In an Aug. 6 Examiner commentary, state Sen. Matt Bartle discussed the outcome of the Aug. 3 primary election as it pertained to Proposition C. As is the case in a number of his commentaries, he fails to properly inform his constituents and those who read this story concerning the real facts.
What he said was that 71 percent of “nearly 1 million Missourians voted for the initiative, which places into Missouri law a prohibition on forcing people, employers or health-care providers to participate in a health-care system.” That is yes and no. What he didn’t tell you is that state laws cannot preclude, override, trump or take the place of federal laws.
Sen. Bartle is a lawyer and knows this and therefore should have taken the time to adequately explain this. He also didn’t bother to tell you about a few pertinent facts about this election.
Historically, 24 percent of Missouri’s registered voters vote in the August primary election. In this election, 23 percent of Missouri’s registered voters turned out. But only 16 percent voted on the Proposition C initiative and of those, 11 percent voted yes and 5 percent voted no.
Now that we have this in truer perspective, does this really suggest what Senator Bartle said? “If it wasn’t clear before, it certainly is now: Missourians do not support the federal health-care plan and its intrusive, costly mandates.” Not even close. Put another way, with those 16 percent who voted on Proposition C, 89 percent either voted no or did not bother to vote at all. Either way, it is hardly a mandate in the way Sen. Bartle suggests.
In another example of his exaggeration of the vote, he stated “the people have made their views known.” Once again, hardly. Not when only 16 percent of registered voters turn out and vote on a proposition that should never appeared on the ballot. Why? The initiative was a confusing referendum in that it asked voters to answer two questions with just one “yes” or “no.” Obviously, that is impossible on any ballot. The new health-care law is and will be a huge benefit for America’s citizens going forward.
Here is one glaring example: Those with pre-existing conditions will no longer have to worry about whether they will have access to decent health care. Insurers will not be able to deny coverage or charge higher rates based on that status.
Perhaps Sen. Bartle and the rest of his Republican colleagues, including those on the national level, should follow the example of former President Harry S. Truman: “I don’t give people hell, I just tell them the truth and they think it’s hell.” Let’s see if Mr. Bartle learns anything from this.
