Of course the entire concept of the bill is unconstitutional. But it’s going to be tough to find someone with standing and get any serious court attention that could scrap the entire thing. But the attorney generals of 13 states might slow things down some:
Republican attorneys general in 13 states say congressional leaders must remove Nebraska’s political deal from the federal health care overhaul 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.
Those signing on are Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Washington state. I’m proud to say both of my states of Idaho and Washington are attempting to stop this abomination.
I just “love” how they point out they are all Republicans. Other sources make an even bigger deal out of that point:
House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said the letter was a political ploy.
“This threat stinks of partisan politics,” he said in a statement. “If Henry McMaster wants to write federal law he should run for Congress not governor.”
Meanwhile, Nelson is taking his message on health care reform directly to his constituents. In a television ad beginning during Wednesday night’s Nebraska-Arizona Holiday Bowl football game, the Democrat says he stuck by his principles throughout the debate and doesn’t want Nebraskans to be confused on his position.
While it’s not uncommon for states to challenge federal laws in court, one legal expert said political bluster was likely behind the letter.
“I do think that it is some combination of the losers just complaining about the officiating, or complaining about how the game was played, in combination with trying to make the bill look as seedy and inappropriate as possible, for political purposes,” says Andy Siegel, a former University of South Carolina School of Law professor now teaching at Seattle University School of Law.
“It is smart politics to try to tarnish it and make it look less like an achievement and more like some sort of corrupted bargain,” he said.
Principles? Democrats have principles? I didn’t know Democrats had principles. Can anyone tell me any principles the Democrats will admit to? The Republicans claim some principles but treat them as guidelines or just half-hearted suggestions.