PICTURES IN THE PLASTER
By Bruce Wales
The images that live upon my ceiling
The patterns that reside upon my floor
Have a living staying still so I might know them till
I figure out their meaning and much more.
I catch them with the snapshot of my eyelids,
I turn away and back to find some more.
Oh, the images that park when my ceiling’s almost dark
And the patterns that reside upon my floor.
There’s a monkey with one arm and crooky tail
And a girl with eyes so big I simply stare
And a portion of a whale, and a shovel, and a pail.
And a cloud of German lettering floating there.
When the lamp is off and sunlight fills the window
Or the daylight fills each floor in every room
Disappearing monkey, man, and the girl in his hand
They’re replaced, as if by swishing of a broom.
I’ve seen barbells, lots of noodles,
Half tanks and partial poodles,
A bicycle that has a funny wheel.
But, the strangest apparition
Was a clown in an umbrella
Juggling white mice while he balanced on a seal!
A bald man smokes a cig’rette grabs his hiney
And a rocket moving like it’s on the go
A train of cars so shiney, I count them, “eenie, minie”
There’s another three, “meeny, minie, moe!”
The pictures in the plaster
The figures in the tile
May come and go while life unrolls
But always make me smile.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Shunned Shields takes a sharp shot to the shin
By Jim Keyworth
Gazette Editor
Here’s a fun little story that will brighten your day. As most of you know, the Payson Roundup has an online forum that allows registered users to post comments on local issues.
From time to time over the years, people are kicked off that forum (and usually let back on after doing penance) for reasons that seem kind of stupid to us. In fact, some of them seem to negate the whole purpose of such a forum – to encourage an honest and open dialog on the issues.
Anyway, the latest booting took place this week when longtime Rim Country resident Dean Shields got jackbooted in the shin.
Because her Internet was down, she went to the Roundup’s office to “thank” Publisher John Naughton. Here’s how Shields reported in an e-mail that it went when Naughton came out to the lobby:
“OMG I wish you could have seen his face!! Talk about ugly and mean:)”
She further explained why she was kicked off the forum:
“I was banned because I said (Payson Mayor) KennyWho (Evans) is a liar and pointed out several of his lies. It (ticked) Rex Hinshaw off and he said I should be banned; maybe that had something to do with it?”
Here, for the record, is the infamous post that got Shields the boot:
“Yes, I read it Dan. His first story about losing his hand was different, like Pat said. He was hit by lightning. His two stories about losing his son are totally different also. But the biggest lie was the one he told when he was campaigning to be mayor. He said it was all his idea; no one asked him to do it; no one was behind it. But he screwed up big time when his web page had a calendar showing all the people that had scheduled fund raisers for him. Plus the e-mail I received from one of his fans telling me how someone in the Police Department and Evans were going to decide which one would take on Bob Edwards.
“The link you posted? Another attempt at gaining votes when he campaigns for a higher office when his term expires here.”
And here is the responding post from Hinshaw:
“Dean,
In addition to continuosly calling our Mayor a liar you are now insinuating that he is lying about his hand injury and his sons (sic) death. That is low and uncalled for. Those statements have no place on this or any other public discussion forum. I would recommend an apology or your removal from this site.”
To which Shields responded:
“Rex, a liar is a liar, regardless of who it is. The two different stories about those subjects were in this newspaper. You defend him all you want, I still say he is a liar. ( But not that different than most politicians.)
"I have no idea which story is true, but if he tells a story, or a lie, I have the right to point out the discrepancies and dispute it on this, or any other public discussion forum. He is a public figure, an elected official.
“No apology from me, got it??”
And finally, the post wherein Naughton booted Shields, in which he responds to comments in her original post:
“Ms. Shields:
“‘A liar is a liar, regardless of who it is. The two different stories about those subjects were in this newspaper.’
“That statement is incorrect. As reported, He lost his son in a pedestrian/automobile accident, half his hand in an electrical accident.
“Nothing else has ever been reported in the Roundup except those facts.
“‘I have no idea which story is true, but if he tells a story, or a lie, I have the right to point out the discrepancies and dispute it on this, or any other public discussion forum.’
“That statement is also incorrect. You do not have the right to defame anyone regardless the person or the forum. In fact, as it pertains to this website, you explicitly agreed not to.
“Ms. Shields, you have crossed the line. You have left us no choice but to ban your comments from this site.”
So there you have the whole goofy chain of events. But don’t worry about Shields. She’s doing just fine:
“I was giggling all day every time I remembered the look on Naughton's face. :) Still am.
“There is a quote from a movie ("A Few Good Men") that keeps going through my head...‘Truth? You can't handle the truth!!’”
(Remember, you can click on BY THE PEOPLE in the right column to leave a comment about this or any other subject. We only censor the ones that are trying to sell something.)
Gazette Editor
Here’s a fun little story that will brighten your day. As most of you know, the Payson Roundup has an online forum that allows registered users to post comments on local issues.
From time to time over the years, people are kicked off that forum (and usually let back on after doing penance) for reasons that seem kind of stupid to us. In fact, some of them seem to negate the whole purpose of such a forum – to encourage an honest and open dialog on the issues.
Anyway, the latest booting took place this week when longtime Rim Country resident Dean Shields got jackbooted in the shin.
Because her Internet was down, she went to the Roundup’s office to “thank” Publisher John Naughton. Here’s how Shields reported in an e-mail that it went when Naughton came out to the lobby:
“OMG I wish you could have seen his face!! Talk about ugly and mean:)”
She further explained why she was kicked off the forum:
“I was banned because I said (Payson Mayor) KennyWho (Evans) is a liar and pointed out several of his lies. It (ticked) Rex Hinshaw off and he said I should be banned; maybe that had something to do with it?”
Here, for the record, is the infamous post that got Shields the boot:
“Yes, I read it Dan. His first story about losing his hand was different, like Pat said. He was hit by lightning. His two stories about losing his son are totally different also. But the biggest lie was the one he told when he was campaigning to be mayor. He said it was all his idea; no one asked him to do it; no one was behind it. But he screwed up big time when his web page had a calendar showing all the people that had scheduled fund raisers for him. Plus the e-mail I received from one of his fans telling me how someone in the Police Department and Evans were going to decide which one would take on Bob Edwards.
“The link you posted? Another attempt at gaining votes when he campaigns for a higher office when his term expires here.”
And here is the responding post from Hinshaw:
“Dean,
In addition to continuosly calling our Mayor a liar you are now insinuating that he is lying about his hand injury and his sons (sic) death. That is low and uncalled for. Those statements have no place on this or any other public discussion forum. I would recommend an apology or your removal from this site.”
To which Shields responded:
“Rex, a liar is a liar, regardless of who it is. The two different stories about those subjects were in this newspaper. You defend him all you want, I still say he is a liar. ( But not that different than most politicians.)
"I have no idea which story is true, but if he tells a story, or a lie, I have the right to point out the discrepancies and dispute it on this, or any other public discussion forum. He is a public figure, an elected official.
“No apology from me, got it??”
And finally, the post wherein Naughton booted Shields, in which he responds to comments in her original post:
“Ms. Shields:
“‘A liar is a liar, regardless of who it is. The two different stories about those subjects were in this newspaper.’
“That statement is incorrect. As reported, He lost his son in a pedestrian/automobile accident, half his hand in an electrical accident.
“Nothing else has ever been reported in the Roundup except those facts.
“‘I have no idea which story is true, but if he tells a story, or a lie, I have the right to point out the discrepancies and dispute it on this, or any other public discussion forum.’
“That statement is also incorrect. You do not have the right to defame anyone regardless the person or the forum. In fact, as it pertains to this website, you explicitly agreed not to.
“Ms. Shields, you have crossed the line. You have left us no choice but to ban your comments from this site.”
So there you have the whole goofy chain of events. But don’t worry about Shields. She’s doing just fine:
“I was giggling all day every time I remembered the look on Naughton's face. :) Still am.
“There is a quote from a movie ("A Few Good Men") that keeps going through my head...‘Truth? You can't handle the truth!!’”
(Remember, you can click on BY THE PEOPLE in the right column to leave a comment about this or any other subject. We only censor the ones that are trying to sell something.)
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Prop. 302 will raid child funds, lead to more crime
By JENNIFER A. JOHNSON
Cronkite News Service
PHOENIX – Helping at-risk children develop social skills and the ability to learn before they enter school prevents crime in the long run, retired Mesa Police Chief Dennis Donna said Monday.
“We need to invest in the education and development of today’s most at-risk kids, so they don’t become tomorrow’s high-risk offenders,” he said at a news conference opposing a plan to eliminate the voter-approved First Things First program.
Joined by retired Paradise Valley Police Chief John Wintersteen, Donna read a book at Phoenix Day, the oldest continuously operated child development center in Arizona.
Proposition 302 would transfer $325 million from First Things First, which provides early childhood health and development services, to help address the state budget deficit.
The program was approved in 2006 out of concern about a gap in services addressing the needs of children 5 and under. It’s funded from an 80-cent-a-pack tax on cigarettes.
Wintersteen said it’s far better to bolster a child’s educational future than to slam shut a prison door.
“Intervening with at-risk kids and affording them greater educational opportunities will improve public safety in the long run,” he said.
Both retired chiefs said they are skeptical of claims by state officials that money transferred from First Things First will be used to maintain similar programs. Wintersteen said voters’ wishes, made clear in 2006, should be honored.
“They said, ‘This is important … this is something for the long-term health of our state.’”
State Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said in a telephone interview that the state faces a $1.6 billion shortfall and must carefully prioritize the limited funds available for public programs.
“There are need-to-have programs and nice-to-have programs,” Kavanagh said. “It’s all about priorities, and the programs the state is trying to save are far more vital than the nice-to-have First Things First program.”
He said the state has already identified programs it would like to save with the additional funding from the First Things First funding, such as children’s health care programs, vaccinations and hiring additional Child Protective Services investigators to prevent abuse.
Garrick Taylor, a spokesman for the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said First Things First is “laudable” but not a priority in the current budget environment.
“This is a matter of budget prioritization,” Taylor said. “We aren’t passing judgement on the program.”
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Get your beer, ice and terrorists down at Circle K
A suspect in a series of 18 stabbings that left five people dead in three states was arrested recently at an Atlanta airport gate just before he got on a plane bound for the Middle East.
According to CBS News, passengers on the flight the suspect would have been on said “he was tense and talking on his cell phone when he was arrested at the boarding gate shortly before takeoff.”
CBS reported that the attacks began in my home town of Flint, Mich. in May, and continued on an average of one stabbing every four days until the arrest. Besides the ones in Flint, attacks linked to the suspect occurred in Ohio and Virginia.
The suspect worked in a convenience store in Mt. Morris, Mich., a suburb of Flint. His boss was a dude named Abdulla Farrah who, as you might expect, claimed to be surprised by what happened.
"He was a good guy. All of my employees, we never thought nothing about the guy," said Farrah, manager of Kingwater Market.
Of course the pattern is a familiar one. An Arab terrorist slips through all kinds of security checks and almost gets away.
Doesn’t it just figure. Can’t trust a raghead. Ought to just not let them get on planes.
Except this guy isn’t an Arab. In fact he’s a Jew – an Israeli citizen named Elias Abuelazam living in the U.S. with a green card – and the Delta Air Lines flight he was trying to board was bound for Tel Aviv.
What’s more, his motive, as near as authorities can tell, wasn’t grounded in a hatred of Americans or Christians. Nope, it was a good old fashioned all American hatred of blacks. At least that’s what the authorities figure, given that almost all his victims were black.
"I believe his motivation is pure hatred," Leesburg, Va. Police Chief Joseph Price said.
I hope a moral to this story is beginning to emerge. The problem with patterns is that they seldom hold up. We as a country have become masters at stereotyping. And the ultimate act of bigotry is looking under every rock and behind every convenience store cash register for an Arab to blame for everything that happens to us of an unpleasant nature.
The problem is that life is seldom so simple. There are bad Arabs and good Arabs, just as there are bad Jews and good Jews. And, dare I say, bad Americans and good Americans.
And what will the closet racists among us make of the fact that the victims were black. Doesn’t that just turn your world upside down. Because we all know about blacks, don’t we. How their innate lack of moral character makes them really scary dudes. In fact, that’s why so many dogs don’t like black people. They instinctively know they’re not to be trusted.
Which, of course, brings us to Black dude numero uno – President Barack Obama. Have you noticed how the criticisms leveled against him are little more than the same nonsensical stereotypes racists spew about all blacks. He can’t be trusted. His loyalties lie elsewhere. He wants to sneak up and kill your grandma. He’s not real bright so he’s doing some really dumb things (like achieving health care reform, getting the U.S. auto industry back on its feet, and reforming Wall Street). And how not surprising is it that so many Americans are blaming him for a recession that was clearly initiated by the wars and other sordid policies of the Bush administration. And for bailouts that were initiated by the Bush administration.
It was bad enough that this first-ever black president has been bowing down to Arabs and taking all those extra flights on Air Force One. But even worse, he is now starting to cozy up to the “queers.” How else to explain his attempts to do away with “Don’t ask, don’t tell.”
Of course, you yourself are not a bigot. Neither am I. But we need to keep a close eye on our neighbors. And an even closer one on that friend who is always sending out those gang e-mails attacking Obama on every front.
Your e-mailing friend is probably also ranting against the mosque that has been proposed for a location a couple of blocks from the former home of the World Trade Center – now known as Ground Zero.
Despite the premise of religious tolerance that brought his ancestors here in the first place.
Despite the fact that the mosque cannot even be seen from Ground Zero.
Despite the fact that the Islamic leader who wants to open the mosque is a moderate with whom both Republicans and Democrats have been able to work.
It’s insanity. It’s madness. And it’s a tragedy. That the greatest nation in the world is self destructing by ignoring the very principles that made us great.
But I have an idea. It won’t reverse this terrible trend. It won’t really solve anything. But it would be deliciously ironic.
Instead of a mosque, I say let’s turn the site over to a convenience store chain like Circle K. With a manager whose name sounds Islamic.
Before you know it he’ll hire a cast of characters to cashier at the store who run the gamut – from blacks to illegal Mexicans to Gays – and maybe even a knife-wielding Jew.
That will be even scarier to the bigots than a mosque.
As they say on the Circle K TV commercials, “What else do you need?”
Monday, October 25, 2010
WPS endorses Matthews, Mortensen, Claxton
Our recommendations for Pine Strawberry Water Improvement District (PSWID) board in the upcoming Nov. 2 election are:
Mr. Howard Matthews
Mr. Marvin Mortensen
Mr. Mike Claxton
October 21, 2010 PSWID Meeting
Next regular PSWID Meeting: Thursday November 18, 2010 at 7:30 PM at the Pine Cultural Center
Correction
In the last update I said that EMH was one of the companies that had participated in the pre-proposal activities. The correct reference to the company is MWH, which stands for Montgomery Watson Harza.
Board Hires CH2M Hill as Operations Management Company
The board voted unanimously to approve the hiring. Prior to that vote there was a presentation made by Mr. Mike Greer as to the financial feasibility of the contract. No details were provided on the scope of the contract, other than it is for four years and the price will be renegotiated every year. We will make Mr. Greer’s presentation available when we get a copy. Mr. Greer also stated that he would be happy to go through how the financial numbers were arrived at with members of the public.
Comment: I put in a request to Mr. Greer to go through the numbers and will share the results of that.
The board stated that there was no need to hire someone to manage the contract from the district’s side. They will be relying on board members to do that.
Mr. Danny Stevens was introduced as the new operations manager. Mr. Stevens is an employee of CH2M Hill and will be residing in the Pine-Strawberry area.
There was a great deal of concern expressed by the audience about the fate of the current employees with the takeover of operations by CH2M Hill. The board assured the audience that all of the current employees will be hired by CH2M Hill. Mr. Dennis Burrell, the current interim operations manager being provided by CH2M Hill, said that they value the knowledge of the current employees and had every intention of keeping them on. He also stated that they did not have any centralized billing center where work might be shifted to.
Mr. David Davis, PSWID attorney did note that there was no contractual way to enforce this.
Mr. Burrell also said that CH2M Hill has many operations of this size. He said that they have been managing Prescott Valley for 18 years and that they have many other operations contracts where they have been in place for long periods of time. Mr. Tom Weeks said that he spoke to the person managing the Prescott Valley contract and that they are very happy with CH2M Hill.
Comment: From an operations point of view, this is probably the best of the choices that the district currently has. While the current staff is capable, the district seems to be just treading water without any knowledgeable leadership. Hopefully, CH2M Hill will provide the additional expertise and experience needed. Given the board’s track record at estimating costs, it’s likely that this will end up costing much more than they think, but time will tell.
Seasonal Meters
Board voted to convert all seasonal meters to permanent meters
Strawberry Hollow Well (SH3) Status
The purchase is in escrow and there has been bank approval. The bank approval seems to have hinged upon a valuation provided by CH2M Hill.
Milk Ranch Well Status
Mr. Burrell stated that the old pump and motor have been fished out of the well. Seventy-five feet of accumulated sand has been removed and the perforations have been cleaned out.
Mr. Burrell stated that a new pump will be installed next week and a 30 day pump test will be started. At the completion of that pump test an evaluation of the well will be made.
Comment: The well hasn’t run since June and 75 feet of sand accumulated in six months. Seems like quite a lot of sand for that period of time. Mr. Lovetro said at the Sept 18th RCW meeting that there was 150 feet of sand and said that the company that had been hired to originally clean out the well hadn’t gone to the 1050 foot depth that they were supposed to. Seems to be some confusion on the story here.
As of the end of September the total expenditure on repairs, improvements, and evaluation of the Milk Ranch well is $130,186.52.
Misc
There was discussion about replacing a fire hydrant that was removed during Brooke’s ownership of the water system. Mr. Dave Prechtel from the Fire board asked for some cooperation in determining an approach and to perhaps use CH2M Hill’s buying power to get a better cost for the fire hydrant.
There was some discussion of how to deal with several customers who had had disputes with Brooke that led them to not pay bills and have their meters pulled. These disputes (sounded like there were two of them) were about improper installation by Brooke. Since this is a he said/she said type of issue, district will just go ahead and take the word of the owners and rectify the problems without further discussion.
Mr. Ray Pugel spent some time quizzing the district’s attorney about whether there is anything the district could sue Brooke Utilities for. Mr. Pugel seems to think that there is more water loss than was reported to the ACC and that this was fraudulent information. Mr. Davis, suggested that that was a long shot and that less of a long shot would be a class action by the residents of Strawberry to try and recover part of the $900,000 award that Brooke received in a lawsuit some years ago against someone who was illegally taking water from the system to fill a pond. (My knowledge of the details of that is sketchy at best).
Mr. Fred Krafczyk, nominal head of Rim Country Water, got up and complained because Mr. Don Smith had recruited the other candidates, Mr. Matthews and Mr. Mortensen, to run against the Rim Country Water slate of Mr. Greer, Mr. Calderon, and Mr. Claxton.
i. Comment: Mr. Krafczyk implied that there is such a tremendous desire in the community for what the board is doing that they should run unopposed. Nov. 2 should give an indication of what the community is thinking. If they have the mandate of the community that they have been claiming then they have nothing to worry about.
ii. Comment: As a historical note, when I ran for the board in 2008 Mr. Krafczyk stood up in a PSWID meeting and complained that by my running, the RCW candidates were not unopposed in the election. He said that this was all part of a plot between me and Brooke to drain the PSWID treasury of $27,000 for the cost of the election. Gila County Elections was actually estimating $1500 for the cost of the election, and the actual cost was about half of that. It would seem that Mr. Krafczyk is not a fan of elections. He never did apologize for his unfounded accusation.
This update is from the group Water for Pine Strawberry. We will be providing an update after each of the PSWID meetings with a summary of what the board did, additional facts that are relevant to what went on, and some commentary. Emails on earlier meetings are available on our website: www.WaterForPineStrawberry.com .
Water For Pine Strawberry is a group of residents who are concerned about the communities water issues and how they can best be resolved. Visit our web site, www.WaterForPineStrawberry.com, for more information. The website for PSWID is www.pswid.org .
Clarifications can be submitted by anyone who is explicitly named, implicitly identifiable, or a board member to items in this email. Clarifications will be posted on our website. We reserve the right to post a response. Clarifications must deal with the topics discussed in the email that relate to the individual or the board. They must be in family friendly language and be non-abusive. When the clarification is accepted, it will be posted to the website and notice of that posting will be added to the next update.
4 weeks of paving begins today (Oct. 25) on 260
Drivers should be prepared for brief delays as large trucks are directed across the highway.
Information regarding the project is available on the toll-free project hotline at 1-877-521-1118. Weekly construction e-updates are available at prescottdistrictupdates@azdot.gov.
ADOT advises drivers to proceed through the work zone with caution, slow down, and be alert for construction equipment and personnel.
ADOT works to inform the public about planned highway restrictions, but there is a possibility that unscheduled closures or restrictions may occur. Weather can also affect a project schedule. To stay up-to-date with the latest highway conditions around the state, visit the ADOT Traveler Information Center at www.az511.gov or call 5-1-1.
Does Prop. 106 protect rights, or is it useless?
By JENNIFER A. JOHNSON
Cronkite News Service
PHOENIX – Supporters of Proposition 106 say allowing Arizonans to opt out of any federal or state health care mandate would preserve the right of individuals to make their own decisions.
Opponents, however, say the measure could derail the benefits of federal health care reform here if the state can defend it in court. But they say that since a federal plan would trump anything at the state level Proposition 106 would most likely set Arizona up for a costly and unsuccessful legal battle.
The proposition, dubbed the Arizona Health Care Freedom Act, would amend the state constitution to allow Arizonans to opt out of health care mandates.
“It is critically important that we vote to keep patients and families in control of their health care decisions and not politicians, and those protections deserve a place alongside freedom of the press and freedom of speech,” said Eric Novack, a Glendale orthopedic surgeon who serves as chairman of Arizonans for Health Care Freedom, the main group supporting Proposition 106.
The Legislature referred the measure to the ballot in 2009 as Congress was debating health care reform. Supporters anticipated that the federal law would include the government offering a health care plan, or public option, but that was dropped.
As of 2014, the federal plan will require employers to offer health coverage and will require individuals who aren’t otherwise covered to purchase insurance, though there are some exemptions for those with low incomes.
Arizona is among 20 states suing the federal government over the law.
Proposition 106 also would allow individuals to pay directly for any legal health care service without facing penalties or fines.
“If a health care service is legal … no one should ever prevent you from getting access to legal health care services,” Novack said.
Novack’s group had raised $1.9 million through Sept. 13, according to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office. Of that, $1.5 million came from the U.S. Health Freedom Coalition, a national advocacy group of which Novack is chairman.
Two opposition groups had raised less than $4,000 between them.
The measure is similar to a 2008 ballot measure, also pushed by Novack, that failed by a narrow margin. Opponents suggested that that measure would deny low-income Arizonans access to the state’s Medicaid system.
Similar ballot measures are pending in Virginia, Missouri, Idaho, Georgia and a handful of other states.
Proposition 106′s sponsor, Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, said the measure gives voters another opportunity to challenge the individual freedoms she contends are threatened by the national health care law.
“I think we all agree that health care needs reform,” Barto said. “Proposition 106 is a guarantee about who is going to control your health care decisions, and it keeps those decisions in the hands of patients and families.”
The National Federation of Independent Business has also backed Proposition 106, citing concern that the federal plan will place regulatory burdens on small businesses and restrict their ability to choose the kind of plan designs they can afford.
“Health care has been the top issue for the past decade that small businesses have been wrestling with,” said Farrell Quinlan, the group’s Arizona director. “Small businesses want to be able to provide health care to our employees, but we find that mandates make it harder and harder to provide the kind of coverage we want to provide.”
Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, the House minority leader, called the measure “useless” in the face of the federal plan.
“Arizona will end up in costly litigation, and we should be using that money for our schools,” she said.
Sinema said that opponents of the federal health care law should elect members of Congress who will address their concerns, not attempt to change what they can’t control at the state level.
Ellen Owens-Summo, president of the Arizona Public Health Association, said that the proposition would set back many of the preventative health measures that are in the federal law.
“I think we are kind of pulling apart the pieces [of the national health care law] when we need to address the foundation of health care, which is promotion, prevention and workforce development,” she said.
Pete Cerchiara, executive director of an opposition group calling itself Prop 106 Endangers Your Health, said he worries that the proposition would interfere with a law that will help millions of Americans without health insurance.
“When people who aren’t insured can’t pay their bills, we all share in the costs,” he said. “[Proposition 106] is only encouraging more people to be uninsured.”
Key provisions of Proposition 106:
(From Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy)
- Allow individuals and employers to pay providers drectly for health care without penalty or fine.
- Prohibit any rule or law from compelling individual participation in any particular health care system.
- Allow direct payment to a health care provider for any lawful service.
- Provide for purchase and sale of health insurance in private health care systems without prohibition by rule or law.
Cronkite News Service
PHOENIX – Supporters of Proposition 106 say allowing Arizonans to opt out of any federal or state health care mandate would preserve the right of individuals to make their own decisions.
Opponents, however, say the measure could derail the benefits of federal health care reform here if the state can defend it in court. But they say that since a federal plan would trump anything at the state level Proposition 106 would most likely set Arizona up for a costly and unsuccessful legal battle.
The proposition, dubbed the Arizona Health Care Freedom Act, would amend the state constitution to allow Arizonans to opt out of health care mandates.
“It is critically important that we vote to keep patients and families in control of their health care decisions and not politicians, and those protections deserve a place alongside freedom of the press and freedom of speech,” said Eric Novack, a Glendale orthopedic surgeon who serves as chairman of Arizonans for Health Care Freedom, the main group supporting Proposition 106.
The Legislature referred the measure to the ballot in 2009 as Congress was debating health care reform. Supporters anticipated that the federal law would include the government offering a health care plan, or public option, but that was dropped.
As of 2014, the federal plan will require employers to offer health coverage and will require individuals who aren’t otherwise covered to purchase insurance, though there are some exemptions for those with low incomes.
Arizona is among 20 states suing the federal government over the law.
Proposition 106 also would allow individuals to pay directly for any legal health care service without facing penalties or fines.
“If a health care service is legal … no one should ever prevent you from getting access to legal health care services,” Novack said.
Novack’s group had raised $1.9 million through Sept. 13, according to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office. Of that, $1.5 million came from the U.S. Health Freedom Coalition, a national advocacy group of which Novack is chairman.
Two opposition groups had raised less than $4,000 between them.
The measure is similar to a 2008 ballot measure, also pushed by Novack, that failed by a narrow margin. Opponents suggested that that measure would deny low-income Arizonans access to the state’s Medicaid system.
Similar ballot measures are pending in Virginia, Missouri, Idaho, Georgia and a handful of other states.
Proposition 106′s sponsor, Rep. Nancy Barto, R-Phoenix, said the measure gives voters another opportunity to challenge the individual freedoms she contends are threatened by the national health care law.
“I think we all agree that health care needs reform,” Barto said. “Proposition 106 is a guarantee about who is going to control your health care decisions, and it keeps those decisions in the hands of patients and families.”
The National Federation of Independent Business has also backed Proposition 106, citing concern that the federal plan will place regulatory burdens on small businesses and restrict their ability to choose the kind of plan designs they can afford.
“Health care has been the top issue for the past decade that small businesses have been wrestling with,” said Farrell Quinlan, the group’s Arizona director. “Small businesses want to be able to provide health care to our employees, but we find that mandates make it harder and harder to provide the kind of coverage we want to provide.”
Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix, the House minority leader, called the measure “useless” in the face of the federal plan.
“Arizona will end up in costly litigation, and we should be using that money for our schools,” she said.
Sinema said that opponents of the federal health care law should elect members of Congress who will address their concerns, not attempt to change what they can’t control at the state level.
Ellen Owens-Summo, president of the Arizona Public Health Association, said that the proposition would set back many of the preventative health measures that are in the federal law.
“I think we are kind of pulling apart the pieces [of the national health care law] when we need to address the foundation of health care, which is promotion, prevention and workforce development,” she said.
Pete Cerchiara, executive director of an opposition group calling itself Prop 106 Endangers Your Health, said he worries that the proposition would interfere with a law that will help millions of Americans without health insurance.
“When people who aren’t insured can’t pay their bills, we all share in the costs,” he said. “[Proposition 106] is only encouraging more people to be uninsured.”
Key provisions of Proposition 106:
(From Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy)
- Allow individuals and employers to pay providers drectly for health care without penalty or fine.
- Prohibit any rule or law from compelling individual participation in any particular health care system.
- Allow direct payment to a health care provider for any lawful service.
- Provide for purchase and sale of health insurance in private health care systems without prohibition by rule or law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
