March 23, 2010
Representing the people against the powerful

Attorney General Rob McKenna announced yesterday he would join other state attorneys general in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the ObamaCare mandates.

Awesome!

But former Attorney General Christine Gregoire is attacking McKenna for trying to protect Washington consumers from being forced to pay outrageous prices for unwanted "insurance":

"I don't know who he represents. He doesn't represent me," Gregoire said.
Whether he represents her or not, he seems to represent more voters:
YearGregoire VoteMcKenna Vote
20041,373,3611,425,368
20081,598,7381,689,764

Per SurveyUSA, Gregoire's approval rating is now 31%, and our two Senators are at 42% (Murray) and 38% (Cantwell). President Obamacare himself is at 46%. All of their numbers are below where they were last month. I find no recent published job approval polls for AG McKenna. But one thing's for certain: Mrs. Gregoire and her healthcare-wrecking colleagues represent but a minority. A rapidly dwindling minority.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 23, 2010 08:07 AM | Email This
Comments
1. He represents me, much better than Gregoire does as a governor!

Posted by: Pete on March 23, 2010 08:14 AM
2. I hate to point out the obvious, but Gregoire is a "D" and must follow he party line and McKenna is an "R" and must do the same.
Now having said that the real crime is that the health care vote last weekend does not represent the sentiment of the the people regardless of affliction.
I would like to believe the conservative "D's" will swing to the right in November, however by then they will have been re-trained to forget what happened this past weekend.

Posted by: yo yo its meo on March 23, 2010 08:20 AM
3. If anyone ever wonders why AG is a separately elected position, look no further than this.

Posted by: Palouse on March 23, 2010 08:21 AM
4. Apparently CBS's 'legal expert', Jonathan Turley has opined that the 'legal challenge will fail'. I heard similar from a UW legal professor on KIRO this a.m.
This could come back to bit McKenna...big time; as I feel he was pretty well poised for bigger and better things. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 23, 2010 08:26 AM
5. You're totally right, Duffman. A good leader should only care about being re-elected, not doing the right thing.

Posted by: Mark Griswold on March 23, 2010 08:31 AM
6. Our POTUS just delivered on a promise. This is an historic monumental moment in American history.
[He is just a bit late in earning that Nobel prize]; the toothpaste is finally out of the tube and all efforts to put back in will be to no avail. Lo siento mucho to all who feel betrayed by this. Let's -move on! :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 23, 2010 08:33 AM
7. Definition of an expert:
a "former drip under pressure".

Some might think this is a career ender, if so there are numerous states following suit that will also be in the same boat.

Florida's Republican attorney general Bill McCollum announced Monday he and nine other states would file a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the new health care reform bill once Obama signs it into law. He said he'll be joined by his counterparts in Republican Alabama, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington. But McCollum said the lawsuit would be about the law and not politics.

Well not sure about the last statement.

Posted by: yo yo its meo on March 23, 2010 08:41 AM
8. Duffman, unlike the governor, I've never been a big fan of the "when rape is inevitable" position that you and our governor share.

You see, if McKenna is wrong, he's wrong. But if he's right, then the governor you so rabidly support would cheerfully have us live under the tenets of an unconstitutional law.

Someone looks to be "bit," but it won't be McKenna. Instead, it will be the slavish, party line socialist types who would bury us in trillions of dollars of debt, weaken that dollar to the point of a value equal to confetti, while forcing generations to pay for all of this.

And while it's true that the empty suited, anti-American racist bigot occupying the White House "delivered on a promise," although I missed the part where the government's theft of student loans was on that agenda, you're certainly right about one thing:

Any time this lying scumbag actually keeps his word, given the dozens of lies masquerading as "promises," it IS "monumental.

Posted by: Hinton on March 23, 2010 08:49 AM
9. Rob McKenna is a hero and a breath of fresh air in the putrified stench of Washington State politics.

So go to hell Queenie, and take your filthy leftist media with you.

Posted by: Saltherring on March 23, 2010 08:50 AM
10. Just one more example of how totally "lost" Gregoire is. The AG represents the law, nobody else, not the governor, not the constituency, no one. He is to represent state law and uphold, protect it. That's what he is doing. Performing his job does not depend on partisanship, politics. It depends on how well he protects our state constitution.

Posted by: katomar on March 23, 2010 08:51 AM
11. Duffman: Sorry, but I would trust the legal knowledge and expertise of 12 Attorneys General over that of a CBS "legal expert" and a UW prof.

Posted by: katomar on March 23, 2010 08:55 AM
12. Well said Stefan!! I found out on Fox news that Rob Mckenna was joining this lawsuit and emailed him to thank him this is not the 1st. time he has represented those who put him in office.Shame on Chrissy and her cronnies time to pink slip them!!This seems to be par for the course.

Posted by: Laurie on March 23, 2010 08:55 AM
13. 'Duffman, unlike the governor, I've never been a big fan of the "when rape is inevitable" position that you and our governor share.'

...then the governor you so rabidly support...

#8:
Interesting how you so easily draw conclusions and make judgements by simply s-t-r-e-t-c-h-i-n-g comments to fit your agenda. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 23, 2010 09:01 AM
14. Rasmussen shows here that (D) Ellsworth in Indiana isn't polling well at all against all three Republican challengers. He supported Obamacare.

Rasmussen also shows here that 49% approve of McKenna and other states suing to stop Obamacare.

It's true that people were frustrated by healthcare costs. But 75% of us wanted tort reform, a broader free market pool, and innovative risk pools to deal with preexisting conditions, etc. We didn't want a massive new hit to the deficit, that won't even give us healthcare for years, and an unconstitutional mandate that forces everyone to buy healthcare.

And another thing shown in the polls is that 70% of likely voters consider themselves angry at the policies of the federal government. Including 50% of Democrats.

Good luck in November Dems.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 23, 2010 09:07 AM
15. Rob McKenna is performing a late-term abortion on his Washington state political career.

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on March 23, 2010 09:08 AM
16. Or a late term abortion of Obamacare. Either way, Dems should a least be gleeful for the late term abortion. We'll see what the SCOTUS decides.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 23, 2010 09:10 AM
17. Also, lefties here yesterday were defending Obamacare on the grounds that it applies to Congress members. Well, Nancy Pelosi was right, now that the bill has passed we do get to find out what is in the sausage. Yep, Congress exempted themselves.

Rulers, not Representatives.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 23, 2010 09:17 AM
18. Three loud cheers for AG Rob McKenna.

Regardless of the obvious partisan spin the Gov and other (D) WA office holders are desperately trying to sell, our AG is right on the mark; in his statement that Stefan linked to in thread start. I urge all of U 2 follow that link and read the entire statement (it's short).

This really is a fundamental Constitutional issue:
Will citizens of this Republic continue to be able to make important personal decisions on their own, retaining the rights and responsibilities pertaining to same; or:
Can the Feds FORCE citizens to accept the dictatorship of ''big brother knows best'' government, in all things great and small ??

As I noted in a post on prior thread:
If this blatent infringement on Constitutional freedoms is not overturned, where does it end ??
Orwellian answer:
Very badly.
To the political barricades, sez me.

And here's hoping SCOTUS does the right thing at this critical juncture....

Posted by: Methow Ken on March 23, 2010 09:37 AM
19. I think it is time to list the addresses online of Democrat congressmen like Smith, Baird, Dicks, etc. who voted for this monstrosity and give them a visit. They are doing it in VA, and the personal touch is making a difference.

Posted by: Van Ronk on March 23, 2010 09:45 AM
20. Is this true?

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2010/03/23/transgendered-washington-state-attorney-general-rob-mckenna-betrays-his-community

Are you guys OK with that?

Posted by: Joe Szilagyi on March 23, 2010 09:46 AM
21. Rob McKenna is defending the Constitution, as he swore to do. Governor Gregoire swore the same, as political street theater, but acts to defend the left wing of the Democrat Party against the Constitution.

Many thanks to AG McKenna for keeping that oath.

And the sooner our mendacious and profligate Governor disappears from politics, the better.

Posted by: Insufficiently Sensitive on March 23, 2010 09:47 AM
22. McKenna's will go through the roof.

They did in this household.

Gregoire's approval ratings are on a fact finding mission to China. I believe they are passing through the earth's core at this very hour.

Posted by: Andy on March 23, 2010 09:58 AM
23. 1. Many legal pundits claimed that the SCOTUS would never intervene in the dispute over recounting votes in Florida presidential election. Then came Gore v Bush. The health care individual mandate is a matter of first impression. Also, there is parallel SCOTUS authority limiting the scope of the commerce clause to protect states from unfunded mandates imposed by Congress without the consent of the states.

2. As I recall, Gregoire road the tobacco lawsuit horse into the governor's mansion. She must consider McKenna's anti- healthcare suit to pose a danger to her reelection ambition.

Posted by: Paddy on March 23, 2010 10:05 AM
24. 1. Many legal pundits claimed that the SCOTUS would never intervene in the dispute over recounting votes in Florida presidential election. Then came Gore v Bush. The health care individual mandate is a matter of first impression. Also, there is parallel SCOTUS authority limiting the scope of the commerce clause to protect states from unfunded mandates imposed by Congress without the consent of the states.

2. As I recall, Gregoire road the tobacco lawsuit horse into the governor's mansion. She must consider McKenna's anti- healthcare suit to pose a danger to her reelection ambition.

Posted by: Paddy on March 23, 2010 10:05 AM
25. I view McKenna's actions as "damned if you do" and "damned if you don't". McKenna has political plans and goals, the least of which is to win reelection next time around. There is some talk he may also follow CG's path from AG to governor. Either way, in order to win, he needs to firm up his base. If he didn't pursue the lawsuit, then his base would be upset with him and not reelect (or elect him for governor). The problem, however, is by pursuing the case, McKenna sets himself as siding with the right and lowers his chances with the general Washington population, which is a third for each party base and a third in the middle (independents). The fact that he is using taxpayer dollars, when we have a budget crisis may come back to bite him with this middle group. It will depend on how costly and successful/unsuccessful the lawsuits are and also who McKenna's opponent is in 2012 (either for AG or Governor). If McKenna only lends his name, but doesn't spend much of the state dollars fighting this (i.e., letting the other states take the lead), then he probably will come out okay. It will be interesting to watch the politics of this decision by him.

Posted by: tc on March 23, 2010 10:09 AM
26. I'm sure McKenna isn't trying to figure out how he will come out ahead. There really is only one thing on the mind of conservatives and that is that this healthcare bill is unconstitutional and will result in the destruction of our way of life. He probably would rather have this thing killed than hold another elected office ever again.

It just so happens that the third of Washington state that are the independents probably want this killed as well.

Posted by: Doug on March 23, 2010 10:15 AM
27. Gregoire used taxpayer dollars for many of her national level legal crusades while she was AG. Her strategy in attacking tobacco for example, was to make a name for herself. Publicity works both ways.

The biggest problem with Obamacare is the individual mandate, which is the unconstitutional part. I could care less if a bunch of sheep want to walk off the cliff with Obama. I just don't want to be forced to go along and bankrupt the country further in the process. Especially when so many are pursuing their happiness by living very unhealthy lifestyles. Contrary to Obama's lies, I am not going to get $2500 in reductions. Instead, I'll be forced to pay for other people to live unhealthy.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 23, 2010 10:27 AM
28. Doug @26
Yah, right. McKenna is that noble. I would believe that if he states he is not going to seek reelection, nor run for another office.

Posted by: tc on March 23, 2010 10:42 AM
29. If Mckenna was only concerned about his next job, he would simply do nothing. Republicans are going to support him anyway over someone like Gregoire. By suing here, he might pick up some independents and lose some Democrat votes. It's probably a net negative proposition over standing pat.

Posted by: Palouse on March 23, 2010 11:03 AM
30. If the government can mandate that we purchase health insurance, what else can they force us to buy? Perhaps 2% of your paycheck must be used to purchase T-bills to finance the debt (under the guise of helping people save in safe instruments). Perhaps every American must buy an energy efficient GM vehicle. Perhaps all obese Americans must buy membership to a health club. Perhaps every American must buy certain healthy foods - like vegies and fish - whether they eat them or not. Where does it end?

Posted by: Shel Belle on March 23, 2010 11:03 AM
31. How about this...the government mandates and end to elections?

Posted by: Jack on March 23, 2010 11:28 AM
32. NOTHING frightens a liberal more than principled man.

I suspect it's because they fear that what they do not know.

Posted by: RagnarDanneskjold on March 23, 2010 11:30 AM
33. Thank You Rob Mckenna! Wow! A Washington Elected Official who actually respects the U.S. Constitution, States Rights, and Individual Rights! Gregoire, you're an embarrassment! Go Rob Go!!!

Posted by: GoRob! on March 23, 2010 11:31 AM
34. Jack @ 31 ... That will be the intent of the next big push, amnesty for illegal immigrants. They will need the votes, and they've got to get them from somewhere. Brace for another congressional assault.

Posted by: PeggyU on March 23, 2010 11:49 AM
35. Palouse @29
Don't be naive. Is McKenna not fundraising? Has he stated he is not seeking any other job, even reelection? There is only one politician that I remember in my lifetime that was not worried about reelection. He was the late Senator William Proxmire from Wisconsin, who spent a couple hundred dollars in his last few campaigns mailing back contributions. Saying McKenna doesn't worry about his future is like believing Obama stating that he would rather pass Healthcare and be a one-term president than see it fail. I am sure you believed that one, too.

Posted by: tc on March 23, 2010 12:09 PM
36. I never said he isn't concerned at all, just that it's not his primary concern with this lawsuit. Both McKenna and Obama would have been better off if they did nothing, and both are standing for what they believe in. I just wish Obama would have as much concern about the document that he took an oath to defend as McKenna does.

Posted by: Palouse on March 23, 2010 12:22 PM
37. Thank you Mr. McKenna for defending the 10th Amendment! You are a breath of fresh air in our over-taxed democrat-plagued state.

Posted by: Kevin on March 23, 2010 12:31 PM
38. PegguU @34. This is why I belive it is very important for Republicans to actively court the Latino vote.

Posted by: Jack on March 23, 2010 12:39 PM
39. I love this. It will be amusing to see McKenna's governor and insurance commissioner testifying against his suit while his state legislature disavows that he is representing his state. Meanwhile McKenna will never again be supported by the moderate Democrats who helped get him elected as AG.

Posted by: Bruce on March 23, 2010 01:36 PM
40. Our POTUS just delivered on a promise. This is an historic monumental moment in American history. ~ Obamaton Duffman

Yeah, nevermind that its unconstitutional, just blindly accept that the obamessiah is doing the right thing by all us peasantry.

"So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause"- Natalie Portman in Revenge of the Sith

Posted by: Rick D. on March 23, 2010 01:41 PM
41. If anyone believes that there will be even some semblance of cost containment, this will show the big picture how unsustainable this really looks.

http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/03/immigration-proposal-will-blow-out-all.html

Posted by: KDS on March 23, 2010 02:03 PM
42. @39 - There is no such thing as a moderate Democrat.

e.g. Bart Stupak, supposed moderate, willing to trade airport money for his principles and a vote for KillerCare.

Posted by: yaddacubed on March 23, 2010 02:31 PM
43. Not to worry about Queen Christine filing a brief opposing Rob McKenna's lawsuit. Per past practice she will file past the deadline, and then blame it on her staff.

Posted by: Saltherring on March 23, 2010 02:32 PM
44. GoRob! @33 and others above: States have no "rights."
Read the 10th Amendment. Under its terms, States have "reserved powers." And those only alongside and concurrent with the people, who are the "reservers" of all political power, under our Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
While McKenna has taken the right step in joining the suits of the States against this unConstitutional measure, he has used careless phrasing in his news release on the AG website.
The phrase "States Rights" is inaccurate to the point of misleading.
Although the phrase is used in many legal circles -- I believe I have even read recent SCOTUS documents which use it -- the fact is that the U S Constitution refers to "rights" ONLY in relation to "the people."
The use of "states' rights" is also politically against interest; it harkens back to the Democrat South and their politics of legalized racial discrimination.
So, with all due respect to posters on this thread and AG Rob McKenna -- for whom I have voted every time he stood for election to state office -- he should instruct his publicity staff to use more accurate language. In fact, IMHO, the use of the more proper "powers reserved to the States" phrase would, in fact, more strongly make the case to reverse this Congressional outrage against the Constitution.
P / P

Posted by: P / P on March 23, 2010 02:39 PM
45. The sheer arrogance of liberals is something to behold.

But hey. Keep it up. The pendulum always swings the other way. Always.

Eventually, you're going to choke on that arrogance. And I'll enjoy every minute of helping you choke on it.

Posted by: jimg on March 23, 2010 02:48 PM
46. Hey, but wait a minute. It's a living Constitution. It means whatever they want it to mean and any given time. ; (

Posted by: Jack on March 23, 2010 03:13 PM
47. I read 8% of the doctors were going to retire and 25% were going to quit when this bill takes effect. I believe more than that will quit when all the details of this disaster are revealed. We wont be able to see a doctor. Democrats are so confused yet they have the arrogance about them that makes me want to puke. Not to change the subject but some people I know just got their building permit for their new house. Three years to get it through King County! THREE YEARS! Its time for a revolution! These people need to go live somewhere else.

Posted by: mark on March 23, 2010 06:19 PM
48. Well I know who Gregoire represents...The Olympia special interests. It certainly isn't me that she represents!

Posted by: Michele on March 23, 2010 06:19 PM
49. Here's the facebook group supporting the AG.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=103244449711375

Posted by: Dee on March 23, 2010 07:21 PM
50. P / P: no one cares. Really. That's a mere semantic argument without any actual significance. Further, I very well can make the argument that states -- being collections of citizens -- have collective rights. For example, the right to be represented in the Senate (well, until the 17th Amendment, anyway).

And I don't think anyone who is politically open-minded cares about the whole "South" connotation of the phrase, either.


Joe Szilagyi: Is this true?

Yawn. If you really have to ask, then it's no wonder you believe everything the Democrats tell you. Is "Szilagyi" Hungarian for "gullible"?


tc: There is some talk he may also follow CG's path from AG to governor. Either way, in order to win, he needs to firm up his base.

Nonsense. He's one of the most popular elected officials in this state. He got 60 percent of the votes, statewide, in 2008 (a Democratic year). He won every county in Washington, except for Jefferson (which he lost by less than one percentage point) and San Juan.

He could win reelection without even trying. It's doing things like this that put his career as AG in jeopardy, rather than "firming up his base."

You're right that this does firm up the GOP base for him, but, like Sam Reed, he doesn't need it for reelection.

That said, he MIGHT need this for election as governor. Being a much more partisan position, he won't win all those counties in any gubernatorial race, and he'll need his base much more. That said, though, this sort of thing can lose him a lot of Western Washington moderates. I don't know that it helps him, or that he thinks it helps him. But you're right, it'll help with his base, which is important in a governor race, but he might lose more than he gains with this.

Which is why I don't think it was a political calculation, because there's no way to really calculate it politically this far out, how it will play with the independents and moderates.


If McKenna only lends his name, but doesn't spend much of the state dollars fighting this (i.e., letting the other states take the lead), then he probably will come out okay.

That doesn't make any sense, sorry. McKenna has been out in front of this, in public, arguing the merits of the case against the federal government. He is not trying to back his way into it, he's going into it head-on.

Posted by: pudge on March 23, 2010 07:33 PM
51. Don't suppose any of you have read the 22 page complaint. :-D

Would love our resident legal 2nd rate propagandist to comment about this

"The only other way for a state to avoid the Act's requirements is to drop out of the Medicaid program, leaving millions of persons uninsured."

Therefore: UNCONSTITUTIONAL EXERCISE OF FEDERAL POWER AND VIOLATION OF THE TENTH AMENDMENT

"Plaintiffs cannot afford the exorbitant and unfunded costs of participating under the Act, but have no choice other than to participate."

but, but, but... your silly complaint identifies the choice every state has: drop out of the Medicaid program!

ONOZ! The evil Federal Government won't pay for our share and their share and that's unconstitutional.

yeah, this is going to go far. :-D

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on March 23, 2010 07:39 PM
52. 3. If anyone ever wonders why AG is a separately elected position, look no further than this.

Actually, it's because the Progressive movement of a century ago passed the laws which made the AG, Sup't. of Public Inst., &c. into elected positions. This was, of course, reviled by the conservatives of that day.

Your debt to the Progressive movement has been noted.

Since "I spent your money to deny you healthcare" probably won't win many votes, will he even file for re-election? Or will this be another example of Mrs. Craswell and her 15% of the Republican primary vote handing the office to Any Democrat?

Posted by: tensor on March 23, 2010 08:27 PM
53. @52 tensor on March 23, 2010 08:27 PM,

Not Progressives!

Set your prediction bookmarks wingnuts, McKenna is done with elective office if he sticks to this pile of doo-doo.

Posted by: MikeBoyScout on March 23, 2010 08:39 PM
54. MikeBS: Therefore

I don't think you know what that word means.

But then, you don't understand most of what you blabber about, so that's unsurprising.

Posted by: pudge on March 23, 2010 09:41 PM
55. McKenna, the only leader from Olympia with guts and backbone to stand up to thugs and fight this evil "forced" healthcare. Unlike the so-called one in the mansion.

Posted by: Harry on March 23, 2010 10:40 PM
56. Michele,

From county commissioners to state reps/sen, to Congress, to U.S. sens, to governor, to president, my elected officals are 100% Dimocrat.

I thereby fully understand the concept of taxation without representation.

Posted by: Sal on March 24, 2010 07:16 AM
57. 7wrmwf xjwzlpbkzosh, [url=http://ypzotfddqmlv.com/]ypzotfddqmlv[/url], [link=http://gfeokvzabwwq.com/]gfeokvzabwwq[/link], http://ygxmtijexzjk.com/

Posted by: pbnxmyptte on March 26, 2010 06:56 AM
58. 7wrmwf xjwzlpbkzosh, [url=http://ypzotfddqmlv.com/]ypzotfddqmlv[/url], [link=http://gfeokvzabwwq.com/]gfeokvzabwwq[/link], http://ygxmtijexzjk.com/

Posted by: pbnxmyptte on March 26, 2010 06:56 AM
59. SuayXd dzuveeajhgxo, [url=http://mnpucdviilxa.com/]mnpucdviilxa[/url], [link=http://sieoudgwkcdc.com/]sieoudgwkcdc[/link], http://vxpekqvnpbhs.com/

Posted by: gmgblsst on March 28, 2010 07:18 PM
60. SuayXd dzuveeajhgxo, [url=http://mnpucdviilxa.com/]mnpucdviilxa[/url], [link=http://sieoudgwkcdc.com/]sieoudgwkcdc[/link], http://vxpekqvnpbhs.com/

Posted by: gmgblsst on March 28, 2010 07:18 PM
61. SuayXd dzuveeajhgxo, [url=http://mnpucdviilxa.com/]mnpucdviilxa[/url], [link=http://sieoudgwkcdc.com/]sieoudgwkcdc[/link], http://vxpekqvnpbhs.com/

Posted by: gmgblsst on March 28, 2010 07:19 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?