McKenna’s health care challenge only addresses constitutionality of reform bill

Letter writer Michael Barr (April 16 edition) dismisses Attorney General Rob McKenna’s challenge of a specific provision of the health care reform bill as just a political ploy by Republicans to “thwart the will of the people.” Will of the people? When poll after poll shows opposition to this bill consistently near 60 percent nationally and well over 50 percent in Washington state? Mr. Barr is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own set of facts.

April 21, 2010 2:22 pm

Letter writer Michael Barr (April 16 edition) dismisses Attorney General Rob McKenna’s challenge of a specific provision of the health care reform bill as just a political ploy by Republicans to “thwart the will of the people.”

Will of the people? When poll after poll shows opposition to this bill consistently near 60 percent nationally and well over 50 percent in Washington state? Mr. Barr is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own set of facts.

Widespread objection is understandable and crosses party lines. It reflects disgust at the way the bill was crafted and rushed to passge by a Congress who knew little of its content and the public even less.

Attorney General McKenna’s objection is ONLY with the portion of the bill that requires Washingtonians to puchase insurance from a private company, a clear violation of the Commerce Clause and the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (once taught in schools). It does NOT repeal or overturn the bill itself. McKenna has joined 19 other attorney generals in this lawsuit.

This emphasizes their common concern while minimizing legal expenses. Mr. Barr states that a challenge by more than one state is “frivolous” and “nonsense,” calling it unnecessary. Does he feel the same way about former Attorney General Christine Gregoire’s participation in the multi-state tobacco lawsuit several years ago?

Rob McKenna has served Washingtonians well in defending their interests no matter their political stripes, while also enforcing existing statutes and regulations. You need look no further than his two most recent actions.

Last week McKenna sued the Obama administration for inexplicably abandoning the Nevada Yucca Mountain site as the preferred depository for nuclear waste, offering no alternative after decades of study and $10 billion in costs. Washingtonians would be stuck with Hanford’s waste for who knows how long.

This week McKenna appears before the United States Supreme Court and pleads that they OVERTURN a lower court decision that gay rights groups cannot have access to names of those who signed the Referendum 71 “anti-gay rights” petition. He will be defending Washington’s public disclosure laws. This won’t endear him to elements in the Republican party. Go figure.

Roger Trepanier, Redmond