Arizona isn't the land of Barry Goldwater anymore. Recently Gov. Janet Napolitano met with 200 health-care officials and the Mayo Clinic Health Policy Center to call for top-down health care.

OK, they didn't call it top down. The news article says that "Napolitano urged adoption of universal health insurance at the federal level," and quickly added "but criticized a proposition on Arizona's November ballot that addresses choice in health-care providers."

That proposition is actually a good one.

"Prohibits laws that: restrict person's choice of private health care systems or private plans; interfere with person's or entity's right to pay directly for lawful medical services; impose a penalty or fine for choosing to obtain or decline health care coverage [emphasis added] or for participant in in any health care system or plan.

A "yes" vote shall have the effect of prohibiting laws that restrict a person's choice of private health care systems or private plans, interfere with a person or an entity's right to pay for lawful medical services, and impose a penalty or fine for choosing to obtain or decline health care coverage or for participation in any health care system or plan. Yes.

A "no" vote shall have the effect of retaining the current law regarding a person or entity's health care choices. No."

In other words, the measure would establish as policy the idea that you, are in control of your health, including which insurance to have--or even whether to have it. Not Gov. Napolitano. Not Michael Crow, the president of Arizona State University, who expressed a desire to "blow up the current models." Not Robert Smoldt, the director of the Mayo center who called for "universal health-care insurance."

Interestingly, someone else at the conference pointed out something that could go a long ways towards establishing affordability--without a significant government program.

Phil Hamilton, the benefits manager for Arizona's 140,000 state employees, predicted tort reform could cut health-care fees significantly.

"It isn't the cost of the insurance, but the cost of practicing defensive medicine, ordering tests just so you can't be accused later of not doing them," he said.