You’d be forgiven for thinking this was satire. Some twisted skit on late-night TV. But no—this is California politics in 2025.
State activists have submitted a ballot initiative called the Luigi Mangione Access to Health Care Act—named after a man accused of murdering a UnitedHealthcare executive. Yes, you read that right. They’re naming a healthcare law after an alleged killer. Not a war hero. Not a civil rights leader. A man who shot an innocent man in the back in broad daylight.
And as the headlines obsess over legal language, public comment periods, and whether the ballot initiative will clear procedural hurdles, almost no one is talking about the family of the victim. A real person—likely a husband, a father, a son—who was murdered in cold blood. Where is their justice? Where is their recognition?
Instead, the state is practically immortalizing the man accused of killing him.
The Proposal: Bureaucracy Disguised as Justice
The initiative, currently under review by California’s Attorney General, would make it illegal for insurance companies to deny, delay, or modify any medical procedure or medication prescribed by a licensed physician. Sounds simple—until you dig deeper.
Under the proposed law, only a physician could make that determination on behalf of an insurer. Any non-doctor who even reviews a denial could face felony charges. Think about that. An insurance company could be criminally liable just for allowing a nurse or claims analyst to do their job.
Worse still, insurers would have to prove—by clear and convincing evidence—that a procedure was unnecessary or wouldn’t lead to severe consequences like disability, death, or amputation. If they can’t meet that bar? They face lawsuits where plaintiffs can collect treble damages—triple the jury-awarded amount—plus attorney’s fees.
In other words, California wants to burn down the entire system of medical review, handcuff insurers from managing care responsibly, and unleash a litigation frenzy. And they’re doing it in the name of an alleged murderer.
Revenge Isn’t Reform
Let’s be clear: no one likes insurance companies. They’re bureaucratic, frustrating, and slow. But they’re not murderers.
Luigi Mangione, however, is accused of being exactly that. Yet his name is now being used to sell what can only be described as healthcare by revenge—a form of policy born not from thoughtful reform but from anger and emotional grandstanding.
This isn’t about improving patient outcomes. It’s about punishing the insurance industry. And while the Left claims to care about compassion and decency, they seem oddly okay with weaponizing tragedy—so long as it serves their agenda.
Where is the outcry from the so-called “empathetic” crowd about the family of the slain CEO? Where’s the compassion for them?
It’s nowhere to be found. Because that family’s grief isn’t politically useful.
A Dangerous Precedent
Let’s step back and ask what message this sends.
Imagine you’re a deranged individual watching this play out. A man allegedly kills a corporate executive, and the state responds by putting his name on a ballot measure and turning him into a symbol. What’s next? A state holiday? A statue?
This is not just irresponsible—it’s dangerous. It signals that violence can be a legitimate path to political influence. That if you kill the “right” person, your name might live on in legislative glory.
It’s a grotesque, dystopian message.
And it’s being packaged and sold as compassion.
The Real Cost
Beyond the moral decay on display, this initiative would devastate California’s healthcare system.
Removing administrative review processes would balloon costs, delay treatment even further, and likely drive many insurers—and doctors—out of the state altogether. Who wants to do business in a place where lawsuits and felony charges are a risk for doing standard case reviews?
This law would create chaos, not care. Litigation, not healing. And it would empower ambulance chasers far more than it would protect patients.
If passed, it would mark yet another milestone in California’s journey away from reality and toward a dangerous form of ideology-driven governance.
Final Thoughts
The death of a man—whether you agreed with his company’s policies or not—should never be politicized. It should be mourned. But instead of honoring the life lost, California is posturing, virtue signaling, and rewarding an alleged killer by elevating his name into law.
This isn’t justice. It’s moral rot masquerading as reform.
And it’s exactly the kind of thing that happens when emotions—not facts—write the laws.
WE’D LOVE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS! PLEASE COMMENT BELOW.
JIMMY
Find more articles like this at steadfastandloyal.com
h/t: Steadfast and Loyal
