By Lynn Hatter
http://stream.publicbroadcasting.net/production/mp3/wfsu/local-wfsu-960334.mp3
Tallahassee, FL – The Republican-controlled legislature is trying for the second time to get a constitutional amendment before voters that would block any law that mandates health insurance coverage. The Florida legislature passed the amendment and put it on the ballot last year in response to the federal healthcare law. But as Lynn Hatter reports, the state's courts kicked it out.
The legislature's first try at getting the amendment before voters failed in the courts last year. The original ballot summary said the constitutional proposal would "ensure access to health care services without waiting lists, protect the doctor-patient relationship and guard against mandates that don't work." Leon County Circuit Judge James Shelfer said those 20 words were not acceptable.
"I think the three phrases that the plaintiff has pointed out in the ballot summary are manifestly misleading."
After Shelfer's ruling, lawmakers fought back but lost again before the state Supreme Court. But now the amendment is back, working its way through the legislature in an attempt to get it before voters in 2012. And bill sponsor, Representative Scott Plakon of Longwood, says there have been some changes to make it comply with the judges' ruling.
"There were 20 words last year that were the offending words in the court case. We've removed those words. And we've also added "Healthcare Freedom" as the title at the beginning of what would be Article I Section 28, much like Article I Section 3 is named Religious Freedom right at the front end."
But even with a makeover and fancy new title, some lawmakers still think it's a wolf in sheep's clothing. Critics to the amendment proposal say if the state doesn't comply with the federal law there are other options. Rich Templin heads the Florida AFLCIO and opposes the bill. He says the state has three choices: Do nothing and let Medicaid continue to grow and eat the state's budget, wait for a public option which critics call socialized medicine, or choose option three:
"So the only option left on the table then is to find ways to use the existing private insurance system to lower costs by spreading those costs over a larger group of people. The problem with this proposed constitutional amendment is that it ties the hands of all future legislatures to actually address this fundamental problem."
But Republican Representative Ronald Renuart, says that's a false choice.
"There are a myriad of simple solutions when you take away individuals rights, liberties and freedoms. And on the simple solution of our state legislature creating its own healthcare and mandating that, we would do just the same. Individuals would lose that protection they've been offered from the constitution. And those solutions are things you would see in a socialized country, and this is America. We value individuals' freedoms their liberty and their own responsibility. This bill speaks to that and I'm in support."
The constitutional proposal would allow voters to decide to bar any law, state or federal, that mandates a person to purchase health insurance. That individual mandate is the subject of several lawsuits against the federal healthcare law. But there is one thing about the bill that niggles at Democratic Representative Scott Randolph of Orlando. He views the constitutional proposal as the state's attempt to opt out of the federal law. And he wonders why the amendment is necessary when the opt-our provision is there.
"This amendment doesn't inform voters that basically, the bill would opt the state of Florida from of the federal healthcare law and we are going to be required as a state legislature, to come up with a different system for allocating healthcare costs throughout our society."
But the proposal's Sponsor, Representative Scott Plakon says he doesn't see it that way.
"This goes to individual rights. In its truest form, the state of Florida isn't recognized in this bill. This is an individual right of Floridians, a basic right for them to have control over their healthcare freedom."
The proposal has a lot of support in the Republican-controlled legislature as it makes its way through the process. Last year both chambers approved it, and seem likely to do so again. If it survives court challenges, voters will see it on the 2012 ballot. Meanwhile the federal healthcare law is still making its way through the court system as it heads for the U.S. Supreme Court, which will have the final say on the matter.