Missouri Voters Pass Referendum Barring Health Insurance Mandates
Missouri voters became the latest to express displeasure with the new health care reform law yesterday.
The latest display of public displeasure with the new health care reform law came yesterday in Missouri:
Missouri voters on Tuesday easily approved a measure aimed at nullifying the new federal health care law, becoming the first state in the nation where ordinary people made known their dismay over the issue at the ballot box.
The measure was intended to invalidate a crucial element of President Obama’s health care law — namely, that most people be required to get health insurance or pay a tax penalty. Supporters of the measure said it would send a firm signal to Washington about how this state, often a bellwether in presidential elections, felt about such a law.
“My constituents told me they felt like their voices had been ignored and they wanted Washington to hear them,” Jane Cunningham, a state senator and Republican who had pressed for a vote, said Tuesday night. “It looks to me like they just picked up a megaphone.”
The referendum, known as Proposition C, was seen as a first look at efforts by conservatives to gather and rally their forces over the issue. In the end, though, the referendum seemed not to capture the general population’s attention. Instead, Republican primary voters (who had the most competitive races on Tuesday) appeared to play a crucial role in the vote’s fate.
Practically speaking, it remains entirely uncertain what effect the vote will have. The insurance requirement of the federal health care law does not come into effect until 2014. By then, experts say, the courts are likely to weigh in on the provision requiring people to buy insurance.
It’s unclear where things go from here with regard to this law. Missouri is not one of the states that has filed a lawsuit against the Federal Government to strike down the health care law and, given that it’s Attorney General is a Democrat, it’s unlikely that they will. Moreover, given that this referendum was on the ballot during a primary dominated by Republicans, the political impact of the victory for the anti-ObamaCare crowd is somewhat muted. It’s a victory, but not really a very important or significant one.
That looks like the state of Georgia behind that button.
That looks like the state of Georgia behind that button.
It might be. It’s a stock graphic that’s not supposed to represent a specific state, really
Meh- 70% of an 11% turnout on the hottest day of the last two years is hardly a resounding victory for opponents of the individual mandate.
Being on the ground in Missouri, I can safely say that the vast majority of people (a) don’t think that this has any legal effect, and (b) don’t really care anyway.
Billy,
I agree. If this were a General Election, this would have more meaning
My interpretation of this result is that voters in Missouri, the quintessential purple state, who oppose the healthcare reform bill are more motivated than voters there who support it.
I’ve tried to post this twice now, and failed. One more time. In 1993, S 1770, a bill to provide comprehensive reform of the health care system of the United
States, and for other purposes, was introduced by the following: Mr. Chafee (for himself, Mr. Dole, Mr. Bond, Mr. Hatfield, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Danforth, Mr. Brown, Mr. Gorton, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Cohen, Mrs. Kassebaum, Mr. Warner, Mr. Specter, Mr. Faircloth, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Durenberger Mr.
Boren, and Mr. Kerrey)
Note some of the co-sponsors. Given where we are now, this is the interesting part of the bill:
I’d but in the link, but I think that’s what causes the failure to post. Try googling S 1770 1993.
put in the link, of course…evidently that’s what was causing the failure to post. sigh.
It’s a victory, but not really a very important or significant one.
Whistling past the graveyard. What tune will be picked when it becomes clear that the super-majority of Americans don’t want this? At what point, in a government that is “by the people and for the people”, do you move from “federal law is immutable once approved by the judicial branch” to “the federal law is in opposition the consent of the governed and therefore unconstitutional?”
Y’all are funny. There’s a fable that fits your reaction to the vote in Missouri quite neatly – I’m sure you’re all familiar with it. Just keep telling yourself that it doesn’t matter ’cause the grapes were probably sour anyway.
Juneau something, that is right. I can see November from my house. We will see how much it matters soon.
Funny how the “voters” of MO (I was one of the few) have a problem with the Gov’t mandating “fiscal responsibility for ones health care…” but have no problem with the gov’t mandating “fiscal responsibility” for ones driving….
Hmmmmmm…..
The day certain people say “It is ok for a hospital to deny medical care on the basis that an individual is unable to provide surety of payment…” is the day I will say this country has decided to take health care seriously.
(funny how that free market thingy is a great thing… until it hits you in the face.)