“Its wording is so broad and so subject to interpretation that it would hamstring state or federal efforts to address the health-care crisis Ohioans face. It would effectively freeze health-care as we know it, or, in some cases, send it backward.”Meanwhile, the Enquirer advocated that Ohioans “State issues: Reject health ‘fix’” as follows:
“Issue 3 supporters say the language won’t have ill effects. But it’s fuzzy enough that we don’t know how it would be interpreted. That could invite a flurry of costly lawsuits and uncertainty. And as an amendment to the state constitution, it would take another amendment to repair. As they say in the medical field: First, do no harm. With that in mind, it’s better to avoid the whole questionable issue in the first place. Passing it won’t do any good. Vote “no” on Issue 3.”In every case, editorials cited the exact legal arguments about the potential for unintended consequences of Issue 3 that were originally made by Innovation in our report on Issue 3. Links to all the newspaper endorsements are available on our Issue 3 Resource Center.
Tagged in these Policy Areas: