(Condensed from The Yellow Sheet Report)
The Arizona Republic columnist Robert Robb on Friday advanced a legal argument suggesting that by “shoehorning” the Medicaid expansion proposal into a health care appropriation, the Senate might have violated the Constitution’s single-subject rule.
The rule states: “The general appropriation bill shall embrace nothing but appropriations for the different departments of the state, for state institutions, for public schools, and for interest on the public debt. All other appropriations shall be made by separate bills, each embracing but one subject.”
ASU Professor Paul Bender agreed with Robb asking voters to approve Medicaid expansion would resolve the legal questions surrounding it, But Bender said that if the expansion is a separate measure that deals with policy changes that might or might not be related to the main budget bill, then it is not an appropriations bill.
Bender also said the courts tend to give the Legislature leeway in crafting laws, particularly as they deal with the single-subject rule.
Meanwhile, Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest attorney Tim Hogan said the last time the single-subject rule issue came up was when Napolitano was governor and she line-item vetoed several budget measures.
“I remember the court expressing some skepticism about the ability to include all of these various subjects in the [reconciliation bills], but [the court] did not come right out and say it violated the constitutional provision,”
Bender said he thinks there is some merit to looking at the idea of sending the Medicaid proposal to the ballot. First, it gets rid of the Prop 108 question and, second, it also takes care of the single-subject question since it would likely only deal with Medicaid expansion, which will be paid for by a hospital assessment, he said. Bender also said supporters can potentially get it passed much more quickly by having the public approve it in a special session within the next few months.
The costs of insuring the childless adult population, expires at the end of this year. Given people’s immediate need for health coverage and the threat of the feds’ pulling out their funding match, “that would be a real disaster,” Bender said.
Related: [GUEST OPINION] Senators were just doing their job in voting for Medicaid
