By Erik Smith

Staff writer/ Washington State Wire

OLYMPIA, Jan. 31.—Seemed like everyone in Washington state’s political world had something to say Monday when a federal judge in Florida shot down federal health care reform.

            In case you haven’t heard by now, U.S. District Court Judge Roger Vinson declared unconstitutional the mandate requiring all U.S. citizens to purchase private health insurance or pay a fine. He also ruled that a provision denying Medicaid funds to non-participating states violated the Constitution. And he went one step further, tossing out the entire law.

            It’s the result of a lawsuit filed by Republican governors and attorneys general in 26 states, including this one, where Attorney General Rob McKenna signed on last spring shortly after the lawsuit was filed.

            Everyone recognizes the problems with the nation’s health care system that have made health care unaffordable for many U.S. citizens, Vinson wrote, but he went on to say:

“Regardless of how laudable its attempts may have been to accomplish these goals in passing the act, Congress must operate within the bounds set by the Constitution.”

The only solution is a constitutional amendment, he said – or a new interpretation of the Commerce Clause from the U.S. Supreme Court.

The ruling is sure to be challenged at the appeals and Supreme Court levels, and to be sure, it counters two other federal court rulings that upheld the law. But here in the Evergreen State it set off a flood of press releases and public statements at every political level. This might not come as a shock, but reactions fell pretty much according to party lines. Republicans said see, I told you so. And Dems looked forward to a higher court.

Here’s what people were saying Monday:

            McKenna Says Ruling Was Correct

McKenna said the court interpreted the law correctly – Congress can’t require everyone to buy a private product. He called the ruling a victory for individual and state rights.

“While we all recognize the vital need to access health care services in our country, forcing all U.S. citizens to buy a commercial product in the private market with their own money is an unprecedented and unconstitutional move by the federal government,” he said. “Americans value their constitutional rights. They want a health care law that respects those rights and actually reduces the financial burdens on their families. That is why more than half of the states in America are challenging this new law.”

            Governor Crestfallen

Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire had joined her fellow Democrats in attacking McKenna for joining the case – a
constant refrain last spring. Gregoire used her own legal staff to file a friend-of-the-court legal brief on behalf of Obamacare.

Gregoire said Monday, “This ruling, as I have stated all along, is not good for Washingtonians.

            “This means that nearly 900,000 seniors in Washington who have Medicare coverage will be forced to pay more for regular check-ups and important preventive services, like mammograms and colonoscopies. It means the more than 45,000 Washington Medicare beneficiaries who received a one-time, tax-free $250 rebate to help pay for prescription drugs may be forced to give that benefit back. In addition, they’d lose out on the 50 percent discounts on certain prescription drugs. 

             “Nationally, it means up to 4 million small businesses lose out on $40 billion worth of tax credits to defray employee health-care costs. It puts at risk those with preexisting conditions who can now be denied health coverage by insurance companies. It means young adults and families will no longer have the peace of mind knowing that children up to the age of 26 could be covered under their parents health insurance plan. And it means people with insurance will continue to pay more than their fair share to cover the costs of the uninsured. 

            “The fact is – the Affordable Care Act is good for Washingtonians, and it’s good for business. Individuals who can afford to get a benefit, but are unwilling to pay their fair share of the cost of that benefit, are getting ‘something for nothing’ and the rest of society is subsidizing them.

             “Washington state is proof of that. As a major purchaser of both health care services and health insurance, our state budget has been severely impacted by the spiraling costs of services and insurance and declining access to affordable care. In recent years, health-related costs have accounted for up to one third of the state’s general spending.

            “I continue to champion health reform in Washington state to ensure that Washingtonians have access to high-quality, affordable health services. The Affordable Care Act ensures that the federal government is an active partner for states like Washington. Today’s decision is just one of many pending lawsuits that that are being decided. I am confident at the end of the day, the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act will be upheld.”

            Wilbur Congratulates McKenna

Kirby Wilbur, chairman of the state Republican Party, said McKenna did the right thing.

“Judge Vinson’s decision is a victory for all Americans.  I look forward to the day when true health care reform is done in a way that is constitutional, and does not violate our individual liberties.

“I especially want to thank our own Attorney General, Rob McKenna, for joining in this lawsuit, and for being a leader in protecting our constitutional rights.  Rob has done a great job in being out in front of this issue, as well as many others, and for being one of the first attorneys general to have signed on with the lawsuit.”

            Advances ‘Extremist Republican Agenda,’ Activists Say
 

The Washington Community Action Network, a grass-roots lobbying organization, issued a statement condemning the Vinson-McKenna team. But perhaps the most surprising thing about it was that Board Chair Deana Knutsen and Executive Director Will Pitz advanced an argument normally sounded by the right, accusing the judge of writing new law. And they said McKenna, though apparently successful, had wasted the state’s time and money.

“Judge Vinson has gone too far, legislating from the bench to reopen the health care debate and advance the Republican Party’s extremist agenda to return control of our health care to the insurance companies. Fortunately, the judge’s partisan findings are of limited impact because the U.S. Supreme Court will have the final say on the legal challenge to the Affordable Care Act. Two other federal district judges have already upheld the law.

             “Congress clearly has the authority to regulate the health insurance market, including protecting consumers from insurance industry abuses and reducing costs for families, seniors and businesses. The best way to protect consumers and control costs is to make sure everyone has health insurance and that there will be no more free riders, and that’s what the Affordable Care Act does.

“It was reckless for Attorney General Rob McKenna to join in this lawsuit. This is a waste of time and money when our state should be focused on how to create jobs and revive the economy. We need to move forward. The last thing Washington needs is for hyper-partisan public officials to use this ruling as an excuse to drag their feet on implementing the many state-level elements of the ACA. Washington has to move forward.               

             “Washington consumers already are benefiting from this law. Without the law in place, 20,500 young adults would lose their coverage; Nearly 3.8 million residents would be subject to lifetime caps on health plan benefits and no limits on the share of premiums that could go to profits, executive pay and overhead; 897,000 thousand seniors would be forced to pay a co-payment for important preventive services, including an annual checkup.

            “This litigation is really about the Republican Party protecting health insurance company profits at the expense of working families. The Republican politicians who marched in lockstep to bring this suit aren’t really interested in the new law’s individual-responsibility rule. This lawsuit is another tactic in the Republican Party’s campaign to give our health care back to the insurance companies no matter what the cost.

            “We will not allow the courts or the Congress to bring us back to the time when insurance companies could exclude people because of pre-existing conditions, drop people for getting sick, or let benefit caps force people with serious diseases into bankruptcy.”

            Stop Spending State Money, Schmick Says

Rep. Joe Schmick, R-Colfax, ranking Republican on the House Health Care and Wellness Committee, said the state ought to stop spending money to implement federal health reform.

            “Today’s ruling by the court shows us that now, more than ever, state leaders need to continue to work toward finding solutions at the state level that provide quality health care that families can afford,” Schmick said. “We can’t keep putting off state solutions while waiting for the federal legislation to come to a legal conclusion.

“And with this ruling today, it would be irresponsible for our state to spend any more state resources on implementation of a federal law that may never go into effect.  In fact, this should remind us once again what can happen when the federal government passes expensive, constitutionally-ambiguous mandates down to the states.

“Thankfully, our top priorities moving forward do not change: we need to address lawsuit reform, and we need more competition – more insurance carriers offering more plans – in the state marketplace.”

Ericksen Hails Action

State Sen. Doug Ericksen, R-Ferndale, said, “Instead of focusing on how to make health care more affordable and accessible, our state government has been preoccupied with implementing the federal laws.  It is time for us to concentrate on Washington state solutions, not to enable Washington, D.C. and its barriers to innovation.

“We have real solutions that we can implement now to fix our health care system. We need to get to work and get it done.

“Our actions should be based on the principle of fixing what is broken in our current system, and protecting what is working well. It should be on breaking down government-created barriers, protecting individual freedoms and limiting government growth.

“This approach has specific goals and outcomes, which include lowering health-care costs; providing more choice; increasing access to health care; and strengthening the safety net for our most vulnerable citizens.

            “Today’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson is another example of why we should not let our health-care decisions be determined by government officials more than 3,000 miles away.”

Your support matters.

Public service journalism is important today as ever. If you get something from our coverage, please consider making a donation to support our work. Thanks for reading our stuff.