COLUMBIA, S.C. – Republican attorneys general in 13 states say congressional leaders must remove Nebraska's political deal from the federal health care reform bill or face legal action, according to a letter provided to The Associated Press Wednesday.

"We believe this provision is constitutionally flawed," South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster and the 12 other attorneys general wrote in the letter to be sent Wednesday night to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

"As chief legal officers of our states we are contemplating a legal challenge to this provision and we ask you to take action to render this challenge unnecessary by striking that provision," they wrote.

In a rare Christmas Eve vote, Senate Democrats pushed sweeping health care legislation to the brink of Senate passage, crushing a year-end Republican filibuster against President Barack Obama's call to remake the nation's health care system. The 60-39 vote marked the third time in as many days Democrats posted a supermajority needed to advance the legislation.

The letter was signed by top prosecutors in Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Washington state. All are Republicans, and McMaster and the attorneys general of Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania are running for governor in their respective states.

Last week, McMaster said he was leading several other attorneys general in an inquiry into the constitutionality of the estimated $100 million deal he has dubbed the "Cornhusker Kickback."

Republican U.S. Sens. Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint of South Carolina raised questions about the legislation, which they said was amended to win Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson's support.

"Because this provision has serious implications for the country and the future of our nation's legislative process, we urge you to take appropriate steps to protect the Constitution and the rights of the citizens of our nation," the attorneys general wrote.

A conference committee begins meeting next year to work out a compromise between House and Senate versions of the bill. Experts expect those talks will likely last into February.

McMaster says if the bill goes through to final approval with the benefit to Nebraska, taxpayers in the other 49 states will have to pay for it.

House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., said the letter was a political ploy.

"This threat stinks of partisan politics," he said in a statement. "If Henry McMaster wants to write federal law he should run for Congress not governor."

Meanwhile, Nelson is taking his message on health care reform directly to his constituents. In a television ad beginning during Wednesday night's Nebraska-Arizona Holiday Bowl football game, the Democrat says he stuck by his principles throughout the debate and doesn't want Nebraskans to be confused on his position.

While it's not uncommon for states to challenge federal laws in court, one legal expert said political bluster was likely behind the letter.

"I do think that it is some combination of the losers just complaining about the officiating, or complaining about how the game was played, in combination with trying to make the bill look as seedy and inappropriate as possible, for political purposes," says Andy Siegel, a former University of South Carolina School of Law professor now teaching at Seattle University School of Law.

"It is smart politics to try to tarnish it and make it look less like an achievement and more like some sort of corrupted bargain," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091231/ap_on_re_us/us_health_care_deal_states

LMAO!

LMAO


I didn't say it.

I still don't agree with the Nebraska deal just to buy a vote.



Fanta, ya know I love ya more than my luggage...

Actually the Fed will finance the expansion in all 50 states for 3 years.

Others a little longer.

But but if the tables were turned, they would do the EXACT same thing. How can one require better from others than what you do yourself?

if the Feds are going to do that...then why need something special fro Nebraska?

Heaven FORBID they actually consider challenging it because parts of it < especially the part about making health care MANDATORY > would be unconstitutional.

Lord KNOWS it can't POSSIBLY be about that.

Yep. If the bill was the Republicans baby, and the Dems found parts of it unconstitutional, then they would be screaming from the rooftops about challenging it.

But Nebraska gets that perk FOREVER as part of the deal.

I don't think they get 100% financed and there is no time line mentioned.

Besides, I think it will probably be fixed during negotiations.

The bill will pass and there is nothing for the losers to do but complain about the officiating,and how the game was played.

LOL

ok again...I really am not understanding (told ya I'm rusty)

If all states are getting this, then why a separate deal for Nebraska?

There is nothing in the bill that is unconstitutional anyway.

Even paying for NE medicare bill forever is not unconstitutional....lol,

They are poor, have a high need, and have a Republican Governor.

Hmmm...not even the part about making paying for health care mandatory??

I know a few lawyers who would beg to differ.

But then again, you probably just ignore that part.

still congress already let us know the bill is a piece of crap. If they think it is a piece of crap why did they pass it? I think our politicians are idiots.

so their vote was bought?? why should they get a deal and not the other states?

LMAO

Only the losers!

Because
United we stand, Divided we fall.