us, or raising the premium so high that we can no longer afford it. Security would be a wonderful thing, but there really are no guarantees in this life. Still, today was good. Have a great weekend!
July 23, 2010 at 9:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
slipmahoney says...
Insurance companies created this mess to begin with. They are not in the business of paying claims. They are in the business of collecting premiums and denying claims. I can't stand insurance and hopefully someday I can get them off my payroll. But for now, I am much like everyone else.......afraid to be without it. However, I really don't like the idea of forcing anyone to pay an insurance premium. As individuals each of us are the ones most responsible for our own health. And while I feel that the State has a vested interest in the health and well being of all it's citizens, making them pay a premium to the greedy insurance industry isn't going to make everyone healthy. It's going to make the insurance companies bottom line healthy. I want to vote for Prop C just on principle, but I really don't know how to help those who are in need of health care without some sort of mandate.
July 23, 2010 at 10:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
peoplerule says...
First, most liberals won't use LL's tone and he doesn't seem very liberal. The basis of liberalism is inclusion, hence a plan to include more people in health care.
Let's remember that the point of insurance in the first place was the selfish idea that if a whole bunch of people bought insurance (originally on ships cargos) then if there were a disaster you wouldn't have to bear the entire loss. We use insurance to spread the risk. It is somewhat of a gamble since we don't know if we will have a big loss, a little loss or none at all.
State government requires us to purchase car insurance. Mortgagers require fire insurance. Good judgment may require liability or floor insurance and other types.
Health insurance used to be cheap and so was medical care and doctors made house calls. Some countries with national health care still have all three, relative to the US.
Hospitals used to be run by churches as a not-for profit service and doctors did not have multi-thousand or multi-million dollar offices.
July 24, 2010 at 12:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
peoplerule says...
Hospitals used to be run by churches as a not-for profit service and doctors did not have multi-thousand or multi-million dollar offices.
Most insurance companies either went for profit or at least raised their salaries way above what most people make. Most churches sold their hospitals because, they said, they couldn't afford to underwrite the losses and the cost of modern equipment.
That was at least partly true.
So we have insurance companies now that skim 20-25% of premiums off the top, deny services, drop people from coverage, refuse coverage to others, and sometimes cheat their customers. They pay hospitals well and most doctors are lucky to get 50% of what they charge.
If you think this system is great, you may vote for Prop C; if you think it screws a lot of people, then vote Prop C down and enjoy the good parts of the new government regulated (not controlled) health care program.
July 24, 2010 at 12:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hussien says...
And the reason Insurance companies get away with all that in the first place is...the government, In Alabama, Blue Cross is the only company you are allowed to use, in KS..it is BC , or Humana. All those plans you see in Ads on TV, in most states you can't even get them because the government doesn't allow it.So if you enjoy that, lets have the government get even more involved in mandates and GIVING insurance to people on the backs of others, Works for Cuba..or did anyway.
July 24, 2010 at 5:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
liberal_lamont says...
I find it more than hilarious than when discussing large increases in cost, every single left-winger seems to forget about medicaid and medicare.
When discussing the outrageous cost of houses, they seem to forget about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
When discussing the outrageous cost of higher education, they seem to forget about Sally Mae.
There was a time when these things were market-rated, absolutely. It was before the government stepped in and forced these markets to lend to people who otherwise wouldn't qualify. What did that do to the market? It toyed with it.
When the government forces them to take these people on as customers, and then dictates when they will get paid, the market price increases to cover the bad investments that the market was forced to issue,
Ask a doctor how they are reimbursed for medicaid and medicare, Ask a realtor the effects of lending to sub-prime borrowers. Ask a private bank what happened to the majority of their sub-prime borrowers.
Learn your history people.
July 24, 2010 at 9:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
heckler91 says...
liberal_lamont.........
Are you sure your a liberal? you sound like a conservative to me!
It also makes my blood boil when I read some of these stupid commemts on here.
Work harder, millions on welfare are depending on you!
July 24, 2010 at 8:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )