Idaho politics: Labrador hails 'brave decision' on health care reform law

Rep.-elect Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, praised today's federal court ruling which rejected the requirement that Americans purchase health insurance.

"The American people should be proud of this brave decision," Labrador wrote in a guest opinion. "However, the ruling should not have been necessary in the first place. Congress must recognize its limited role and not exceed it at the expense of state sovereignty, our economy and our personal freedoms.

Here is his guest opinion in full (and a link to my previous blog post, with a reaction from Gov. Butch Otter):

Today’s ruling by U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson in Virginia that the Health Care Reform Bill passed by Congress last Christmas Eve contains unconstitutional requirements represents a great victory for all Americans and our Constitution.

Idahoans are deeply opposed to the reform bill. I am proud to have been an original sponsor of the Idaho Health Care Freedom Act in the Idaho Legislature. The fundamental reason for bringing this bill, which Governor Otter signed into law, was that our U.S. Constitution does not grant the federal government the power to force Americans to purchase health insurance, or anything for that matter, against their will.

Judge Hudson agreed. In his decision he wrote that Obamacare's basic requirement that Americans carry health insurance or pay a financial penalty "exceeds the Constitutional boundaries of Congressional power."

Justice Hudson saw the law for what it is: an unprecedented expansion of federal power at the expense of the states and of the people when he said the law "would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers."

The American people should be proud of this brave decision by Judge Hudson. However, the ruling should not have been necessary in the first place. Congress must recognize its limited role and not exceed it at the expense of state sovereignty, our economy and our personal freedoms.

The Idaho Health Care Freedom Act was a step in the right direction. Idaho’s case against the federal government on this issue is filed in Pensacola, Florida. Hearings are scheduled for Thursday before Judge Roger Vinson, who has already made clear he has reservations about the legal mandate of Obamacare. He is expected to rule next year, but I hope Judge Hudson’s quick decision will help rally support for repeal of the measure early in the 112th Congress.

The health care bill is a salient example of my commitment to Idahoans. I will fight for principles of limited government, less spending, personal responsibility and the protection of the freedoms that our forefathers fought and died for. Repealing Obamacare must be as much a priority as restraining spending and reducing our debts.
Idahoans know that Congress has limited Constitutional authority. That is why together we applaud today’s ruling.

I ask for your help as I take office in a few weeks to ensure that this new Congress creates a limited government that allows for unlimited opportunity for all Americans.

Get Twitter updates on my blog and column and Statesman editorials. Become a follower. You can also get updates on Facebook's Idaho Statesman Opinion Page.

That's great, Raul. And plan B is...?

Let the market take care of the problem? We have a fair measure of that now, and for those too young for Medicare, the market solution is that the wealthy have access to the greatest medical care in the world, and the not-so-wealthy, not so much.

If the judge's opinion prevails, we will all have the pre-existing condition of a diseased system of health care insurance.

It was NOT brave, it was a judicial verdict.

----------

Happy Jesus Thing and a Chinese New Year

The so-called Health Freedom Act is....

a step designed to keep the health insurance industry profitable and to repress the true freedoms of all people - the right to health care and a better quality of life - regardless of income.

Brave? Really?

Glad to see he already jumping into the use of Washington's hollow political rhetoric. Does Labrador think the courts are brave when he doesn't agree with their ruling? If the courts do away with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", I wonder if he will consider that decision to be "brave" or "activist".

The right to die poor and ill

With no affordable medical treatment. Ain't the Xtian America great? You have the guaranteed freedom to die if you can't afford the American elitist health care only the wealthy can afford.

This judge is also a political hack

He has ownership in a Repubican big business consulting firm that lobbied against health care reform.

America is becoming more banana repubic and politically corrupt as corporatism and government becomes one. The working class has no chance.

raul?

You voted for him. Why would they care...they have great medical insurance paid for by the taxpayers--except Rep. Phil Hart.