S.C. Senator Mick Mulvaney isn’t waiting to get to Washington D.C. to start his fight against President Barack Obama’s socialized medicine plan. Nor is he wasting any time in ramping up his campaign against fourteen-term incumbent U.S. Rep. John Spratt.
Along with Lowcountry Sen. Mike Rose and several other GOP lawmakers, Mulvaney has added an amendment to an otherwise symbolic piece of legislation that would effectively block the implementation of “Obamacare” in South Carolina.
Here’s a look at the operative text of the amendment, which claims South Carolina’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as it relates to the socialized medicine plan that’s currently being negotiated behind closed doors by Democratic leaders in Washington:
… it is the policy of the State of South Carolina that:
No law shall interfere with the right of a person to be treated by or receive services from a health care provider of that person’s choice;
No law shall restrict a person’s freedom of choice of private health care systems or private health care plans of any type;
No law shall interfere with a person’s or an entity’s right to pay directly for lawful medical services; and
No law shall impose a tax, penalty, or fine, of any type, for choosing a health care provider, to obtain or decline health care coverage or for participation in any particular health care system or plan.
Be it further resolved that it is the policy of the State of South Carolina that the Attorney General will challenge the constitutionality of any provision enacted by the United States Congress that would violate any of the policies established by this resolution and join with other states that are like-minded to make such a challenge.
In addition to Mulvaney and Rose – who drafted and proposed the amendment – longtime fiscally conservative lawmakers who are supporting it include Senators Lee Bright, Kevin Bryant, Tom Davis, Phil Shoopman, Larry Grooms, Danny Verdin, Shane Massey and Greg Ryberg.
Fiscally liberal lawmakers who are supporting the amendment include Senators Glenn McConnell, Thomas Alexander, Paul Campbell, Ray Cleary, John Courson, Ronnie Cromer, Mike Fair, Wes Hayes, Jake Knotts, Larry Martin, Shane Martin, Billy O’Dell, Harvey Peeler, Luke Rankin and David Thomas.
Obviously the resolution benefits Mulvaney, in particular, as he wages an aggressive campaign to unseat Spratt – who voted in favor of Obama’s socialized medicine proposal last November.
Recent polls have shown Spratt – who appeared dazed and confused at several town hall meetings in his district last year (here and here) – vulnerable not only on the health care issue, but also over his support for a “cap and trade” energy tax and numerous government bailouts.
WEB EXTRA:
By Someone In Spartanburg January 13, 2010 at 3:15 pm
Just out of curiosity, I know of one vote that Sen. Shane Martin made that was questionable. Is your status of “Fiscally Liberal” based off of that one vote or mutliple? Could you provide instances?
By me January 13, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Will this be the 1830′s Nullification crisis all over again? I hope so, time to be free
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullification_Crisis
By votar January 13, 2010 at 3:58 pm
The the words of William Wallace….FREEEEEEEDOM!
I hope this sends a message to the corrupt, power-hungry statists in D.C.
By Weighing In January 13, 2010 at 4:18 pm
they are wasting time debating this. they serve in the SC Senate, not the US Senate. Their dealings impact the SC Constitution, not the US Constitution, SC law, not Federal law. It will have ZERO IMPACT and be unenforceable. Stop wasting our time and money you so called “fiscally conservative Senators”
By Lynnsie Gayham January 13, 2010 at 5:13 pm
The fella in the pink shirt and bow tie is cute.
By General Washington January 13, 2010 at 5:16 pm
Censure goes to committee, these guys spend their time on something completely outside their jurisdiction (fed health policy). However, I beleive there are a number of existing State laws this would impact. If I was a realtor, I would be FUMING that this is wasting so much time. To quote Sen Leventis on the floor “this is the Jerry Seinfeld of resolutions”. Then again, “not there is anything wrong with that” is the motto of the majority party in SC, so maybe Lev. is right?
You can tell it is not an election year in the Senate.
By votar January 13, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Weighing In–
I respectfully disagree. I believe the 10th Amendment may reassert itself here. The Constitution doesn’t mention the “right” to an apothecary or physician. The Federal Gov’t doesn’t have the right to force health care on Americans, despite what the statists in DC would have you believe.
By Yeah Right January 13, 2010 at 7:54 pm
How exactly does Shane Massey fall under “long time”?
By CaptMiller January 13, 2010 at 9:19 pm
Gen. Washington, I’m a licensed RE Agent and I was at the capital today. However, I’m far more concerned with my kids future access to quality health care- we’ll deal with taxation soon enough. I wish Sen. Leventis- SC’s own George Costanza- would for one minute weigh the consequences of what he and his party are so hell bent on forcing on us all.
By Bobby January 13, 2010 at 9:27 pm
Call it far-left or ultra-liberal. It’s not Socialism. You really only have to go look at a dictionary or a political science textbook to know that. That’s not a critique of your politics, it’s a critique of your knowledge about international political systems. Single-payer would be Socialist, and maybe a public option would be somewhat Socialist; this plan is not at all Socialist and you’re wrong.
By What a reaction January 13, 2010 at 10:36 pm
The health care proposal is a bad policy, probably won’t pass.
As bad as it is, it doesn’t give a punk like Mulvaney the right to use the state Senate to wage his political campaign, nor does it give any other sponsor legs to stand on that.
This thing has no legs or teeth.
By MOHANNA January 14, 2010 at 12:18 am
What a bunch of Hooey. The only thing this piece of legislation does is to State any SC Citizen can pay as much as they want to the Uncontrollable Health Care Industry. Does anyone who will get affordable Health Care worry about a bunch of Yahoo’s paying premium price for second rate care.
By T4 January 14, 2010 at 2:12 am
You gotta love the “feel-good resolutions” and censures by SC lawmakers: it’s tradition. The merits of this censure are totally bogus, notwithstanding the fact they’re contesting an incomplete bill. The citizens of SC deserve more than wasted time and cynical speculation.
Mulvaney’s career in Washington will be over before he sets foot in the Longworth building, much like Demint’s health proposal.
Votar: The only message that Washington will hear, is that we’ve not yet gotten past the Civil War.
By icterus January 14, 2010 at 7:05 am
T4-I suspect the statists in DC need to be reminded that the Constitution does not specifically enumerate universal health care as a national “right.”
States Rights is incredibly relevant in the health care debate, and I hope this resolution passes and I look forward to the case of South Carolina vs. Obama going to the Supreme Court.
By Jonathan January 14, 2010 at 7:15 am
I guess someone missed that whole thing about federalism and dual sovereignty…
By Dr Manhattan January 14, 2010 at 7:42 am
FIOA needs to be done to see how much the tax payers paid for his so called state lawyers!!
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The ongoing ethics probe of Gov. Mark Sanford has cost his campaign at least $185,347.
Sanford’s campaign finance report filed on Wednesday shows three payments to Columbia law firm Hall & Bowers Llc.
The legal payments exclude costs of state-paid lawyers hired to defend Sanford’s office during the House’s impeachment hearings last month. The impeachment effort failed but the House passed a formal rebuke of Sanford on Wednesday by a 102-11 vote.
Sanford’s campaign finance report also show he continues to spend heavily with his campaign adviser. The fourth-quarter financial report shows Red Sea Llc of Bethesda, Md., was paid $66,100 in October.
Sanford spent a total of $259,052 during the quarter and has $1.4 million remaining in his campaign account.
By Wait a second January 14, 2010 at 8:14 am
It seems that given the language of the tenth amendment, this is EXACTLY what needs to be done. The states clearly have standing to assert their rights under the 10th. In fact, one us left to wonder what else they can fo, short of suing.
Which may be next.
By OhNoNotAgain January 14, 2010 at 11:02 am
“I guess someone missed that whole thing about federalism and dual sovereignty…”
Is the word “federal” in the Constitution? Umm. Let’s check. No.
I don’t believe Sovereign is in any form as well. Let’s check. No again.
Sovereignity WAS in the Articles of Confederation. The Articles said state’s retain their sovereignity.
I guess someone missed that whole thing about the problems that brought about the Constitutional Congress, that being the unlimited sovereignity of each state causing a world of problems. The paper money of Connecticut not being good in South Carolina. South Carolina having its own army and navy, potentially. Trades and tariffs between states. Etc.
Stuff like that.
By votar January 14, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Not again-
There’s quite a lot of difference between using dollars across state lines for the purpose of commerce AND forcing all Americans to pay for health insurance which covers abortion.
By cfd007 January 14, 2010 at 1:22 pm
This needs to be passed. 38 other states have introduced resolutions on sovereignty. 3 states have already passed such a resolution. The Federal government was created by the states, not the other way around.
By T4 January 14, 2010 at 6:20 pm
You guys are missing my point. If state governments are to contest the health insurance bill, they need something solid. Vague constitutional interpretations of the Constitution, lack standing in court.
This is a tax issue, which is an undeniable prerogative of the U.S. Federal Government. Nonetheless, if states wish to go forward with a legal question, it should be one of commerce and/or tax.
By The Man January 14, 2010 at 8:53 pm
I smell Another BallyWhoo!: Mike Roose… Toom Davis… Phil Shoopman… Larry Grooms… Glenn McCoonell… Ray Cooeary… John Coorsun… Ronnie Crooner… Jake Knoots… Billy OoDell, Harvey Peeler… David Thoomas
Pingback: Sc senators | Profcharles