ILNews

Legislator says state trying to deny health care insurance to Hoosiers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Democratic State Rep. Ed DeLaney has called for the state’s lawsuit against the Affordable Care Act to be thrown out of court “as quickly as humanly possible.”

The state and 15 school corporations filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the Internal Revenue Service, challenging the employer mandate requirements of health care reform. Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller said the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision upholding the individual mandate to buy health insurance did not address the IRS regulations regarding the employer mandate.

“We contend the ACA improperly regulates sovereign states and does not authorize the IRS to do what it is doing in treating the state as a taxable entity,” Zoeller said. “We are raising this respectful challenge for the federal courts to decide these questions.”

DeLaney, an Indianapolis attorney, charged the state is trying to gut the Affordable Care Act provisions that benefit Indiana residents.

“This lawsuit confirms the desire of our state’s Republican leadership to deny affordable health care coverage to hundreds of thousands of Hoosiers and takes that to dangerous new levels,” he said.

DeLaney held a press conference Wednesday and issued a statement regarding the lawsuit.

The Indianapolis Democrat reiterated the argument his caucus made during the recent session of Indiana General Assembly about the state’s decision to not expand Medicaid. He said nearly 400,000 additional Hoosiers who live below the poverty level will not be able to get coverage under Medicaid even though Indiana taxpayers’ dollars are funding the expansion.

Now, DeLaney continued, Indiana residents are being told that the state’s decision not to operate its own health insurance exchange means that another 400,000 Hoosiers who make between $15,000 and $80,000 a year in the private sector should not receive any subsidies from the federal government to pay for their health care coverage.

“This lawsuit deserves to be tossed out of court as quickly as humanly possible,” DeLaney said. “Someday, there will need to be an accounting for the willful neglect demonstrated by the leaders of this state’s government toward the basic human need for health care.”
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The child support award is many times what the custodial parent earns, and exceeds the actual costs of providing for the children's needs. My fiance and I have agreed that if we divorce, that the children will be provided for using a shared checking account like this one(http://www.mediate.com/articles/if_they_can_do_parenting_plans.cfm) to avoid the hidden alimony in Indiana's child support guidelines.

  2. Fiat justitia ruat caelum is a Latin legal phrase, meaning "Let justice be done though the heavens fall." The maxim signifies the belief that justice must be realized regardless of consequences.

  3. Indiana up holds this behavior. the state police know they got it made.

  4. Additional Points: -Civility in the profession: Treating others with respect will not only move others to respect you, it will show a shared respect for the legal system we are all sworn to protect. When attorneys engage in unnecessary personal attacks, they lose the respect and favor of judges, jurors, the person being attacked, and others witnessing or reading the communication. It's not always easy to put anger aside, but if you don't, you will lose respect, credibility, cases, clients & jobs or job opportunities. -Read Rule 22 of the Admission & Discipline Rules. Capture that spirit and apply those principles in your daily work. -Strive to represent clients in a manner that communicates the importance you place on the legal matter you're privileged to handle for them. -There are good lawyers of all ages, but no one is perfect. Older lawyers can learn valuable skills from younger lawyers who tend to be more adept with new technologies that can improve work quality and speed. Older lawyers have already tackled more legal issues and worked through more of the problems encountered when representing clients on various types of legal matters. If there's mutual respect and a willingness to learn from each other, it will help make both attorneys better lawyers. -Erosion of the public trust in lawyers wears down public confidence in the rule of law. Always keep your duty to the profession in mind. -You can learn so much by asking questions & actively listening to instructions and advice from more experienced attorneys, regardless of how many years or decades you've each practiced law. Don't miss out on that chance.

  5. Agreed on 4th Amendment call - that was just bad policing that resulted in dismissal for repeat offender. What kind of parent names their boy "Kriston"?

ADVERTISEMENT