The Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee passed the Health Care Freedom Amendment today on a voice vote and is now on its way to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislation would allow Kansans to make their own choices regarding the type of health care they would like to receive and ensures that Kansas residents are not forced to comply with mandates that could be passed down by the federal government, such as the requirement for every person to purchase health insurance.

Usually a proposed measure is only sent to one committee, but in this case, because it would be a state constitutional amendment, the measure was referred to two committees in the Senate.  In the House, the measure was referred to one committee — the House Health and Human Services Commitee.

The next step will likely be final action and a vote taken by the House health committee, chaired by Rep. Brenda Landwehr, a sponsor of the concurrent resolution.  Rep. Peggy Mast, another sponsor, also serves on the committee.

The legislation has gained widespread support from conservative Republicans in both the House and Senate, as well as several grassroots organizations.

A Rasmussen report released Monday demonstrated that 59 percent of voters support states having the ability to opt out of federal programs that the state opposes. One-fourth of respondents disagreed, and 15 percent of respondents indicated they were unsure of which position they would support.

Sixty-three percent of respondents indicated they would support the ability of states to opt out of federal programs that pass down unfunded mandates.

The poll also questioned residents specifically on what opt-out rights states should have when it comes to national health care reform. Nearly half, or 47 percent, of respondents said that states should have the ability to opt out of any federal health care reform while 40 percent disagreed, arguing that individual states should not have the opt-out option.

The Health Care Freedom Amendment does not seek an “opt-out” plan for the state, but rather encourages freedom through the preservation of state sovereignty. The difference between the two initiatives may appear to be minor, but the significance becomes obvious when considering the avenue in which the state would maintain individual freedoms.

—Holly Smith

Resources:

Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 1626 (Senate House Health Care Freedom Amendment)

House Concurrent Resolution No. 5032 (House House Health Care Freedom Amendment)

Senate Judiciary Committee

House Health & Human Services Committee

Health care freedom supporters testify for joint health committee

Rasmussen report

Because the Health Care Freedom Amendment would be a state constitutional amendment, it would need to pass each House by two-thirds vote.  It would then go directly to the 2010 ballot for the vote of the people.  It would not need the signature of the governor.