Senator pre-files a health care choice measure
by Jon Gillooly
jgillooly@mdjonline.com
December 02, 2009 01:00 AM | 2979 views | 13 13 comments | 25 25 recommendations | email to a friend | print
MARIETTA - State Sen. Judson Hill (R-east Cobb) has pre-filed legislation that would protect a person's right to make their own health care choices. The legislation would preserve the rights of individuals to pay directly for medical care - something not allowed in single-payer countries such as Canada - and prohibits any individual from being penalized for not purchasing government-defined insurance, Hill said.

The measure requires a constitutional amendment, needing the approval of both two-thirds of the Senate and House before being placed on the ballot before the voters in 2010.

Called the Health Care Freedom of Choice Constitutional Amendment, the legislation was modeled after the American Legislative Exchange Council's (ALEC) Freedom of Choice in Health Care Act, which protects the individual rights of patients to obtain the health insurance of their choosing and to pay directly for medical care. Georgia joins the ranks of legislators from 14 other states who have already filed or pre-filed similar legislation. Legislators in another 10 states have publicly announced their intention to file the legislation. The legislation passed in Arizona earlier this year, Hill said.

The bill was pre-filed in the House by state Rep. Calvin Hill (R-Canton).

"We have taken the first step in protecting Georgians from government-run health care and intrusive government mandates. If Congress' proposed government option mandate becomes law, then the federal government will become a significant decision maker in Georgians' medical care," Hill said.

"The time has come for us as citizens, and Georgia as a sovereign state, to stand up to the federal government and stop these mandates that trample individual rights," he said.

Hill quoted the 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," adding, "We, as elected representatives, must do what we can to ensure these basic rights for the citizens of Georgia."

State Rep. Alisha Thomas Morgan (D-Austell) believes Hill's intentions are admirable to help ensure Georgians can get the care they need, when they need it.

"Unfortunately, this proposed constitutional amendment would not achieve that objective. I believe it would tie the hands of Georgians and prevent them from developing a health care system that is accessible to all, regardless of income, and of the highest quality," she said.

The bill distracts from a real problem at hand, which is that Georgia has close to 1.7 million people who are uninsured, Morgan said.

"If we are to truly create consumer choice in health care, we need to support the federal reform bill that is now before the U.S. Senate," she said.

The U.S. Senate bill would end the practice of insurance companies denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, allow Georgians to seek care from the doctor of their choice or require Americans to purchase a government-run health plan, she said.

"Instead of going after the consumer and small business-friendly bill being debated in the Senate, we should go after the insurance companies, which repeatedly deny health care to Georgian families and hold payments from our family physicians," Morgan said.

For more information on Hill's legislation, go to www.judsonhill.com.
Comments
(13)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
dark
|
December 03, 2009
I forgot an O but I remember my values.
dark
|
December 03, 2009
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is just that.

The insurance companies are government subsidized and they make profit off denying basic human rights.

That is inhumane and corprate communism.
Pat H.
|
December 03, 2009
If it is truely about providing healthcare for the uninsured, or for those who no longer afford insurance, the unspent stimulus money could be used and problem solved. It is about control over our country, culture and people.

We are in a dangerous period and unless people wake up we will lose what few freedoms we have left.

We cannot afford to provide healthcare for all. Why not focus on bringing good jobs and a solid middle class to fund programs
DavidSmyrna
|
December 02, 2009
The real question is, is such legislation unconstitutional. No, it's not. So all the Bushies approve of snooping on Americans with no connection to terrorism, etc. etc. and yet this Bill which works for the improvement of the human condition in this country and they are against it..well I guess in an odd way that makes sense, at least for the wackos. It is not an unconstitutional law and that's the only issue, so get over it.
DavidSmyrna
|
December 02, 2009
It's amazing to read from the Far Right supporters who have never had an experience with ruthless insurers, denying claims, making life miserable to obtain the coverage you are entitled to, then if it's from an auto accident you have to pay them back with no refund of premiums, and then the retroactively refuse to cover you and this is called freedom? Well, that's not the kind of Free world a reasonable person needs to live in. The assets of the insurance industry would pay off the national debt with one check. Ok, let the Robber Barrons keep on robbing and the lemmings keep on singing their praises.

The insurance industry has CAUSED this problem so you want to listen to them on how to solve it? Give me a break.
GC Clark
|
December 02, 2009
To RC: You are just the kind of individual the fascists love to have under their control. Not even at all rationally identifying the problems we have with health care and attempting to rectify. No; you bring up other crap to promote the continued distortion and lies that YOU by conspiring with them are part of. Did you attempt to address the simple question I posed to Mr. Fighter and am still awaiting his response? No; you pulled our your ranting lies and emoting false indignation to avoid being "logical" as you refer to it. Perhaps you can earn another stripe at one of the local tea parties for your display of lack of knowledge about the issue.. which they adore by the way. The elite profiteers are proud of you as well.
Light
|
December 02, 2009
@ Dark

Please direct us to the Constitutional provision(s) citing a persons Right to Healthcare. A few hints: It's not the "general welfare" clause or the Declaration of Independence "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" clause either.

Where exactly does the Constitution permit our Government to force anyone to purchase anything?

Your answers, undoubtedly intelligent and absent name calling or vile references should prove interesting reading.

Please don't confuse affordability with rights.

And, by the way, it's illegal for a medical practitioner to deny treatment to someone based on the patient's ability to pay. The patient can get treatment. Paying for that treatment is a different matter.
The Treeman
|
December 02, 2009
Freedom fighter, you are right on.

Health care is not guaranteed by the constitution, and is not a right. The 40 million, or what ever the number is, that the government says do not have health insurance, currently have access to free health care through medicaide, medicare, free government clinics, etc.

This whole debate is about government control, and the Democrat's desire to garner power by taking away freedoms, substitute them with security, and packaging it to the people who contribute the least to society, in order to get their vote.
to RC
|
December 02, 2009
What world do you live in GC. Why would someone, put up with the grumpy public, go to school for ions, rack up tons of debt, not to make a profit. Should the farmers give you food and not make a profit because you need it to survive. should builders give you a home, because you need warmth and a place to rest your head. Given your logic, we should be given everything for free.

healthcare is not a right, just like food and shelter is not a right.
GC Clark
|
December 02, 2009
To Freedom Fighter.. you certainly are fighting freedom and trying to keep it from yourself as well as the profiteers who enjoy such folly as you espouse with your "angry" tone. So you don't mind the fascist greedy profiteers with control of your "freedom" do you? It's they who you trust? Tell me Mr. Fighter, what is the incentive of these profiteers to keep costs down and to ensure our country's health is the best it can be? Can you articulate response to that one question without ranting for me to leave the country and calling me what you refer to as a "socialist"?
GC Clark
|
December 02, 2009
More grandstanding from yet another republican lackey; this one at the state level. Yet one more of the seemingly endless embarrassments for the state and constituents as they appeal to the fear they instilled by taking advantage of people's ignorance while taking loads of financial support from the special interests whose profits they serve to protect. Ironic these guys then advertise what dedicated church-goers they are.

This man is essentially lying and adding more lies on top of the lies this is based on. There is no such thing as a takeover of government of health insurance although to be honest even that would give us a better system than we now have. They conveniently "frame" - i.e., lie to people - their false concern in the diminishing "freedom"; this freedom is the profits for the special interests who prop them up, not of the working people of this country. This guy like the other republican assistant-devils are wearing sheep's clothing that look like suits - all clean cut and glowing. Think about that "wholesome" image as you are struggling to pay your insurance premiums (if you are fortunate enough to have them) and when your poorly informed friend, associate, parent, sibling, daughter or son; are struggling with a decision that is truly beyond their means and totally outside of their financial allowance because of no insurance or viable health care options. We are a compassionate and wise bunch indeed to make it so those who profit from our misery call ALL of the shots for our health and medical well being.
Freedom Fighter
|
December 02, 2009
Health Care is NOT a right. No one has the right to take money from someone else just to pay for their health care. America is a giving nation and we already have health care for poor folks, its called Medicaid and for seniors called Medicare. This whole health care debate is NOT about health care but about power, who controls what! Either the people can choose for themselves or the Government will do it for us. Any time the Government does it you loose the freedom to choose for yourself; it's that simple! If the Government weren't regulating the wazuzi out of everything, the cost wouldn't be so high and everyone who want to could afford insurance. Just getting everyone insurance at the rates today isn't going to bring down the cost of health care or help anyone! When costs keep going up the poor always suffer first so either we keep our freedom or we all suffer - it's the people's choice!

Dark
|
December 02, 2009
Health Care is a right.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides