Spokane7
68°Quick links: 2012 graduating seniors • Summer camp guide • Jobs: The Road Ahead • Prep sports • News quiz
COLUMBIA, S.C. – Republican attorneys general in 13 states say congressional leaders must remove Nebraska’s political deal from the federal health care reform bill or face legal action, according to a letter provided to The Associated Press Wednesday.
“We believe this provision is constitutionally flawed,” South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster and the 12 other attorneys general wrote in the letter to be sent Wednesday night to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
“As chief legal officers of our states we are contemplating a legal challenge to this provision and we ask you to take action to render this challenge unnecessary by striking that provision,” they wrote. Full story.
Locally, Butch Otter’s not too happy either:
BOISE – Idaho Gov. Butch Otter said he may sue to stop federal health care reform, calling U.S. House and Senate bills unconstitutional and too costly.
Otter sent letters Wednesday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, telling them he’s considering legal action to keep the federal government from imposing “a crushing unfunded mandate” on state and local governments. More.
Thoughts?
D.F. Oliveria is a columnist and blogger for The Spokesman-Review. Huckleberries Online was judged the best 2008 Idaho newspaper blog by the Idaho Press Club. And the best 2007 news blog in the Pacific Northwest by the Society for Professional Journalist. Print Huckleberries is a past winner of the Herb Caen Memorial Column contest by the National Association of Newspaper Columnists. The Readership Institute of Northwestern University cited this blog as a good example of online community journalism.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
Find DFO on Facebook
DFO on Twitter
hmoffsuite on December 31 at 8:59 a.m.
Considering how the democrats have abused their power in Congress, I think these lawsuits are fitting and appropriate.
Phaedrus on December 31 at 9:05 a.m.
hmoffsuite are you just going to revert to your typical behavior avoid the whole hypocrisy of the republicans over the underwear bomber?
Phaedrus on December 31 at 9:05 a.m.
Just like Otter wasn’t going to accept stimulus money ? More partisan hypocrisy.
RathdrumBob on December 31 at 9:13 a.m.
Abuse of power?!?! This is the same governor who had his Transportation Board fire their director because she SAVED the state money by cutting a contract for one of his contributors. She’s now suing, and she’ll win, causing more wasted money for the taxpayers. I think you Republican’ts should rethink your position.
hmoffsuite on December 31 at 9:13 a.m.
Phaedrus. No, actually, I thought the Bush handling of the shoe bomber was not any better than the way the Obama administration handled the underwear bomber. Does that make Obama’s miscues any better? As I often have to remind you, Bush isn’t the President anymore. And, offering bribes for votes is shameful.
danofthecommunity on December 31 at 9:16 a.m.
Well I agree that this smacks of unbridled favoritism and is appropriate to be loudly protested.
However before anyone gets too up in the air on their partisan finger pointing high horse I would point out that this is standard politics, especially here in Idaho. Just review the tax code or liquor licenses or local option sales tax authority to see all kinds of “special” exemptions that only are targeted at the lucky few. Now they craft the bills in “non-specific” language so in theory it can be applied broadly but in reality only applies to the few or the one.
It’s not good and it stinks but it is so ordinary that I can’t understand the feigned outrage. Talk about cleaning all of it up at all levels of politics and then I can get excited.
Smacky on December 31 at 9:36 a.m.
Offering bribes for votes it the only way things get done anymore. I guarantee your finger will get tired of wagging if you jump into this newly found astonishment too quickly. Pace yourself, this is how our government has worked since day one.
hmoffsuite on December 31 at 9:43 a.m.
Smacky. I spose you are right. Unfortunately I had this crazy idea that Obama was going to ‘change’ the way things were done. My bad. I guess I shouldn’t have listened to him while he was campaigning. Pretty much everything he said he would do was just a scheme to get elected. Change? Hardly. Change we can believe in? No more.
Smacky on December 31 at 9:50 a.m.
One, this is Congress, not the presidency. The president does not make laws, Congress does.
Two, do you honestly expect me to believe that you “expected” any thing good from Obama? You expected the worst and you now see the worst in every thing he does…or in this case, is falsely accused of doing.
Phaedrus on December 31 at 9:58 a.m.
Suite, your feigned disappointment in Obama rings false and insincere (because it is). The Tea Party pants wetting outrage that you and your fellow baggers express on a daily basis might deserve some credibilty if it was ever expressed with some sense of balance and perspective, but the simple fact that y’all kept your pieholes shut during the 8 years of the Bush fiasco only to awaken when a Black Democrat was elected negates just about everything you whine about.
Smacky on December 31 at 10:04 a.m.
FWIW, I agree that allowing Nebraska a free ride on Medicaid is unjustifiable and inequitable…but my objection is not based on political bias. My New year’s wish for our government is that they find a way to put our country’s needs over their own agendas.
hmoffsuite on December 31 at 10:09 a.m.
Smacky. First of all, my initial comments on this thread were directed to the Congress, not Obama. Secondly, I happen to think that an effective President establishes the tenor of his administration and must provide a culture for change, if it is actually desired. This is particularly true when the control of congress is made of of his party.
Phaedrus >>” 8 years of the Bush fiasco only to awaken when a Black Democrat was elected negates just about everything you whine about”
Get off the Bush years. They are not relevant any more. And, just like a good liberal defending a weak position, you bring race into the argument. If you happen to support the recent dealings in the Congress and the buying of votes with bribes, that’s fine with me. As a matter of fact, it was rather expected.
HonestGeorge on December 31 at 12:05 p.m.
Excellent comments from all - top to bottom. Personally I’m thoroughly disgusted with the process - I don’t really care which ‘side’ did/does it - its destroying citizens respect for the government. Honor is in short supply in our government and our financial oligarchy.
spokelooneh on December 31 at 12:39 p.m.
It’s political posturing. No bill has yet been signed into law. My preference is for the Senate to blow up the Senate rules, and pass what’s needed via majority rule, reconciliation. Right now we’ve got tyranny of the minority. Time to kick the Repubs and DINOs to the curb.
Good column in the Inlander on the matter:
” … Nor is the argument that the filibuster is needed to prevent “tyranny of the majority” on solid ground. The Framers did view the Senate as a brake on majority passions, but they sought to achieve this end through overrepresentation of states and longer terms, not systemic obstruction. Consider: Wyoming has only slightly more than one-quarter of the population of Washington’s King County. Yet Wyoming has two senators, just like the entirety of Washington state. Isn’t that enough of an edge? …”
http://www.inlander.com/content/newscommentary_robert_herold_filibuster_option_health_care#comments
Norther on December 31 at 6:00 p.m.
Considering Idaho had to borrow money to cover medicaid, I don’t think they should have enough money left over for a ridiculous lawsuit that will do nothing.
In order for our government to return to the people, we would have to end the career politicians. That isn’t going to happen anytime soon.
Regardless of public opinion on any number of matters, the government will do as the money trail tells them to do.
The bills being proposed, both senate and house, will destroy small hospitals plain and simple. So, no, I am not a fan. That being stated, I realize it is going to pass in some form or another and that there really isn’t anything I can do about it. The people who represent me did not vote for it. Therefore, I feel as if I have been duly represented.
Save the squabble for the pundits. Speak with your vote.
And Phaedrus…some of us did throw a raging fit at the spending of the Bush Admin.
Whippersnapper on January 01 at 1:39 a.m.
The only way to make their health care bill look “affordable” was to throw millions, and in some cases, billions in federal Medicaid funding back onto the states (except for those who demand special deals), then collect 10 years of new taxes and cut the almost-bankrupt Medicare system by 50 billion a year for 10 years so that we can, maybe, get six years of medical coverage. Lame ideas pushed through because the Democrats are obsessed with their majorities and don’t care what anyone thinks. Democrats: The party of Gimme (and make someone else pay for it)
richard on January 03 at 11:11 a.m.
We will see who is “whining” in about 5 years when the health bill is actually implemented. Those who buy insurace will be forced to pay much higher premiums … or select Medicaid-type coverage. Care will be rationed (there is no other way to keep costs down) or prices will continue to skyrocket - there will be no middle ground.
This will hurt the the middle-class as it always does.
It will be entertaining to hear how that “Hopey-Changey” thing has worked out for all ye who bought into it, believing they would be getting something for nothing.