Slog
News & ArtsThursday, September 29, 2011
Health / Politics Is Rob McKenna a Crappy Liar, or a Crappy Lawyer?
Posted by Goldy on Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 12:58 PM
Yesterday the Obama administration formally appealed a ruling by a federal court in Atlanta striking down the individual insurance mandate, a core provision of the controversial Affordable Care Act (ACA). This will almost surely put the issue before US Supreme Court in its coming session, with a decision to come during the 2012 presidential election season. But 2012 is also a gubernatorial election season here in Washington state, which means Attorney General Rob McKenna has some serious 'splainin' to do about how his words don't match his actions.
The issue is "severability." In talking to both the press and the public, McKenna has insisted that he is not seeking to toss out the health care reform act in its entirety, but rather, just the individual mandate. According to McKenna, the mandate is legally severable from the rest of the ACA. From a policy perspective, it's a bullshit argument on its surface, as key reforms like eliminating preexisting conditions don't work without the mandate. But legally, this claim also flies in the face of what he and his fellow attorneys general are telling the courts:
At the same time, however, the winners in that appellate case, 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business, also asked for high court review Wednesday, saying the entire law, and not just the individual insurance mandate, should be struck down.
McKenna's office told the Seattle Times that he was overruled by his co-plaintiffs, explaining that in a multi-state lawsuit "an individual state can't necessarily dictate to the group every aspect of the case." But that's an excuse that simply does not jibe with the timeline of a lawsuit which by his own account, McKenna took the lead in pursuing. "[T]wo of us got together, and others joined us," McKenna told the Christian Science Monitor back in March of 2010, in explaining the genesis of the lawsuit.
And it's a lawsuit that from its very first filing for summary judgement, has always sought to toss out the entire ACA:
Plaintiffs have established that the Act's Individual Mandate and Medicaid provisions are unconstitutional. Because each of these portions is essential to the [Affordable Care Act (ACA)] as a whole, neither can be severed. It follows, as a matter of law, that the unconstitutionality of either renders the entire Act unconstitutional. Accordingly, Plaintiffs ask, as requested in Counts One and Four of the Amended Complaint, that the Court declare the entire ACA unconstitutional and enjoin its enforcement.
Severability is not some new issue that's suddenly popped up on appeal despite McKenna's best intentions. His lawsuit—the one he claims he took the lead in filing—has always argued that the individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the act. So how he can simultaneously argue in a court of law against severability, while arguing in the court of public opinion for it, and still maintain his credibility, just beggars the imagination. I mean, if he is truly at odds with his co-plaintiffs over the severability issue—if he really doesn't want to toss out the entire ACA—he could always withdraw from the case and file his own.
But when McKenna tells an audience that "it is inconceivable that one lawsuit could bring down the entire measure," at the same time he's asking the courts to do exactly that, one can only come to only one of two conclusions: Either McKenna is lying to voters and reporters about the true intensions of his lawsuit, or he's such a crappy lawyer that he truly doesn't understand its consequences.
Neither is a flattering option.
Am I missing something here?
4
8
I voted for Big O, and I will again, but this healthcare law is a stinking piece of shit pie. It might look good on paper, but the reality is something else. Healthcare has become more expensive, insurance has become more expensive, insurance now covers less of the costs of healthcare and there seems to be no indication that this will ever change. The Healthcare Reform Act looks more like The Make Health Insurance Companies Even More Money Act.
It would suck for private insurance companies, but would be great for people.
Ummm...perhaps someone needs to explain to you the basic concept of insurance and risk pooling. Insurance essentially works by having a lot of people pay into a large pot that the company invests, manages, and ultimately disburses to cover the medical costs of those who get sick. Because not everyone paying in will get sick at the same time (or even at all), there's enough money in the pool. In addition, those paying in don't have to pay the "full" cost of medical expenditures -- it's not like an individual savings account. Insurance companies essentially bet (based on sophisticated actuarial data) that the total cost of the expenses across everyone in the pool will be covered by the discounted individual pay-ins.
This is why insurance companies place restrictions on those with "pre-existing conditions" (note: I'm not saying this is morally or ethically right; this is just the dumbed-down economic rationale).
So now think about the ACA without the individual mandate. If you as an individual did not have to buy insurance, but you knew that you would always be able to obtain a policy after you got sick, why the hell would you buy up front? Of course you'd wait until you got sick. Think about it -- if you could buy auto insurance to cover damage the day after you got in an accident, would you carry insurance?
But if no one buys health insurance prior to becoming sick, how could there ever be enough money in the pool? The only people paying premiums would be drawing immediately on those policies. If they're not paying the full value of the benefits, where's the money supposed to come from? (And if they were paying the full cost, what's the freaking point of insurance???)
So the summary answer to your question is: yes, you're missing something because there would be no insurance companies because no one would be stupid enough to set one up.
Does that make sense? I hope so...
Right there with you on single-payer, but it ain't gonna happen the way you think.
11
Not only that, but since The Stranger is a scab outfit, you're missing union benefits. Why haven't you organized the workers at The Stranger into a union so they can negotiate better wages, hours and conditions?
Being known as Goldy the scab isn't a legacy you would like to leave.
I mean, only a right-wing propaganda whore could argue that it's perfectly okay for McKenna to argue one thing in court and another to the public.
13
16
At least your arch-enemy, The Seattle Times, has several collective bargaining agreements covering journalists and production and delivery workers. How many CBAs does The Stranger have with its workforce?
Tell me again what the most recent state-wide polling between Jay Inslee and Rob McKenna indicates about the 2012 race for governor?
And before you criticize lawyers, how they argue cases and how they prepare appellate briefs and arguments, you might try going to law school. It's not just parsing words - there is something to it.
20
22
You could encourage Stranger workers to sign authorization cards. Get enough of them to sign and you can demand card-check recogniztion from the boss. Go into his office and demand recognition or tell him there will be a long and costly strike.
If you establish a picket line, then Stranger workers would be forced to join the cause - they wouldn't dare be seen scabbing a union picket line to go to work.
If The Stranger isn't willing to go union, then it really doesn't believe in its high-sounding progressive ideals and verbiage. Time to man up, Stranger, and do the progressive thing for your workers.
Longview longshoremen are storming the Port of Longview, slashing railcar brakelines, vandalizing grain intended for shipment to hungry people across the world and terrorizing personnel at the port all in the name of progressive values. Why are Seattle progressives too chicken to do the same?
On the plus side, this comment thread alone has more views than the entire Evergreen Freedom Foundation site for which he use to write. So that's something.
24
Why do progressives continue to endorse the exploitation of the workers? Why not stick it to the man and demand The Stranger go union just as you do every other scab outfit in Seattle. No self-respecting progressive would ever patronize a non-union bar or tavern, restaurant, retail outlet, service or any other business.
Union label or leave town! Who among you disagrees with that?
26
But the union longshoremen of the ILWU are holding fast despite getting thumped with a $250,000 fine from a U.S. District Court judge for violating his orders about unlawful picketing and violence. http://www.komonews.com/news/local/13086…
Somebody has some balls...even though they're getting sliced off.
28
It's still a scab paper, and those who read it and support it are scabs, including the non-union workers who refuse to do the right thing and organize.
You might also ask the Everdum Freegreen people why they have all blog posts (like this one: http://www.myfreedomfoundation.com/index…) associated with the byline 'Scott "The Piper" St. Clair'.
There must be an imposter out there - omigosh!
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (29) RSS