FamilyFoundationBlog.com

Today, in the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee, the anticipated fireworks didn’t materialize. But it sure did have some strange twists and turns.

Although there wasn’t as much hype concerning HB 10, The Virginia Health Care Freedom Act, there was due to be some suspense. The patron, Delegate Bob Marshall (R-13, Manassas), had reason to be confident since three similar Senate bills escaped Commerce and Labor earlier in session, albeit by 8-7 votes, due to the brave votes of Democrats Charles Colgan (D-29, Manassas) and Phil Puckett (D-38, Tazewell). But HB 10 is worded slightly different. One difference from the Senate bills is that it clearly limits exemptions on insurance purchase mandates in divorce settlements, an omission Senate liberals objected to in SB 417, SB 311 and SB 283. On the other hand, its protections from the federal government are a little more expansive.

Stage set, here’s what happened: Delegate Marshall barely was into the introduction of the bill when he got a few questions, including one from committee chairman and Majority Leader Dick Saslaw (D-35, Springfield), who asked, “Do you think we have the power to tell Congress what to do?”

Of course, the bill won’t tell Congress what to do. Only that Virginia won’t participate in a certain action (health care insurance mandates) that it may pass. In fact, Delegate Marshall cited a 1994 Congressional Budget Office memo during the HillaryCare debate, that stated never before had Congress mandate Americans to buy any good or service, and that doing so would open the door for other mandated purchases and a command economy. (Hopefully, our public schools still teach what political system uses a command economy.) He reasoned, that if Congress has never required an individual mandate before, it must not be legal, or it would have done so already in more than 200 years. He also cited New York v. United States where a federal court ruled in New York’s favor over a federal mandate. Seemingly anxious to just get it over with, it was about here where Senator Creigh Deeds (D-25, Bath) asked if there was any difference between HB 10 and the Senate bills, which Delegate Marshall already had volunteered that there was. He amended his bill to preserve divorce settlements in which insurance coverage may be a part, something on which committee liberals hammered the Senate bills’ patrons. On the other hand, his bill, in a macro constitutional sense (I love creating new phrases) was a bit broader and probably more protective of the feds than the Senate bills.

Before the committee’s legal counsel and Delegate Marshall could complete their responses, motions and comments started flying all over the place. Senator Saslaw, confident that the differences were huge and that the bills were not the same, motioned that HB 10 be passed by for the year. Senator Frank Wagner (R-7, Virginia Beach) made a substitute motion to report. Senator Steve Newman (R-23, Forest) made a parliamentary inquiry if the bill could be conformed into one of the Senate bills. He was told no because the bills are in different sections of the code.

That struck me as odd right away because bills are conformed all the time. In fact, “conforming” is changing legislative language to the exact same language as another bill — in other words, that’s the point! Change it and put it in any code section you want! So the motion to report was voted upon with Senators Puckett and Colgan upholding their part, but the bill failed 8-7. How could this be when the others passed? Senator Tommy Norment (R-3, Williamsburg) voted no.

As supporters gathered outside to plan a next step — primarily, to get Senator Norment to offer a motion to reconsider at the next meeting — word came out of the committee room to head back in: That’s what indeed he was doing! So the bill was brought right back up, interrupting the introduction of the next bill. After the motion to reconsider passed, a motion to — believe it or not — conform it to SB 417 was made and passed on a 8-7 vote. So, HB 10 survives, amended to the same language as SB 417. You like unintended consequences (something liberals are always warning us about)? Good, because now the protections for divorce orders is gone!

It should now pass the Senate floor, where it will go back to the House. It remains to be seen if Delegate Marshall will then insist on his original language when it returns there and force a conference committee, or if he’ll take what he has. Does he want pride of authorship? Or, knowing the other bill will become law, does he want to roll the dice and try to get the additional protections in HB 10 to become the law of the Commonwealth?

Friday afternoon, we were the first to alert the public that the Senate had assigned the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act (HB 10), in a blatant violation of its rules, to the Education and Health Committee. The bill, which overwhelmingly passed the House 72-26, by rule of the Senate should have been assigned to the Commerce and Labor Committee, where three similar Senate bills shocked the political establishment earlier in session by passing on 8-7 bipartisan votes. But yesterday, the bill’s Web page listed its assignment to the decidedly less friendly Ed and Health Committee.

The bill, patroned by Delegate Bob Marshall (R-13, Prince William), would exempt Virginia and Virginians from an individual health care mandate by the federal government. It appeared that the liberal Senate majority, licking its wounds from the surprise losses in C&L and Senate floor, wanted a pyrrhic victory by sticking it to the leader on the issue — Ed and Health at best would fall one vote short based on its membership and its 10-5 , well-out-of-proportion-super-majority. Of course, the train had left the station — the three Senate bills passed the House without amendments (thus avoiding a conference committee) and now are on their way to Governor Bob McDonnell.

This wasn’t the first time this session the Senate had tried chicanery with bill assignments. Earlier, the Legislative Information Services Web site gave away the Senate majority leadership’s strategy on SB 504 when it whitewashed its Courts of Justice sub-committee actions and, without and committee vote, had moved it to Ed and Health. So, was this another trick by the Democrat majority? Or did the Senate Clerk make a mistake, intentional or un? Or a combination thereof?

We don’t know, but, alas, we can breathe easy. Either we stirred up a hornet’s nest, the Senate leadership was adequately burned last time or there was a mistake — of some sort, by someone. Today, according to the bill’s Web page, it is rightfully assigned to the Commerce and Labor Committee (again with no mention of the previous committee assignment). So, we can expect another spirited debate in the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee later in session. At least we hope so. There are other tricks in the legislative bag to pull out. We hope they stay put. If not, we’ll be there to expose them. Again.

As lobbyists at the General Assembly, we subscribe to something called Lobbyist In A Box, from the GA’s Legislative Information Services division. It’s a very handy tool that let’s you know, with fair regularity, all the updates to all the bills you track. So, it wasn’t a surprise when an update flashed up on HB 10, Delegate Bob Marshall’s (R-10, Prince William) Health Care Freedom Act. After all, it passed the House comfortably yesterday and the notice probably was a pro forma notification that it was sent to the Senate. Oh, boy, was it!

Just as it did with the coerced abortion bill, the Senate powers have placed HB 10 in the Committee on Education and Health instead of the Commerce and Labor Committee. Could it be that the Democrat leadership doesn’t want to get embarrassed with another defeat in that committee, as it did earlier in session with the passage of the senate versions of HB 10? Hmmm.

Here is what the Senate Rules say about the jurisdiction of the two committees:

18 (b). A Committee on Commerce and Labor, 15 Senators, to consider all matters concerning banking; commerce; commercial law; corporations; economic development; industry; insurance; labor; manufacturing; partnerships; public utilities, except matters relating to transportation; tourism; workmen’s compensation and unemployment matters.

18 (d). A Committee on Education and Health, 15 Senators, to consider matters concerning education; human reproduction; life support; persons under disability; public buildings; public health; mental health; mental retardation and health professions.

Seems pretty straightforward to me. After all, the House heard four such bills and all were in its Commerce and Labor Committee and the Senate heard three, all in its C&L Committee. How does this not smell? We report. You decide.

In the end, though, Senate Dems are a day late and several bucks short. Today, the Senate bills all passed the House and are on their way to Governor Bob McDonnell. Too, bad, liberals.

Freedom-loving, constitution-respecting Virginians are one step closer to seeing Virginia enact historic legislation! Today, the House Commerce and Labor Committee voted 17-5 to report HB 10, The Virginia Health Care Freedom Act, to the House floor. The bill is patroned by Delegate Bob Marshall (R-13, Manassas). The committee also rolled the similarly worded HB 722, patroned by Delegate Chris Peace (R-97 Hanover), into HB 10.

In introducing the bill, Delegate Marshall told the committee that the Congressional Budget Office cited the fact that Congress in 220 years never has mandated an individual purchase of any product — and if it hasn’t done so in that time, it means it knows it can’t do so. In typical Marshall style, he also quoted Alexander Hamilton, the most ardent supporter among the Founding Fathers of an influential central government, in Federalist 83, where he explicitly stated Congress’ power extends only to certain enumerated powers and defined the “welfare” clause quite differently than do most politicians today.

In addition, the committee scheduled a late vote on SB 283, SB 311 and SB 417, the health care freedom bills passed in historic fashion by the Senate. The Senate bills are patroned by Senators Fred Qualye (R-13, Suffolk), Steve Martin (R-11, Chesterfield) and Jill Vogel (R-27, Winchester), respectively. Easy victories were expected for those bills as well.

Virginia now is only a few steps from leading on, and asserting, what it so profoundly led and asserted two centuries ago: That the states and the people, as explicitly stated in the 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution, are the sovereigns of this country and commonwealth, and where the central government has no stated role, the people have natural rights to make decisions for themselves. Virginia now has the opportunity, in a new era, once again to lead the country in respect for constitutionally guaranteed limited government.

Even with this great momentum, nothing — nothing — should ever be taken for granted around here. These four bills – HB 10, SB 283, SB 311 and SB 417 – now go to the House floor. Anyone of the Senate bills that passes will go to Governor Bob McDonnell for his signature. E-mail your delegate (here) (or find your delegate here) and ask him or her to vote in favor of Virginians’ rights to make their own health care decisions without the federal government’s intrusion.

Delegate John O’Bannon (R-73, Henrico), the chief co-patron of Delegate Bob Marshall’s (R-13, Manassas) Virginia Health Care Freedom Act (HB 10), spoke at The Family Foundation of Virginia Day at the Capitol on January 18. Here are his comments on the bill, why it is necessary, constituent feedback and why it is constitutional. Delegate O’Bannon is a neurologist and was the only doctor in the House of Delegates for several years until 2008. Until this session started, he remained the only physician in the House. Now there are three “delegate-doctors,” with Doctors Chris Stolle (R-83, Virginia Beach) and Scott Garrett (R-23, Lynchburg) beating Democrat incumbents last November.

Delegate O’Bannon, long the General Assembly point man on health care issues, speaks about the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act.

Here’s Delegate Bob Marshall’s (R-13, Manassas) take on the Health Care Freedom legislation pending in the General Assembly, in a statement released earlier today, in light of the historic Senate vote yesterday:

Congress is attempting to make Virginia and other states mere administrative agents for dubious public policies that the Congress either lack the money to enforce or the authority to enact. Congress has seen states pay for the programs or fail to challenge their legitimacy because of the financial and legal difficulty of doing so.

Rights are not kept secure by silence or timidity in defending them. For too long, state legislators have been intimidated from challenging members of Congress to abide by the Constitutional limits on their enumerated powers. And for too long, citizens have allowed their state representatives to do nothing in defense of their rights against predators in Washington, D.C. — until now.

The Ninth and Tenth Amendments clearly reserve to citizens and states the power to challenge and reject over-reaching policies of the national government such as National Health Care. …

* * * * *

The Health Care Freedom Act (HB 10) is a challenge to Obamacare insurance mandates. It protects an individual’s right to participate in or to decline to participate in a health care system or plan for any lawful medical service, and it prohibits the imposition of a penalty, tax, or fine upon an individual who declines to enter into a contract for health care coverage. HB 10 will allow Attorney General Cuccinelli to defend any Virginia taxpayer against the IRS for declining to purchase health care required by Obamacare.

Congress’ own Budget staff has stated that never in 220 years have individuals been mandated to purchase any private good or service by Congress, much less be prosecuted by fines and jail time for refusing to do so.

And the Congressional Research Service in 2009 noted that the individual insurance mandates face constitutional problems:

“Despite the breadth of powers that have been exercised under the Commerce Clause, it is unclear whether the clause would provide a solid constitutional foundation for legislation containing a requirement to have health insurance. Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or a service.”

Attorney General Cuccinelli supports HB 10. HB 10 passed subcommittee 8-2. A full House of Delegates vote is expected Feb. 7-8 or after. HB 10 is the most viewed bill on the General Assembly’s website in the 2010 session. (See HB 10 Q and A at www.delegatebob.com.)

As mentioned here (and according to the AP), 13 attorneys general are preparing to file suit on behalf of their states to block any eventual nationalization of America’s health care system — or at least leave their states free to choose whether to participate. Virginia Attorney General Bill Mims is one of the 13.

Law suits have been known to work. It is, after all, the states which have the right and obligation to defend themselves from participation in any federal scheme not enumerated in the constitution as a federal responsibility — also known as the 10th Amendment. Of course, the 10th Amendment, nor anything about the constitution, has stopped the federales from increasing its size and scope over our lives throughout recent decades.

But law suits aside, what else can the states do? Apart from the attorney general, who else is in the game? What about legislatures? If Delegate Bob Marshall (R-13, Prince William) has anything to do with it, Virginia’s General Assembly will have a lot to do with it. Last month, he made a presentation to the Tuesday Morning Group Coalition about HB 10, The Health Care Freedom Act, a bill he has already filed. Other patrons thus far are John O’Bannon (R-73, Henrico), Scott Lingamfelter (R-31, Prince William), Harvey Morgan (R-98, Gloucester) and Bob Tata (R-85, Virginia Beach). HB 10 reads, in its entirety, thus:

No law shall restrict a person’s natural right and power of contract to secure the blessings of liberty to choose private health care systems or private plans. No law shall interfere with the right of a person or entity to pay for lawful medical services to preserve life or health, nor shall any law impose a penalty, tax, fee, or fine, of any type, to decline or to contract for health care coverage or to participate in any particular health care system or plan, except as required by a court where an individual or entity is a named party in a judicial dispute. Nothing herein shall be construed to expand, limit or otherwise modify any determination of law regarding what constitutes lawful medical services within the Commonwealth.

Marshall, as ever, is sure of its legislative cure as well as its constitutionality, as we are reminded by Norm Leahy at Tertium Quids. In fact, as Leahy points out, Delegate Marshall offers a Q&A on Dr. Bob Hollsworth’s Virginia Tomorrow blog, asking and answering questions himself, a FAQ tutorial on state legislative prerogative on federal issues, if you will. At least as far as it concerns the federal takeover of the health care industry and individuals’ constitutional rights to be forced into it. 

So, the 10th Amendment lives? We’ll see what Virginia’s General Assembly says — about its own authority. Virginia could make hay as the bulwark against the largest federal power grab in history. That would really give the lawyers something to fight about.