Learning from Arizona Proposition 101
November 12th, 2008 | by Brian Schwartz |Should supporters of health care freedom try to emulate Arizona’s Proposition 101 in other states, it’s worth learning from this measure that almost passed. I suspect the arguments against 101 described below are disingenuous. Even if the proposition were tweaked to make the arguments inapplicable, the same people would object for other reasons ask proxies for a more fundamental view on the role of government in our lives.
From the East Valley Tribune (Phoenix):
Backers of a measure aimed at precluding state-imposed universal health care conceded late Monday the measure is going down to defeat.
Jeff Singer said a majority of voters in 12 of the state’s 15 counties supported Proposition 101. But Singer said that was countered by a strong vote against the proposed constitutional amendment in Pima County. …
But Singer, a Phoenix physician, said last week’s election was just the first act. He said there already is consideration for putting the idea back on the 2010 ballot.
This time, however, supporters will craft the language to spell out explicitly that it would not affect the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System, the state’s program for providing insurance for those below the federal poverty level. …
…claims by AHCCCS Director Anthony Rodgers that the wording of the initiative could undermine how the state agency operates.
AHCCCS now functions like a health-maintenance organization, paying medical providers a flat fee to provide all necessary care for each person enrolled.
Rodgers said the language of Proposition 101 could be interpreted to preclude such an arrangement, forcing AHCCCS to pay fees for each service provided to patients, a change he said could cost taxpayers $1 billion a year.
Singer called that a sham argument, even asking a judge to declare that Rodgers was illegally using state resources to campaign against the measure. The judge, however, said the law allows the state agency chief to “educate” voters about the potential effects of ballot measures. …
tags: Arizona Proposition 101, Colorado Right to Health Care Choice Initiative, state-level health care reformProposition 101 sought to put a provision in the state constitution stating that “no law shall be passed that restricts a person’s freedom of choice of private health-care systems or private plans of any type.”
It also would have barred the government from forcing people to enroll in any specific health care plan or pay a fine for refusing.
Singer said the main purpose was to preclude lawmakers - or voters - from setting up a “single-payor” system similar to what exists in Canada and what is being tried in Massachusetts.
