Arizona says NO to Obamacare

[Navy1960]

Friday, June 12, 2009

PHOENIX -- Saying they are working to prevent socialism, members of the state House voted 34-19 Thursday to ask voters to block the federal government from forcing Arizonans to enroll in any universal health care program.

"We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions,' argued Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, the sponsor of the measure.

"Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.'
Denied:1up! Software ()

As a Arizona resident I applaud our state house for sending a message that Arizona doesn't want an intrusive Federal Govt. managing healthcare. I had posted this in another thread and thought it worth starting a thread topic on, as it shows that some states know best whats best for themselves as far as whats best for it's citizens. Arizona is attempting to do the same thing with the Forced Unionization bill comming soon. In that Arizona will assert it's right as a "right to work state". I think it's telling when states have to start asserting their rights to a Federal Govt. that has not idea that providing healthcare to the entire nation is something that it's not constitutionally allowed to do..

 

[slackjawed]

HCR2024 is an Arizona state bill being introduced to assert AZ state sovereignty and limit the Federal govt from meddling in state matters in the future.
call, write, email and fax your state rep and support this bill.

 

[editec]

Interesting political development.

Should it come to it, I expect the Supreme Court will have to rule on the constitutionality of a state denying its citizens enrollment in this proposed Federal program.

Clearly the AZ legislators who voted for it will say that that is their right as a state government, and the Feds will insist that the state has no such right.

 

[Sarah G]

So what else is new from the party of no.

pfft.

 

[sealybobo]

Friday, June 12, 2009

As a Arizona resident I applaud our state house for sending a message that Arizona doesn't want an intrusive Federal Govt. managing healthcare. I had posted this in another thread and thought it worth starting a thread topic on, as it shows that some states know best whats best for themselves as far as whats best for it's citizens. Arizona is attempting to do the same thing with the Forced Unionization bill comming soon. In that Arizona will assert it's right as a "right to work state". I think it's telling when states have to start asserting their rights to a Federal Govt. that has not idea that providing healthcare to the entire nation is something that it's not constitutionally allowed to do..

This is why the GOP will lose this state.


Health-care issues lead latest Arizona State University-Southwest Poll
Questions examine opinions in Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas

IMAGE: When asked whether the country's health care system needs reform, 86 percent of Southwesterners said "a great deal " or "only a little " reform is needed, according to the latest Arizona...

TEMPE, Ariz. – A majority of Southwesterners – 86 percent – think the U.S. health care system is in need of some reform, and more than half – 53 percent – indicate "a great deal of reform" is needed, according to the most recent Arizona State University-Southwest Poll.

Specifically, 53 percent of all the respondents "strongly" or "somewhat" favored the U.S. government guaranteeing health insurance.


Health-care issues lead latest Arizona State University-Southwest Poll

 

[Navy1960]

I would not count on the GOP losing Arizona anytime soon sealy, however, I do think this law will set up an interesting court battle of the constitutionality of the healthcare issue. If you read the article closely though, it does not deny people the ability to enroll in a Govt. sponsored healthcare program, what it does do however, is take away the mandates.

 

[Navy1960]

This is why I love polls, I swear...

Results of the poll, which were released June 9, are online at: issrweb.asu.edu. They are based on a lengthy 45-question telephone poll conducted by the Institute for Social Science Research at Arizona State University. The poll asked 501 Southwest adult residents in Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Texas their opinions on several issues, including health care costs and quality, electronic medial records, and the economy.

So given the fact there are roughly what 45 to 50 million people that live in these states 501 people represent what percentage of the population of all 4 of the states? Even if this poll said 99% of the people didnt want health care it would still be flawed.

 

[Old Rocks]

Given that most of the young people starting entry level jobs in the workforce find themselves unable to afford health insurance if the company does not sponsor it, and small businessmen cannot afford to pay the price for good healthcare insurance, I believe that we will have to come up with something that works, or we will see in a decade, the present generation simply voting in a system that will turn your conservative hair very white.

There are many working systems out there. We are do not have to re-invent the wheel here. Here is where you can see how five of them, Britain, Japan, Taiwan, Germany, and Switland, work.
FRONTLINE: sick around the world | PBS

 

[oreo]

So what else is new from the party of no.

pfft.

Arizona--like Massachuttes--may have already fixed the health care problem in their state--& don't want to be taxed to death to pay for everyone else who hasn't?

 

[Douger]

Friday, June 12, 2009

PHOENIX -- Saying they are working to prevent socialism, members of the state House voted 34-19 Thursday to ask voters to block the federal government from forcing Arizonans to enroll in any universal health care program.

"We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions,' argued Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, the sponsor of the measure.

"Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.'
[

As a Arizona resident I applaud our state house for sending a message that Arizona doesn't want an intrusive Federal Govt. managing healthcare. I had posted this in another thread and thought it worth starting a thread topic on, as it shows that some states know best whats best for themselves as far as whats best for it's citizens. Arizona is attempting to do the same thing with the Forced Unionization bill comming soon. In that Arizona will assert it's right as a "right to work state". I think it's telling when states have to start asserting their rights to a Federal Govt. that has not idea that providing healthcare to the entire nation is something that it's not constitutionally allowed to do..

Don't forget to shut down them thar public school systems and close all of the libraries too. Gotta get rid of ALL that thar socialism.Don't forget " social security" Yer granny can get off her lazy ass and get a job and be a real Amurkin !.
BTW . I like that Nazi avatar.
Idiots..................

 

[Political Junky]

I would not count on the GOP losing Arizona anytime soon sealy, however, I do think this law will set up an interesting court battle of the constitutionality of the healthcare issue. If you read the article closely though, it does not deny people the ability to enroll in a Govt. sponsored healthcare program, what it does do however, is take away the mandates.

Reminds me of the Texas governor continually talking of secession.

 

[American Horse]

Don't forget to shut down them thar public school systems and close all of the libraries too. Gotta get rid of ALL that thar socialism.Don't forget " social security" Yer granny can get off her lazy ass and get a job and be a real Amurkin !.
BTW . I like that Nazi avatar.
Idiots..................

So those are our choices.....As usual, all or nothing.
Idiots..................

 

[Douger]

Don't forget to shut down them thar public school systems and close all of the libraries too. Gotta get rid of ALL that thar socialism.Don't forget " social security" Yer granny can get off her lazy ass and get a job and be a real Amurkin !.
BTW . I like that Nazi avatar.
Idiots..................

So those are our choices.....As usual, all or nothing.
Idiots..................

That's exactly right. All or none. Lib or Conservo,Christian or not. Free or enslaved. Have or have not. Period.
The only form of govt.that was actually fairly successful were indigenous govt's and even they brainwashed and war mongered to some extent. All forms of " modern govt" have proven a disaster.
Someday, not in our lifetime or our great, great grandchildrens, there will be a world with no govt, no giant corporations,no religeon, no borders and no identity.I'm no fucking Amurkin.
I am a creature on a planet. Free as a deer !
I wish.
Individualism.
Might not even be on this planet since we are rapidly destroying it.

That's why I chose to live in the middle of nowhere, with some sense of old ways and lifestyles.If I weren't already middle aged I'd be in Brazil, as far as I could possibly get from " modernism", govt and Nazi control freaks.

 

[Nik]

Wow....they voted to prevent the federal government from doing something that the federal government isn't going to do anyway. Well, this sure is news.

Obama has repeatedly said nobody is going to be forced to go onto the public plan.

 

[sealybobo]

I would not count on the GOP losing Arizona anytime soon sealy, however, I do think this law will set up an interesting court battle of the constitutionality of the healthcare issue. If you read the article closely though, it does not deny people the ability to enroll in a Govt. sponsored healthcare program, what it does do however, is take away the mandates.

Now we are starting to see why the last two elections were so important to the GOP that they had to steal them. It was all about Supreme Court appointees. Do you know that John Roberts has sided against people and with corporations on every issue he has decided on so far?

Did you know the Exxon Valdez settlement was cut in half?

$5B award against Exxon from Valdez spill cut in half - On Deadline - USATODAY.com

So now Corporations can do whatever they want and if we sue them, all they have to do is appeal the decision.

I think Supreme Court Judges are in some ways more powerful/important than Senators or even the President. Look at who decided the 2000 election. The Supreme Court.

Anyways, so now that we have the majority, you guys are going to tie everything we do up in court for years and get your way because you stacked the deck. I wish you guys would stop with these frivilous lawsuits. How much are you costing the tax payers with these TRIAL LAWYERS and these judges that legislate from the bench.

Yes, judges lean left and right too believe it or not.

 

[sealybobo]

I would not count on the GOP losing Arizona anytime soon sealy, however, I do think this law will set up an interesting court battle of the constitutionality of the healthcare issue. If you read the article closely though, it does not deny people the ability to enroll in a Govt. sponsored healthcare program, what it does do however, is take away the mandates.

Reminds me of the Texas governor continually talking of secession.

Republicans don't like courts or lawyers unless they are the ones using them for their own benefit.

Remember how much Ken Starr cost us? And still Clinton balanced the budget.

 

[Bfgrn]

Friday, June 12, 2009

PHOENIX -- Saying they are working to prevent socialism, members of the state House voted 34-19 Thursday to ask voters to block the federal government from forcing Arizonans to enroll in any universal health care program.

"We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions,' argued Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, the sponsor of the measure.

"Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.'
Denied:1up! Software ()

As a Arizona resident I applaud our state house for sending a message that Arizona doesn't want an intrusive Federal Govt. managing healthcare. I had posted this in another thread and thought it worth starting a thread topic on, as it shows that some states know best whats best for themselves as far as whats best for it's citizens. Arizona is attempting to do the same thing with the Forced Unionization bill comming soon. In that Arizona will assert it's right as a "right to work state". I think it's telling when states have to start asserting their rights to a Federal Govt. that has not idea that providing healthcare to the entire nation is something that it's not constitutionally allowed to do..

Right to work states
Basically union busting states...

Business interests led by the Chamber of Commerce lobbied extensively for right-to-work legislation in the Southern states. Critics from organized labor have argued since the late 1970's that while the National Right to Work Committee purports to engage in grass-roots lobbying on behalf of the "little guy", the National Right to Work Committee was formed by a group of southern businessmen with the express purpose of fighting unions, and that they "added a few workers for the purpose of public relations." They also argue that the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has received millions of dollars in grants from foundations controlled by major U.S. industrialists like the New York based John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. which grew out of a family manufacturing business, and other "right wing" groups.

Opponents further argue that because unions are weakened by these laws, wages are lowered and worker safety and health is endangered. They cite statistics from the United States Department of Labor showing, for example, that in 2003 the rate of workplace fatalities per 100,000 workers was highest in right-to-work states.
wiki

WOW...the right to work for LESS $$ and the right to work in hazardous conditions to DIE in the workplace...

And, YOU have the right to be a pea brain...

"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru

 

[sealybobo]

Friday, June 12, 2009

PHOENIX -- Saying they are working to prevent socialism, members of the state House voted 34-19 Thursday to ask voters to block the federal government from forcing Arizonans to enroll in any universal health care program.

"We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions,' argued Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, the sponsor of the measure.

"Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.'
Denied:1up! Software ()

As a Arizona resident I applaud our state house for sending a message that Arizona doesn't want an intrusive Federal Govt. managing healthcare. I had posted this in another thread and thought it worth starting a thread topic on, as it shows that some states know best whats best for themselves as far as whats best for it's citizens. Arizona is attempting to do the same thing with the Forced Unionization bill comming soon. In that Arizona will assert it's right as a "right to work state". I think it's telling when states have to start asserting their rights to a Federal Govt. that has not idea that providing healthcare to the entire nation is something that it's not constitutionally allowed to do..

Right to work states
Basically union busting states...

Business interests led by the Chamber of Commerce lobbied extensively for right-to-work legislation in the Southern states. Critics from organized labor have argued since the late 1970's that while the National Right to Work Committee purports to engage in grass-roots lobbying on behalf of the "little guy", the National Right to Work Committee was formed by a group of southern businessmen with the express purpose of fighting unions, and that they "added a few workers for the purpose of public relations." They also argue that the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has received millions of dollars in grants from foundations controlled by major U.S. industrialists like the New York based John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. which grew out of a family manufacturing business, and other "right wing" groups.

Opponents further argue that because unions are weakened by these laws, wages are lowered and worker safety and health is endangered. They cite statistics from the United States Department of Labor showing, for example, that in 2003 the rate of workplace fatalities per 100,000 workers was highest in right-to-work states.
wiki

WOW...the right to work for LESS $$ and the right to work in hazardous conditions to DIE in the workplace...

And, YOU have the right to be a pea brain...

"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru

AKA, no right to your job states.

AKA right to fire states.

Right to work is soooo misleading. That's putting a positive spin on an anti labor thing.

 

[Bfgrn]

Friday, June 12, 2009

PHOENIX -- Saying they are working to prevent socialism, members of the state House voted 34-19 Thursday to ask voters to block the federal government from forcing Arizonans to enroll in any universal health care program.

"We are a front-line battle state to stop the momentum of this powerful government takeover of your health care decisions,' argued Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, the sponsor of the measure.

"Health care by lobbyists thwarts your rights and can be stopped here.'
Denied:1up! Software ()

As a Arizona resident I applaud our state house for sending a message that Arizona doesn't want an intrusive Federal Govt. managing healthcare. I had posted this in another thread and thought it worth starting a thread topic on, as it shows that some states know best whats best for themselves as far as whats best for it's citizens. Arizona is attempting to do the same thing with the Forced Unionization bill comming soon. In that Arizona will assert it's right as a "right to work state". I think it's telling when states have to start asserting their rights to a Federal Govt. that has not idea that providing healthcare to the entire nation is something that it's not constitutionally allowed to do..

Right to work states
Basically union busting states...

Business interests led by the Chamber of Commerce lobbied extensively for right-to-work legislation in the Southern states. Critics from organized labor have argued since the late 1970's that while the National Right to Work Committee purports to engage in grass-roots lobbying on behalf of the "little guy", the National Right to Work Committee was formed by a group of southern businessmen with the express purpose of fighting unions, and that they "added a few workers for the purpose of public relations." They also argue that the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation has received millions of dollars in grants from foundations controlled by major U.S. industrialists like the New York based John M. Olin Foundation, Inc. which grew out of a family manufacturing business, and other "right wing" groups.

Opponents further argue that because unions are weakened by these laws, wages are lowered and worker safety and health is endangered. They cite statistics from the United States Department of Labor showing, for example, that in 2003 the rate of workplace fatalities per 100,000 workers was highest in right-to-work states.
wiki

WOW...the right to work for LESS $$ and the right to work in hazardous conditions to DIE in the workplace...

And, YOU have the right to be a pea brain...

"We're going to crush labor as a political entity"
Grover Norquist - Republican economic guru

AKA, no right to your job states.

AKA right to fire states.

Right to work is soooo misleading. That's putting a positive spin on an anti labor thing.

Albert Camus said: "It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners."

PEA brains don't think...they blurt out emotions steeped in FEAR...

"Eighty percent of Republicans are just Democrats that don't know what's going on"
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

 

[Care4all]

Wow....they voted to prevent the federal government from doing something that the federal government isn't going to do anyway. Well, this sure is news.

Obama has repeatedly said nobody is going to be forced to go onto the public plan.

I know....so WHAT is this outrage of arizona's for, since it is not mandated in the Federal bill in the first place? All faux outrage or political posturing???

Or if some years down the road, the federal govt tries to change the law with another bill????