PA would block mandatory health insurance

State constitutional amendment would challenge pending federal law

HARRISBURG — A bill in the state Senate would create an amendment to the state Constitution stating that “a person shall be entitled to the freedom of providing for the person's own health care.”

PA Senate bill SB-10 further states that no law can be enacted to require a person to “obtain or maintain health insurance coverage” (unless compelled by judiciary reasons, such as via a divorce agreement or other current laws), that no one can be penalized for paying providers directly for care and that no taxes nor penalties cannot be enforced for a “person's failure to obtain and maintain health insurance coverage.”

The Pennsylvania Health Access Network (PHAN), self-described as a “statewide coalition of organizations working to protect high quality health insurance coverage for individuals and businesses and to expand coverage to the uninsured,” has come out against the legislation, stating that it takes away “personal responsibility.”

However, they do little in their commentary to adequately address the reasons that prompted the bill's creation. In an article by Athena Ford, they say that “Legislators should be working to establish a competitive, consumer-friendly health insurance marketplace that will allow Pennsylvania families and small business owners to purchase the coverage they need.”

Yet, the Federal healthcare law would require individuals to buy insurance by 2014 or be penalized, thus putting a burden on families who are trying to make ends meet or having employment issues. PHAN's concerns about the bill are the same as the bill's sponsors in regards the Federal healthcare law.

The bill, first introduced in January of 2011 and sent to committees for amendments and fiscal impact studies, was finally put on the floor on May 22 of this year. The amendments by Senators Yudichak, Stack and Boscola inexplicably add property tax and motor vehicle tax issues into the bill. The Finance report also states that it would cost the state $2 million for the two advertisements required by law.

The final passage vote in the Senate on March 28 was predictably split down party lines, with Republicans voting in favor of the bill and Democrats opposing it. The amendments to the bill by Kitchen, Yudichak, Stack and Boscola were all tabled. The bill now sits in the House for its review, amendment or passage. It needs 102 votes, without amendments, for it to then go to final legislature passage and onto the Governor's desk.

“The federal health care act is a matter of great interest among my constituents,” according to Sen. Don White – representing Armstrong, Indiana, Clearfield, and Westmoreland Counties in his newsletter. “I heard from Republicans and Democrats, young professionals, working families and retired senior citizens. The vast majority have told me they like many parts of the act, but almost universally they oppose the insurance mandate. They believe it to be an expensive intrusion by the federal government in their lives and I can say with certainty that if we were at the point where this amendment were a referendum on the upcoming ballot, it would pass by an overwhelming majority.”

Senator Lisa Baker (20th District) representing Pike County (along with Wayne, Luzerne, Susquehanna, Monroe and Wyoming), who voted in favor of the bill, recognizes the fact that the Supreme Court is currently in debate over the Federal Health care law, its constitutionality and its effects on the states. But she feels the passage of this bill is needed to protect our state. “ the debate over the national health care law... the individual mandate is a key provision in dispute,” said Jen Wilson, Baker's Chief of Staff. “No one knows how or if the Court ruling will address the conflict between federal law and state constitutions. Amending the PA Constitution is a lengthy process, which SB 10 begins.”

“Senate Bill 10 arises out of concerns that the federal government again appears to be increasing its authority at the expense of the states,” Baker recently explained to a constituent. “In many cases this includes the imposition of unfunded mandates that further exacerbates the state's budget difficulties.”

In Pennsylvania, Constitutional amendments must be approved during two consecutive legislative sessions, be approved by the Governor and then be approved by the voters in a statewide referendum before taking effect.

— Charles Reynolds

Comments