Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« Health Care Debate Underway in the… | Support Pours In For Gay Teenager I… »

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Politics Rob "Republican Conspirator" McKenna Answers Your Questions

Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 10:33 AM

State Attorney General Rob McKenna—Republican and enemy of the sick—has kindly posted to his websides answers to your pressing questions about why he's using your money to fight against your health care benefits. Here are two of his answers:

Q: What will it cost the state of Washington to join this lawsuit?

A: The costs will be minimal. As a party to this multi-state suit, Washington is one of 13 states, to date, participating. State attorneys general typically use multi-state lawsuits to address important national issues or when more than one state has an interest in a legal matter. As the lead state, the Florida Attorney General’s office will provide most of the resources and personnel to pursue the case, though the other participating states will be consulted.

Q: Did Washington join this lawsuit for political reasons?

A: No. This case raises constitutional questions about specific parts of the federal health care reform bill. It could just as easily be suggested that those in favor of the legislation are willing to ignore serious legal questions for their own political reasons. One important role of the Attorney General is to ask a court to intervene when there are issues impacting the state’s legal interests and the interests of its people. Given our concerns about sections of this bill, we conclude that it would be in the state’s best interest to resolve these legal questions now, so that we may repair our health care system in a way that does not conflict with the United States Constitution.

Fighting federal court battles is only a "minimal" expense, and, even though 37 states didn't seem to find a reason to file a lawsuit, the Republican attorney general from our state who did file an appeal says it wasn't political. Don't you feel better now?

Comments (19) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

What's funny is that you have conservatives effectively appealing to the same sort of basic privacy rights that they find so abhorent as a basis for Roe v Wade.
Apparently in their world it's fine for old white men to tell young black women what they can and can't do with their uterus, but it's not ok for a young black man to tell old white men what they must do with a small percentage of their lucre.

Posted by kinaidos on March 24, 2010 at 10:59 AM

Minimal?

$2 is too much.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on March 24, 2010 at 11:06 AM

oh, and that FB group against him doing this has more than 12,000 members right now

Posted by Will in Seattle

on March 24, 2010 at 11:07 AM

not political? then announce now that you aren't running for governor.

Posted by Max Solomon on March 24, 2010 at 11:08 AM

Ordinarily, I'd be all for making sure the health care bill is constitutional. I just don't (and after Citizens United, why would anybody?) trust the current Roberts-led Supreme Court to make that decision. And if McKenna was being honest, he'd acknowledge that he and the other AGs are counting on the Court's conservative idealogues to rule in their favor. He's not interested in the constitutionality of it; he just wants to defeat it because he believes his constituency will reward him later with the governorship.

Crass opportunism, through and through.

Posted by schmacky on March 24, 2010 at 11:10 AM

As always, I appreciate a nice, long-winded response to a simple question. But I've still got one question: how much is it gonna cost?

Posted by piojin on March 24, 2010 at 11:13 AM

He's a liar!

Posted by Vince on March 24, 2010 at 11:13 AM

I can't believe anyone honestly cares about protecting the sanctity of the U.S. Constitution anymore. This country has proven we're ok with a king, W. clearly broke FISA law and no one cares. It's just a piece of paper now.

Posted by OuterCow on March 24, 2010 at 11:16 AM

Me, I'm hoping McKenna gets real sick, real soon. Of course, he gets his health insurance from the state, so it's probably the best that money can buy, but still. I'd like to see him argue this case from an iron lung.

Posted by Fnarf

on March 24, 2010 at 11:32 AM

"The costs will be minimal."

Just like Iraq?

Posted by Zoroastronomer on March 24, 2010 at 11:59 AM

The Q&A didn't answer my question: why didn't these Attorneys General recruit an individual citizen who is actually injured by the mandate (i.e. someone who doesn't have health insurance and who would be subject to the tax/fee but refuses to pay it) to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit? States have no standing to assert this injury. And if there's no actual human being who will be injured by this law -- if they can't find a single person who doesn't have health insurance yet makes enough income to be subject to the penalty for failure to carry insurance -- then this is just a political performance, one that the federal courts will throw out for procedural reasons.

Posted by PGofHSM on March 24, 2010 at 12:02 PM

@10: He will be greeted as a liberator.

Posted by mark on March 24, 2010 at 12:07 PM

Dom, 45 states can't seem to find a reason to legalize homosexual marriage.
Shouldn't the other 5 stfu?

Posted by Don't you feel better now? on March 24, 2010 at 12:10 PM

We all know something can't be unconstitutional if only 14 state AG's say so. Or if it's expensive to litigate.

Posted by joykiller on March 24, 2010 at 12:11 PM