Ohio voters choose to opt out of health mandate

Voters in Ohio have approved a ballot measure intended to keep government from requiring Ohioans to participate in any health care system.
Associated Press
Nov 9, 2011


Voters in Ohio have approved a ballot measure intended to keep government from requiring Ohioans to participate in any health care system.

The constitutional amendment passed is largely symbolic, coming in response to the 2009 federal health care overhaul, a provision of which mandates that most Americans purchase health care.

Supporters hope it will prompt a challenge of the overhaul before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The tea party and Republican groups backing the amendment say the Affordable Care Act was an overreach by the Obama administration and Congress.

They hope approval of the ballot issue will bar Ohio from instituting a state-mandated health insurance program like that of Massachusetts.

Opponents argued state law can't trump federal law and that the amendment's wording could unintentionally jeopardize state health programs.



 Good. Now we can spend time and money that the state does not have in court costs. National laws take precedence over state. This was just a political ploy to get republicans to the voting booth to vote for Issue 1 and 2.


 Eriemom...  That doesn't seem to be the case anymore.  Look at the battle with same sex marriages and the Defense of Marriage Act.  States are passing laws allowing the practice and openly participating in it while at the same time the law of the land is DOMA.  This situation seems no different to me, only difference is that it is a conservative idea...

Anyway, with issue two going doing in defeat by the margin it did, why did this pass by a larger margin?

6079 Smith W

Non-binding and fairly useless.

Unless SCJ Kagan recuses herself, the Supremes will decide 5-4 to uphold the individual mandate for health insurance and then this country will be really f___d.

There will then be no limit to what the U.S. Congress can legislate using the Commerce Clause as the concept of individual liberty is declared obsolete.

The nanny state loves it's children.



 Confused: SB 5 was defeated by a majority of Ohioans because the vote was bipartisan. Ooops. They didn't expect that. Our congressional map looks like a really bad coloring book. If half of us vote democratic in elections why do we now have only 4 representatives, while there will be 12 republican? Why is the focus on keeping people from voting? Why are they trying to destroy unionism?

A majority of Ohioans no longer trust politicians. They decided to trust their neighbors instead. We understand that instead of working to produce more job opportunity, the current administration chose to instead work to stay in power.

DOMA my be current law, but it is unconstitional. The health madates may well be as well, but so far have held when tested in court.


Question: Why is it ok that the government requires us to buy auto insurance, and nobody has a problem with that, but when it comes to health insurance, many Republicans cry foul? It's the same thing, folks. The philosophy behind mandated auto insurance is to protect  us from someone else's negligence, in other words, so that we don't end up having to shoulder all of the financial cost of an accident caused by an uninsured person.

To me, it's simple: if somebody has health insurance, they'll go to the doctor when they start to get ill, because they can see the doc for a $20 co-pay, and that costs me and the rest of us taxpayers little or nothing. By contrast, someone withOUT health insurance will wait until they are really, really sick, then go to the hospital, which costs $500 and the ENTIRE bill is covered by those of us who do have insurance, in the form of higher medical bills and higher insurance costs.

In short, we all end up paying for those who don't have health insurance. Why doesn't that drive Republicans up a wall, since they're always complaining about having to pay to support people who don't pay taxes? You'd think that they would have been Issue 3's greatest detractors, but it was just the opposite.   Pssstt......fellow Democrats....should we point out the inconsistencies and contradictions of the GOP folks, or just let them wallow in their Faux News world of smug superiority?




Marcus M

coasterfan & eriemon I attached the following article and paraphrased explaining the difference  between auto and health insurance requirements, its very simple and to the point even far left wingers like you should be able to understand......

"The comparisons between the proposal for mandatory health insurance coverage and the requirement that drivers maintain auto insurance. Sounds good, but the comparison just doesn't work. In reality, car-insurance coverage is not mandated to all Americans, only those who has a drivers license or owns a car. Auto insurance is but one price that must be paid in order to enjoy the privilege of driving.

Alternatively, the mandatory health insurance proposal would essentially require that, in exchange for the privilege of … citizenship? Residency in the U.S.? Life? … one must procure health insurance for herself and her family. Where in the Constitution does the Federal government have the right to mandate health insurance coverage in the first place?"


Why do moonbats keep bringing up the old car insurance talking point, talk about lame!!!