The GOP’s Gimmicks-R-Us AHCCCS cuts challenged in lawsuit

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I told you this was about to happen last week. The GOP's Gimmicks-R-Us "Balanced" State Budget About To Be Blown Up.

Three public-interest law groups argue in a special action lawsuit filed with the Arizona Supreme Court on Monday that Governor Brewer and lawmakers have no legal right to freeze enrollment or terminate coverage for adults who earn less than the federal poverty level, a group that voters in 2000 agreed should have health insurance in Proposition 204. Arizona Supreme Court urged to reject cutbacks in Medicaid:

The Arizona Supreme Court should stop Gov. Jan Brewer's plan to eliminate health coverage for thousands of low-income Arizonans because it violates the will of voters and the state Constitution[.]

* * *

"If they want to actually reduce eligibility or terminate coverage for these folks, they have to ask the voters," said attorney Tim Hogan of the Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, a non-profit public-interest law firm. [In addition to Hogan and the Center for Law, they're represented by the Arizona Center for Disability Law and the William E. Morris Institute for Justice.]

* * *

The governor wants to freeze enrollment for childless adults and parents earning above 75 percent of the federal poverty level, effective July 1. AHCCCS has estimated that about 140,000 people would lose coverage in the first year. There are roughly 250,000 people covered under Proposition 204, including about 5,200 people with serious mental illness.

Prop. 204 provided free medical care to every Arizonan earning at or below the federal poverty level, which is now $10,890.

Hogan argues that Brewer's proposal effectively repeals Prop. 204 in violation of the state Constitution, which voters amended in 1998 [Proposition 105, the Voter Protection Act] to forbid lawmakers from tinkering with ballot measures.

* * *

[This] is precisely the type of abuse that led to the enactment of the Voter Protection Act," Hogan wrote.

As I predicted last week, the GOP leadership is already trying to cast blame on Tim Hogan and AHCCCS patients for blowing up their GOP Gimmicks-R-Us "balanced" state budget. Newly minted House Speaker Andy Tobin (R-Paulden) said "the lawsuit only worsens the state's budget problems by adding legal fees." [As opposed to the numerous unlawful and unconstitutional acts the legislature approved to force legal challenges in court?]

"(Hogan) doesn't like the way we distributed the money. So, please tell me where you want me to take it from," Tobin said. "Will you be taking it from K-12, universities or corrections?"

The speaker said even if the courts agree with Hogan, he can't force lawmakers to rewrite the budget or raise taxes.

"We're not coming into (special) session because of Tim Hogan's lawsuit," he said.

Unfortunately, the speaker is right. The Arizona Supreme Court can find that the Arizona legislature has violated the Arizona Constitution, but under the separation of powers doctrine and comity, the court cannot force the legislature to enact a particular policy or budget appropriation.

The rule of law depends upon the willingness of people to obey the orders of the court and to comply in good faith. The speaker just made it clear that the Tea-Publican legislature, which willfully disregarded the Arizona Constitution in the first place, will not comply with an order of the court finding that the legislature violated the Arizona Constitution. He is saying that the Tea-Publican legislature will not act in good faith to remedy their unconstitutional act. The legislature will simply say to the court "you can't make me! Phttt!"

Arizona has a lawless legislature, and the only effective remedy is for voters to kick these lawless individuals out of office and to elect people who respect the rule of law.

Governor Brewer acknowledged it was unconstitutional when she "first proposed ending coverage for childless adults to help balance the budget in her 2010 State of the State address, but [conceded] it would have to go to voters for their approval. She changed her mind this year, proposing in January to eliminate coverage for about 280,000 Arizonans and then releasing a new plan in March to freeze enrollment and make other changes." Brewer essentially decided, "screw the law, I am doing it anyway."

The Arizona Supreme Court has set a September 20 hearing date for the case, without oral argument. The state's response is due June 13 and the plaintiffs' reply by June 27.