September 15, 2010 01:45 AM UTC

Suthers: "CaldaraCare" Great (If I Win, and Nobody Needs Medicaid)

•  
• by: Colorado Pols

An interesting exchange from a couple of weeks ago, between conservative commentator Jon Caldara, chief proponent of this year’s Amendment 63–the initiative that would attempt to exclude Colorado from federal health care reform provisions–and Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, who in addition to running for reelection has also joined a number of other state attorneys general in filing suit against the federal government over the same health reform bill.

As you can imagine, these two had quite a lot to talk about. When the conversation turned to Caldara’s initiative in relation to Suthers’ lawsuit, here’s how it was explained:

Basically, Suthers says that if his lawsuit fails–as most legal experts think it will–the federal government can assert its authority to ensure compliance, and both his lawsuit and Caldara’s initiative are meaningless. That’s the most likely result. But according to Suthers, in the unlikely event his lawsuit should succeed, then Caldara’s initiative would “end the route” of an alternative federal government option to tie health reform compliance to state Medicaid reimbursement.

Except that would mean no Medicaid money, wouldn’t it? That doesn’t actually sound like a great outcome, and the federal government could certainly do it–just like cutting off highway funds for states that don’t keep up with DUI thresholds. More likely, “CaldaraCare” would just be another layer of stupidity to quietly strike from Colorado’s bloated constitution before it embarrasses the entire state–or worse, actually hurts people–and in that regard it would be far from unique.