Will Texas Nullify Obamacare Mandates?

  • Share on Tumblr

Representative James White (R-Luftkin) has prefiled House Joint Resolution 48 (HJR 48) in the Texas State House of Representatives.  The bill is designed to amend Article I of the Texas Constitution and would protect the rights of people there to decide for themselves whether or not to purchase health insurance. It states, in part:

“Each individual in this state has the right to choose or decline to choose to purchase health insurance coverage without penalty or sanction or threat of penalty or sanction.”

This bill essentially nullifies the requirement of individuals to purchase health insurance as described in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.  In Section 5000A of the PPACA, it states that individuals must have healthcare coverage, as well as their dependents in any given month.  If coverage is lacking, a penalty will be imposed, unless certain income requirements aren’t met. From the act:

‘‘(a) An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month.

(b) (1) IN GENERAL.—If an applicable individual fails to meet the requirement of subsection (a) for 1 or more months during any calendar year beginning after 2013, then, except as provided in subsection (d), there is hereby imposed a penalty with respect to the individual in the amount determined under subsection (c).”

HJR48 would counter the insurance mandate by preventing any State employee or public official from helping effectuate the penalties for non-compliance:

“A state agency, public official, employee, or political subdivision of this state may not act to impose, collect, enforce, or effectuate a penalty or sanction intended to punish or discourage the exercise of the right described by Subsection (a) of this section.”

In other words, if the bill passes, Texas will refuse to comply with Section 5000A of Obamacare, and the Feds will have to find out how to do it on their own. According to research by Michael Cannon and others at the CATO Institute, economically-speaking, the federal government is reliant upon a certain level of state cooperation to ensure that the mandate stays afloat. The estimates from many experts are that if 20 states refuse to comply with setting up exchanges, it’s going to great serious problems to carry out the mandate. With a number of state Governors, including Rick Perry of Texas, taking the position that they will not assist the federal government by creating or participating the mandated exchange program, the mandate is already teetering.

HJR48 takes it a step further. Instead of just leaving such a decision to the whims of Governor Perry – or a future Governor – through a State Constitutional Amendment, it slams the door shut on any future participation in such a program by any Governor.

The resolution was introduced by Rep. White on Nov. 27, 2012.  If it passes both houses, Texas voters will decide the fate of the amendment at the polls on Nov. 5, 2013.

It is true that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled certain provisions of the PPACA Constitutional, including the penalty for non-compliance.  However, as Thomas Jefferson said, nullification by the States is the “rightful remedy,” when the Federal Government has acted beyond their constitutionally enumerated powers.

And in the case of the PPACA, that’s exactly what Congress has done.

ACTION ITEMS IN TEXAS

Urge your State Reps to pass HJR48
1. Visit this link for contact information http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/Resources/contactText.aspx

2. click on a representative name that is your representative – get their email address and TWO phone numbers – capitol and district offices

3. CALL them. Best option – Let them know you support this bill

4. EMAIL them – even if call, you can still email too. Or just email.

5. Do the same for the Governor’s office – (800) 843-5789 or http://governor.state.tx.us/contact/

6. Report Back – when you get responses, let us know! We want people to be informed of what their delegates are saying and doing.

TEXAS ACTIVISTS ON FACEBOOK:
Join this organizing group – http://www.facebook.com/groups/nullifyobamacareTX/

OUTSIDE OF TEXAS

Act now to reject Obamacare in your state, city, county or town.

1. Use this model legislation: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/legislation/federal-health-care-nullification-act/

2. Get involved, start here: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/volunteer

About Matthew Renquist

Matt Renquist is a blogger for the Tenth Amendment Center. He holds a Bachelor's Degree from Colorado State University and currently lives in Colorado.

Enjoyed This Post?

We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!

Enjoyed This Post?
12 comments
far2right
far2right

Texas is making the very same mistake we did in Tennessee.  Even if Texas' state constitution is amended, this will NOT protect Texas citizens against the federal tax penalty.  The tax is collected at the federal level.  The Texas provision, as in Tennessee, appears to only prohibit the state from action against the citizen.  It has no teeth at all to protect the citizen from the federal government seizure of assets, freezing accounts, extracting taxes, etc.  No sheriff can stop the IRS, except if they show up at my door to arrest me.  Meanwhile, there is nothing the state can or will do to stop seizure of my property which is done from afar.

 

That is the position of Gov. Haslam in Tennessee.  He has acknowledged that the state will do nothing to effectuate any penalty, but further admits that the state can do nothing to stop the feds from effectuating a penalty.

 

Section 1(d) of the TN HFCA:

 

“No public official, employee, or agent of this state or any of its political subdivisions shall act to impose, collect, enforce, or effectuate any penalty in this state that violates the public policy set forth in this section.”

 

The operative words of this clause is "in this state".

 

The Governor insists that no state level or lower employee will do anything to anyone who chooses to not get health insurance.  But there is nothing the state can do to stop the feds from doing what they can at their level.

 

Our TN HFCA is effectively toothless against the feds.

 

There is no wall of separation between the state and federal behemoth. 

 

It appears Texas is making this same oversight.

 

 

West Texan
West Texan

 @far2right Agreed! ...states and their respective residents remain under attack being forced to suffer the abusive overreaching policies of uncontrolled centralized power-brokers. I wish an easier answer to stopping big government's progressive onslaught existed. Our individual freedoms and states' domestic affairs have been undermined far too long. The DC beast continues to grow unabated. The proverbial Camel's back is at its breaking point. Sadly, the Beltways socialist wannabe elitists would rather play their destructive parlor games at the country's expense.

Poet_Carl_Watts
Poet_Carl_Watts

@irasocol no clue, 10th Amendment limits fed power specifically2Constitution, where not specifically granted2fed, exclusively states right

irasocol
irasocol

@Poet_Carl_Watts Not how the Civil War played out. Nor Eisenhower at Little Rock

Poet_Carl_Watts
Poet_Carl_Watts

@irasocol Thx for the data. Do you have a point you wish to make? #AwesomeTeam #ACO1♥Future2U! http://t.co/7TCojiVM

Poet_Carl_Watts
Poet_Carl_Watts

@irasocol Cool. I just know I'm not happy w fed gvt or administration & the erosion of our rights! Not looking for conflict either! :-)

irasocol
irasocol

@Poet_Carl_Watts Nope, other than nullification comes at the peril of breaking up the nation. Which might be good or bad

futureicon
futureicon

@tjholthaus / I can assure you, Tom, if any state stands up to this Kenyan idiot; it will be Texas.

tjholthaus
tjholthaus

@futureicon You are probably correct

Darrel Mulloy
Darrel Mulloy

This is not a bill, but a joint resolution.A bill, once passed by both houses and signed by the governor, carries the power of law, but HJR, meaning house joint resolution, does not carry the power of law once passed.

Michael Boldin
Michael Boldin moderator

 @Darrel Mulloy As a joint resolution for a state constitutional amendment, this is a process different than a non-binding resolution that you've referred to.

 

If passed, it will go directly to the voters.  If the people approve, it will be part of the state constitution and hold a higher force of law than legislation simply passed by the legislators.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Will Texas Nullify Obamacare Mandates? Posted on 12/10/2012 by Mark Masta window.setTimeout('window.location="http://apoliticalrennie.com/breaking-tennessee-says-%e2%80%98no%e2%80%99-to-state-run-insurance-exchange/"; ',10*60*1000); Will Texas Nullify Obamacare Mandates? [...]