Idaho House passes health care nullification bill

The Tenth Amendment Center has announced that the Idaho House of Representatives has passed a health care nullification bill (H0117) on the Tenth Amendment Center's model by a vote of 49-20. Idaho doesn't mince words, as this excerpt will show:

INVALIDITY OF CERTAIN PUBLIC LAWS -- PROHIBITION ON ENFORCEMENT.

(1) The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, P.L. 111-148, 124 Stat. 119 (2010), as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, P.L. 111-152, 124 Stat. 1029 (2010), herein collectively referred to as PPACA, having been declared unconstitutional by this Legislature, beyond the delegated powers of the federal government, and affirmed as such by the Court in State of Florida v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Case No. 3:10-cv-91-RV/EMT (January 31, 2011, N.D.FL), shall not be enforced by the state of Idaho including, but not limited to, any of its departments, political subdivisions, courts, public officers or employees thereof.

(2) No department, agency or political subdivision of 1 the state of Idaho shall establish any program, promulgate any rule, policy, guideline or plan or change any program, rule, policy or guideline to implement the PPACA.

(3) No department, agency or political subdivision, public officer or employee of the state of Idaho shall enter into any agreement or any obligation to implement the PPACA.

(4) No department, agency, political subdivision, public officer or employee of the state of Idaho shall provide assistance or resources of any kind to any agency, public official, employee or agent of the federal government related to any attempted implementation or enforcement of the PPACA.

(5) No department, agency or political subdivision of the state of Idaho shall accept or expend moneys related to the implementation of the PPACA.

(6) No order of judgment, writ or levy of execution shall issue or otherwise be enforced upon any property or against any person in the state of Idaho to collect any amounts adjudged due or assessed against the state of Idaho or its residents for failure to comply with any provision of the PPACA.

(7) Any aggrieved person shall have a right to injunctive relief against any person violating the provisions of this section, with an award of attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party.

Ohio has three bills in committee, all of them much weaker than Idaho's. They are summarized here, along with The Ohio Project's Constitutional amendment.

State Sovereignty Resoluton Update - 4/7

Idaho enacted its HJM004 today with a voice vote in the State Senate, becoming the second State (after South Dakota) to do so in the current session.

Montana's Senate has approved HB 246, which unlike most State sovereignty resolutions, is a bill to forbid the Feds from enforcing firearms statutes with respect to certain weapons. The vote, taken Mar. 27, was 29-21. The bill is expected to be signed by Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer. The gun site M4Carbine Forums has some additional information. When Gov. Schweitzer signs the bill, I shall mark it as enacted.

In a related development, ZDNet Health Care reports that the U.S. Supreme Court has held (Wyeth v. Levine) that Federal law cannot pre-empt suits against drug manufacturers for negligence in their warning labels. Justice Clarence Thomas filed a concurring opinion that states the 10th Amendment position quite clearly:

"[Judge Thomas writes:] 'I have become increasingly skeptical of this Court’s purposes and objectives” pre-emption jurisprudence. Under this approach, the Court routinely invalidates state laws based on perceived conflicts with broad federal policy objectives, legislative history, or generalized notions of congressional purposes that are not embodied within the text of federal law. Because implied pre-emption doctrines that wander far from the statutory text are inconsistent with the Constitution, I concur only in the judgment.

"'Only when acting under power granted by the Constitution can even the Congress pre-empt state law,' he wrote, citing the 10th Amendment. He also quoted the Federalist Papers to the effect that federal powers are 'few and defined,' those remaining with the states 'numerous and indefinite.'"

State Sovereignty Update - 3/24

Idaho's State Sovereignty Resolution, HJM 4, passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 51-17, with 2 abstentions.

One State is conspicuous by its absence from this list. Why isn't Vermont introducing a resolution?

Idaho introduces resolution, draws flak

The Tenth Amendment Center reports that Idaho Rep. Dick Harwood (R) has introduced HJM004 yesterday.

The [Spokane, Washington] Spokesman-Review was on it, including objections by Democrats Rep. Anne Pasley-Stuart and Phylis King. Rep. Pasley-Stuart argued that the bill was “over-reactionary” and said, “It alarms me that we are taking a step to the far right at a time that we need to be working together.” The idea that Idaho could save millions by being free of the federal government “is very inaccurate - that’s not the case at all,” she said. Rep. King, D-Boise, noted that Idaho receives federal funds for everything from Medicaid to highways. “We need to work with the federal government rather than stick a pencil in their eye,” she said.

A triumph of partisanship over liberty. Reps. Pasley-Stuart and King have forgotten where "Federal Funds" come from. The truth is, Idaho, Ohio, and every other State could save millions (in Ohio, arguably, billions) by being free of the Federal government.

State Sovereignty resolutions do not promote secession! They promote a responsible Federal Government accountable to the States, as the Founders intended it to be. It's not a matter of "sticking a pencil in their eye". It's a matter of having efficient government close to, and accountable to the people who elect it.

Idaho protests Federal gun legislation

Not a State sovereignty resolution, but worth noting. The State Affairs Committee of the Idaho House of Representatives has placed on the floor HJM3, a memorial to Congress in opposition to the Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Sale Act of 2009 (HR45), which they rightly view as a gross violation of the Second Amendment.