The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care

By Michael Boldin on December 9, 2009 in Health Care, State Sovereignty Movement

by Michael Boldin

In response to what some opponents see as a Congress that doesnâ€™t represent their interests, State Legislators are looking to the nearly forgotten American political tradition of nullification as a way to reject any potential national health care program that may be coming from Washington.

In 2010, residents of Arizona will be voting on a State Constitutional Amendment that would let them effectively opt out of any proposed national health care plan. Â Legislatures in Florida, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania are also considering similar State Constitutional Amendments.

And now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, “Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O’Fallon, pre-filed a bill Dec. 1 that, if approved by voters, would effectively put a halt on any national health care legislation. Davis said her intent was to give voters a way to protect themselves.”

FREEDOM TO PARTICIPATE

The bill, HJR48, “Proposes a constitutional amendment which would prohibit compelling a person to participate in any health care system.”

It states:

“To preserve the freedom of citizens of this state to provide for their health care, no law or rule shall compel, directly or indirectly or through penalties or fines, any person, employer, or health care provider to participate in any health care system. A person or employer may pay directly for lawful health care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for paying directly for lawful health care services. A health care provider may accept direct payment for lawful health care services and shall not be required to pay penalties or fines for accepting direct payment from a person or employer for lawful health care services. Subject to reasonable and necessary rules that do not substantially limit a person’s options, the purchase or sale of health insurance in private health care systems shall not be prohibited by law or rule.”

NULLIFICATION: A HISTORY LESSON

The principle behind such legislation is nullification, which has a long history in the American tradition. When a state â€˜nullifiesâ€™ a federal law, it is proclaiming that the law in question is void and inoperative, or â€˜non-effective,â€™ within the boundaries of that state; or, in other words, not a law as far as the state is concerned.

Early nullification movements began with the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. These resolutions, secretly authored by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, asserted that the people of the states, as sovereign entities, could judge for themselves whether the federal government had overstepped its constitutional bounds â€“ to the point of ignoring federal laws.

Virginia and Kentucky passed the resolutions in response to the federal Alien and Sedition Acts, which provided, in part, for the prosecution of anyone who criticized Congress or the President of the United States.

Nullification was regularly called upon by states all over the country in response to everything from higher taxes to the fugitive slave law of 1850.

A MODERN NULLIFICATION MOVEMENT

Besides the Health Care legislation in Arizona, activists and state-legislators are pushing forward with nullification efforts all across the country – and it spans the political spectrum.

Thirteen states now have some form of medical marijuana laws â€“ in direct contravention to federal laws which state that the plant is illegal in all circumstances. Massive state nullification of the 2005 Real ID Act has rendered the law nearly void. And, two states, Montana and Tennessee, have already passed laws nullifying federal gun laws and regulations within their states.

HOWEVER WE CHOOSE

“We (Missourians) don’t like it when people try to take away our freedom,” Davis told The Missoulian. “We will maintain the right to purchase health care however we chose. This national health care debate is not about health care as much as it is about redistribution of the wealth. This resolution allows voters to say don’t redistribute our wealth here in Missouri.”

George Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers, in an interview with the Atlanta Business Chronicle said, â€œProposals to deny or limit access to the purchase of private health care are simply unacceptable. Our basic freedoms are at risk with the government-run health care proposals coming out of Washington.â€ Legislators from Georgia recently announced that they would be introducing a similar resolution in 2010.

REAL ID AS THE BLUEPRINT?

Supporters of modern nullification efforts look to the successful rebellion by states against the Bush-era Real ID Act.

In early 2007, Maine and then Utah passed resolutions refusing to implement the federal Real ID act on grounds that the law was unconstitutional. Well-over a dozen other states followed suit in passing legislation opposing Real ID.

Instead of attempting to force the law to implementation, the federal government delayed implementation not once, but twice. And in June of this year, the Obama administration, recognizing the insurmountable task of enforcing a law in the face of such broad resistance, announced that it was looking to â€œrepeal and replaceâ€ the controversial law.

Supporters see this as a blueprint to resist various federal laws that they see as outside the scope of the Constitution. Some say that each successful state-level resistance to federal programs will only embolden others to try the same â€“ resulting in an eventual shift of power from the federal government to the States and the People themselves.

Michael Boldin is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center

About Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin [send him email] is the founder of the Tenth Amendment Center. He was raised in Milwaukee, WI, and currently resides in Los Angeles, CA. Follow him on twitter - @michaelboldin, on LinkedIn, and on Facebook.

View all posts by Michael Boldin →

Enjoyed This Post?

We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!

Subscribe and Follow

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.

History, Missouri Sovereignty, Nullification

Constitutional Avoidance: Then and Now

Our Dead Constitution

22 comments

Newest | Oldest

Tom

Hopefully we can get rid of this health care bill after the elections in November. I'm just worried that those who are elected will be just as bad.

Preston

My question is can and do you think the Federal government will pull all monies from these states that produce their own legislation nullifying health care reform. I think it is agreat way to shoot Obamacare down in a hurry. And do you think that he will still try to pass it knowing that individual states I think 36 are working on it now will not make their residents participate in it

Kindle

glad to see MI on the list!

Andrew

Besides, I'd imagine that you'd see better results with 50 states each trying out their own paths to solving the healthcare issue rather than one big Federal umbrella experiment that is unlikely to be altered or ended even after its flaws become blatantly obvious (like social security insolvency, for example).

Conservative1st

So, how do you think the current SCOTUS will come down on nullification laws? Seems to me, it has granted the federal government carte blanche to do whatever it wants through the Commerce Clause.

MichaelBoldin

The real question is - will there be any courageous people in the states that do what Andy Jackson did? In essence, he said - "the court has their opinion, now let them come and try and enforce it."

Michael Boldin

Make sure to report back to us on how well that goes for you in 2010 - and more importantly, the years after that.

We were told after Clinton won office - wait till the next election! Then, after the fraud that was the "contract with america" - wait till the next election! Then, after the Bush administration and the republican congress gave us the biggest expansion of government health care since the 1960's - wait till the next election!

And now, you're saying the same.

That's a failed strategy and a guarantee of bigger and bigger government every time.

The time has come for some good old-fashioned resistance - nullification is just that, and if it was good enough for Jefferson, it's good enough for me.

Once a few states pass laws saying no - then it's time to deal with the taxes (theft, actually) that is to be used to pay for these unconstitutional programs.

sbrodholland

Does nullifying healthcare nullify the additional taxes? I think not. Repeal after a new Congress is elected in 2010 would be better.

Nukeman

Talk is cheap. I want to see what these same legislators do when the dollars from DC get turned off. I for one don't believe there are enough of them willing to stand their ground in the face of fiscal blackmail by the Politburo in Washington. I certainly hope I'm wrong however.

CARLSON

Preview your comment
CARLSON 0 minutes ago
What is most often missed is the fact that Rights issue from Creator God, not the State of Federal or any other human source. If we get this under the First Amendment, our "...inalienable rights...", then the understanding of the "power of the People" will be gotten. It is not the 10th that protects, completely, our rights. The 9th Amendment is a key, playing off the 10th, and it states: "The Enumeration of certain rights in the Constitution shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People." We have full rights over our Spirit, Mind, and Body and the property extensions of that sphere. No argument here, is there? Aloha, Dr. Carlson

Tim

You are not wrong. When it says "retained by the people" it is saying that people have rights retained to us that may not be mentioned in the constition and since those rights do not have any text pertaining to them in the constitution it means our "rights" exist outside the constitution and not within it.

t quigly

True, the Constitution does NOT allow the federal goobermint to force us to purchase a private product. But beyond that, with unemployment at 15-20%, and foreclosures and homelessness rapidly increasing, forcing people to pay for 'health' insurance is unreasonable and unworkable. People don't have money for food, let alone expensive health insurance. Congresscritters have NO idea what conditions are in the real world out here. This is NOT 'health care' - this is ICCC (pronouced ick!) - Insurance Companies' CEO Care.

sharonsj

I'd like to know when the state legislators are going to care about their constituents who are dying? None of the comments here have a solution on how to save the lives of people who cannot afford health insurance. Also, the health reform bill is the furthest thing from Socialism possible--it's all about making people pay for private insurance and it's a gift to the blood-sucking insurance industry. If you folks would get your heads out of your Republican asses, you'd check the facts about red states--they have the highest numbers of poor and sick. Texas, which likes to talk about leaving the union, has 25% uninsured.

mike

Read line 2 and you'll see why so many Texans are uninsured-

According to a summary of national data by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), groups with a high likelihood of lacking health insurance include:

-People in families with income below 200 percent of the poverty level
-Hispanics
-Young adults, age 19 to 34
-People in families in which the adults worked either part-time or only part of the year
-Individuals in fair or poor health status who are significantly more likely than others to be
uninsured for longer periods.

Andrew

The solution lies in the rule of law. All it would take for the Federal Government to have the authority to consider the healthcare issue is a 2/3 proposal for an amendment in Congress for a "healthcare amendment" of some sort, and 3/4 of the states to ratify such an amendment. NOTE: this does not bar any state from adopting its own solution to the healthcare "crisis" (speaking as someone who is uninsured, myself), in the event that the amendment fails to pass.

The problem is that by circumventing the states and allowing them no input into the issue, we have violated a fundamental principle of the American experiment—governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.

It isn't about left-vs.-right, it is about striving to uphold the rule of law in the event that someone may one day wish to enact a law that you oppose, and is clearly unconstitutional (like Bush's rubber-stamped warrants or wire-taps). When such a time comes, you'd like to find the support of people who are more dedicated to preserving the Constitution than pulling the Party's yoke. The Tenth Amendment Center seeks to educate people to that extent.

Terri K

There are a number of things already in place for those who can't afford health insurance such as Medicaid and SCHIPP. Further, doctors and hospitals will work with people who need treatment--it is illegal for hospitals to not treat people.

I know this because I have personal experience. My children and I have not had insurance for several years and I have negotiated all sorts of reduced-cost treatment for us. Hospitals are wonderful about slashing bills and allowing payment plans with no interest. I qualify for Medicaid and/or SCHIPP but I have a personal problem taking from others.

You really need to look at the history of how we got into the mess we're in today. It was government intervention in health care in the first place that caused it. For example, wage controls in the '40s caused employers to offer benefits such as health insurance to attract employees. That's how health care got tied to employment in the first place-----totally ridiculous! The HMO act in the '70s was the birth of these Big Insurance Companies which have divorced the consumer from the true costs of their care and created a third party, not medically qualified, to make decisions for patients. Add on the massive amount of regulations imposed by the federal government; an example my doctor pointed out is that the feds require that specialists stay in hospital 24/7/365 rather than to be on-call. Her comment was, "those boys 'ain't' cheap".

I could go on and on and on but the bottom line is that it's the federal government that caused this mess and more intervention will only make it worse.

True free-market competition (and a reduction in federal regulations) would reduce costs tremendously. For example, I can buy auto insurance from anywhere I please; not so with health insurance. Because of the feds, insurance companies are not allowed to compete across state lines. That is totally absurd!!!

Also, I buy auto insurance for catastrophes, not for oil changes. If that same model was used for health care, we would pay for major medical insurance with a choice of deductibles, and pay out-of-pocket for routine care. That kind of policy would be relatively inexpensive, especially if competition was opened up nationwide. My doc says that she could reduce her fees by 2/3 (!!!!!!!) with this model, about $40/visit; an amount that most anyone could afford out-of-pocket. She would also be able to do more charity work because she wouldn't have to comply with all the mandates about how many patients she's required to see during the course of a day.

As Michael points out, this is about force and control; not the idea of benevolence for those who can't afford it. And the last thing we need is some other bureaucracy coming between us patients and our doctors.

Here's a view from another doctor:

http://fee.org/news/fee-alum-american-college-of-...

MichaelBoldin

Sharon - it's important to note that a true constitutional position is that the FEDERAL government has no authority to be involved in this issue. And the fact of the matter is that there's millions of people who don't want them to be. On the other hand, it's completely constitutional for a STATE to have a single-payer plan (I don't believe they're good, though), so if you're in Texas you should be pressing your own government to do something about this.

If you're in another state, your policy is really very little different than Bush's policy on Iraq was - you might want to start working in your own area before you start demanding the use of force to get your way in others.

RepealThe16thA

Regarding Obamacare, the Constitution's silence about public healthcare means that the 10th A. has automatically reserved government power to regulate healthcare to the states, not the Oval Office and Congress. In fact, the USSC has already decided that Congress has no business sticking its big nose into the medical practice.

“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925. http://supreme.justia.com/us/268/5/case.html

Just as noteworthy is the fact the USSC has decided that Congress cannot lay taxes in the name of state power issues.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Chief Justice Marshall, GIBBONS V. OGDEN, 1824. http://supreme.justia.com/us/22/1/case.html

So not only is Obamacare constitutionally unauthorized, but Congress never had the power to lay taxes to fund Obamacare.

Congress is trying to enslave the people! :^(

What's going on, IMO, is that state lawmakers and the federal Senate have not been doing their jobs to protect citizens from constitutionally unauthorized federal taxes and illegal federal interference in people's lives. This is a consequence of the ratification of the ill-conceived, anti-state sovereignty 16th and 17th Amendments.

One way that people can restore state sovereignty is the following, IMO. Voters need to elect pro-state power lawmakers to both the federal and state governments in 2010. Once elected, pro-state power lawmakers can effectively use their legislative votes to repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, much like corrupt DC Democrats are effectively repealing the rest of the Constitution at this time.

Finally, the following link should help people get up to speed as to how voters have shot themselves in the foot with big, corrupt federal government as a consequence of the ill-conceived, anti-state sovereignty 16th and 17th Amendments.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=199...

BryceShonka

Great update M, way to go Missouri! The news about nullification is spreading like wildfire, which makes sense considering what a great solution it is to our republic's current state of affairs.

MichaelBoldin

Good question - and as pointed out in the article, the cause of decentralization is not wholly a right wing or a left wing movement. In your state, for example, the governor has already signed a law effectively banning implementaion of the 2005 Real ID act - which is unconstitutional from the perspective of the founders. Also, there's a strong movement to nullify federal marijuana laws - and no matter what your position on that issue is - I personally don't want to be forced to pay for Minnesota's drug enforcement. So this is something that needs to be out of the hands of D.C. and dealt with on a state level only. And - Tom Emmer, who I believe is running for governor, is supportive of a state constitutional amendment, like the ones reported on in this article, to effectively ban national health care in your state.

The bottom line? Get involved - whether it's in MO, or CA, or MN. The cause of the constitution can win many supporters and it's essential to show people that we don't need to rely on the federal government for everything.

Pat Navratil

I live in leftwing territory ie. Mn. How can we proceed with the nullification process? Any other Minnesotans out there willing to move forward on this??? Quite sure Michelle Bachman will be open to this. Like to hear any opinions out there. Pat Navratil

BryceShonka

Great update M, way to go Missouri! The news about nullification is spreading like wildfire, which makes sense considering what a great solution it is to our republic's current state of affairs.

Trackbacks

Tweets that mention The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health CareÂ |Â Tenth Amendment Center -- Topsy.com says:

December 9, 2009 at 8:58 am

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Rae MacGhillielaidir and Ron Paul, Mark Zagorski. Mark Zagorski said: Nullify INCOME TAX as well RT @RonPaul_2012 The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care http://bit.ly/544DRk #tlot #tcot #RonPaul [...]
The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care | The Ruthless Truth blog says:

December 9, 2009 at 2:05 pm

[...] now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, â€œRep. Cynthia Davis, R-Oâ€™Fallon, pre-filed a bill [...]
tenthamendmentcenter podcasts | The Ruthless Truth blog says:

December 9, 2009 at 2:21 pm

[...] The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care 09. Dec, 2009 [...]
The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care - michaelboldin’s Diary - RedState says:

December 9, 2009 at 6:13 pm

[...] now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, “Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O’Fallon, pre-filed a [...]
The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care – Michael Boldin, The Tenth Amendment Center « HOME – Other Right Links and Posts says:

December 9, 2009 at 7:46 pm

[...] now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, â€œRep. Cynthia Davis, R-Oâ€™Fallon, pre-filed a bill [...]
The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care « SHAWSBLOG says:

December 11, 2009 at 6:48 am

[...] now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, â€œRep. Cynthia Davis, R-Oâ€™Fallon, pre-filed a bill [...]
The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care | Florida Tenth Amendment Center says:

December 12, 2009 at 6:35 am

[...] now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, “Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O’Fallon, pre-filed a [...]
Virginia to Consider Health Care Nullification | Tenth Amendment Center Blog says:

December 16, 2009 at 8:02 am

[...] a follow up to my recent article on the growing movement to resist national health care, we can now include Virginia as one of the states that will be considering legislation to [...]
Free of State » Blog Archive » The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care by Michael Boldin says:

December 16, 2009 at 8:34 am

[...] now, Missouri is joining them. According to a report in The Missourian, “Rep. Cynthia Davis, R-O’Fallon, pre-filed a [...]
Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway | Tenth Amendment Center says:

December 21, 2009 at 10:52 am

[...] nullification and health care, there’s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway says:

December 21, 2009 at 4:42 pm

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway | Ohio Liberty and Sovereignty says:

December 21, 2009 at 7:40 pm

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
Tuesday: December 22, 2009 : DBKP REPORT says:

December 21, 2009 at 10:23 pm

[...] ACORN Qualifies for Funding in Senate Health Care Bill Repost because it’s important: The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care Death of a Party: Political Realignment in the 1850s de Tocqueville warns us not to become weak [...]
Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway | California Tenth Amendment Center says:

December 22, 2009 at 1:06 am

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway « Ancavge says:

December 22, 2009 at 1:09 am

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
RADIOACTIVE FALLOUT FROM THE REID-PELOSI-OBAMACARE BOMB – suzyrice.com says:

December 22, 2009 at 10:35 am

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway « Socialism is not the Answer says:

December 22, 2009 at 9:52 pm

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care | Save American Freedom says:

December 29, 2009 at 4:48 am

[...] Continue reading: The Growing Movement to Nullify National Health Care. [...]
Reasonandjest.com » Protecting Ourselves From Government Medicine says:

January 2, 2010 at 2:47 pm

[...] are now efforts to have states “nullify” the dictatorial mandates of health legislation being [...]
FreeWestRadio.com » Blog Archive » Health Care Nullification: Things have just gotten underway says:

January 5, 2010 at 3:13 pm

[...] nullification and health care, thereâ€™s alreadyÂ a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
Pelosi to Dems: Back health bill even if it hurts « Dancing Czars says:

February 28, 2010 at 9:05 am

[...] a whole is unconstitutional, specifically, forcing people to purchase a service they may not want. Many states have already used the Tenth Amendment to nullify this bill and others should they go through (think Cap and Trade and Gun [...]
Health Care Nullification | Lew Rockwell says:

December 8, 2011 at 2:00 pm

[...] nullification and health care, there’s already a growing movement right now. Led by Arizona, voters in a number of states may get a chance to approve State Constitutional [...]
ObamaCareless » Scott Lazarowitz's Blog says:

December 11, 2011 at 2:08 pm

[...] are now efforts to have states “nullify” the dictatorial mandates of health legislation being considered by [...]

Navigation