HCS HJR 48, 50 & 57 -- HEALTH CARE SYSTEM PARTICIPATION

SPONSOR:  Jones, 89 (Davis)

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Special Committee on
General Laws by a vote of 9 to 4.

Upon voter approval, this proposed constitutional amendment
prohibits any person, employer, or health care provider from
being compelled to participate in any health care system.
Individuals and employers may pay directly for lawful health care
services without being subject to fines or penalties, and health
care providers can accept payment for health care services from
individuals or employers without being subject to fines or
penalties.  The purchase or sale of health care insurance in
private health care systems cannot be prohibited by law or rule.

FISCAL NOTE:  Estimated Effect on General Revenue Fund of an
income of $0 or a cost of More than $7,000,000 in FY 2011, an
income of $0 in FY 2012, and an income of $0 in FY 2013.  No
impact on Other State Funds in FY 2011, FY 2012, and FY 2013.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that this health care freedom
amendment makes it clear that the federal government cannot take
over the health care system and mandate the purchase of health
insurance.  Thirty-three states have filed legislation to oppose
federal health care legislation.  Individual states should retain
power to regulate health care and allow individuals the freedom
to choose health care in the open market.  Federal health care
mandates and taxes could bankrupt small businesses and greatly
burden individuals.  Individuals should have the right to choose
whether or not to purchase goods and services.  Many individuals
do not purchase health insurance based on their religious
beliefs.

Testifying for the bills were Representative Jones (89); Missouri
State Medical Association; Laura Hausladen; Ron Keeven; Cindy
McGhee; and Brenda Webb.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bills say that if the federal
legislation is ultimately upheld and the state is prohibited from
enforcing any federal requirements that individuals purchase
insurance, Missouri hospitals may lose Medicaid revenue and will
not receive any benefit from mandated insurance payments.  The
result will be a massive net loss that could approach $2.5
billion over a 10-year period for Missouri hospitals.  Currently,
hospitals are forced to provide emergency care without regard to
whether cost recovery is possible.

Testifying against the bills was Missouri Hospital Association.

OTHERS:  Others testifying on the bills say that the proposed
federal legislation is likely to be ruled unconstitutional by the
United States Supreme Court because a mandate to purchase goods
or services is not authorized under the Commerce Clause of the
United States Constitution.  This mandate is unique and has not
previously been attempted by the federal government.  If the
United States Congress lacks the enumerated power under the
Commerce Clause to impose a mandate, Missouri is clearly free to
enact a state constitutional provision ensuring an individual's
right to choose his or her own health care.

Testifying on the bills was Dave Roland, Show-Me Institute.

Missouri House of Representatives
95th General Assembly, 2nd Regular Session
Last Updated September 14, 2010 at 3:14 pm