Skip to comments.Obamacare implementation could spell trouble for Democrats in 2014
Posted on 11/15/2012 6:54:16 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The good news for Democrats is that Obamacare will now be implemented. But the bad news for Democrats is also that Obamacare will now be implemented.
President Obama's re-election ensures that his signature health care law will not be repealed before its major provisions go into effect. But that also means, to borrow a phrase from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Americans will begin to find out what's in the law.
Starting Jan. 1, several key provisions of the health care law will kick in. Americans will only be allowed to contribute $2,500 to flexible spending accounts, which allow participants to pay for medical expenses on a pretax basis. Also, from then on, the accounts can only be used to pay for drugs with a prescription, excluding over-the-counter drugs, which still may be legitimate medical expenses and were previously allowed.
The new year will also ring in a wave of new tax increases. One is the Medicare tax hike on individuals earning more than $200,000 and married couples earning more than $250,000. Another is the 3.8 percent tax on interest, dividends, annuities, royalties and rents. On top of that, there will be a 2.3 percent tax increase on medical devices. These will be on top of any tax hike that comes out of current end-of-the-year negotiations between Republicans and Democrats to avoid the "fiscal cliff."
Most of the major provisions of the health care law go into effect in 2014. During that year, individuals will be forced to purchase government-approved insurance policies or pay a tax. The tax will hit 6 million uninsured Americans, most of them middle-class, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Employers who have at least 50 workers could have to pay a $2,000-per-employee fine for not providing health insurance. As Zane Tankel, who owns 40 Applebee's locations in the New York area, recently explained on Fox Business, this provision will force him to hold off on expanding or hiring, and even to re-evaluate his current workforce. Business owners throughout the nation have echoed his thinking.
In addition, 2014 will usher in the expansion of Medicaid and the creation of new exchanges. On these exchanges, eligible individuals will receive government subsidies to purchase government-designed insurance plans administered by private companies. These two components are projected to cost $1.7 trillion over a decade.
Governors, right now, are trying to decide whether to participate in the expansion of Medicaid, a program that is already crushing state budgets, and to implement the exchanges themselves or back out and let the federal government set up the exchanges for them.
The establishment of an exchange involves a massive data compilation process in which the federal government will have to figure out Americans' income levels to determine their eligibility to receive benefits. The exchanges are supposed to be up by the fall of 2013 so that individuals can begin enrolling in them.
Each state faces its own challenges in setting up the exchanges. In Washington, D.C., officials determined that the uninsured population was too small for the exchange to function. So they have taken the step of conscripting individuals and businesses with between two and 50 employees to purchase health insurance through the exchange, making it the sole marketplace in D.C. for plans that aren't "grandfathered in."
During a meeting with The Washington Examiner, Mohammad Akhter, chairman of the D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority Executive Board, noted the difficulty of setting up an exchange under the federal time constraints.
With a number of Republican governors deciding that letting the Obama administration set up their state-based exchanges is the lesser of bad options, the federal government will be facing a number of logistical challenges to getting them up and running.
If it goes badly, this could spell trouble for Democrats up for re-election in 2014. But who's ever heard of a massive government database and software development program going badly?
Philip Klein (email@example.com) is a senior editorial writer for The Washington Examiner.
It spells trouble for America, not for democrats. They will be just fine after they instruct the media on how to blame it on Bush.
Because the Supreme Court upholding Obamacare spelled such trouble for the Dems in 2012. :)
There is a reason Reid, Pelosi and Obama are smiling in every picture. :)
RE: Because the Supreme Court upholding Obamacare spelled such trouble for the Dems in 2012. :)
If you read the article, his reasons are quite different from yours — IT IS BECAUSE OBAMACARE HAS NOT YET BEEN IMPLEMENTED.
Read the first paragraph and then read his reasons. Then argue against his reasons.
This is crap.
There is one, single thing that I learned from the last election: the American electorate is TOO DAMNED STUPID to make a accurate correlation between cause and effect.
Period. End of story.
They elected Obama a second time. The first time could be attributed in some way to a combination of naiveté, ignorance, good intentions, stupidity, etc.
The second time this cheesedick was elected can only be attributed to one thing: Stupidity. Stupidity on a massive and irrevocable scale.
And to think that in four years, when things are going to be much worse (and much more directly attributable to the actions of liberals) that there is going to be some kind of backlash against the very people who destroyed things, well...that is wishful thinking. I don’t see it happening at all.
That said, the timeline to failure of the American socialist experiment is unclear at this point. Could it be 2014? Who knows? It will, however, fail. You can bank on that.
Not when you rig the vote. But don’t worry, they’ll let a few Republicans win to make it look believable.
Oh, you are certainly correct. This “socialist experiment” will fail, the way all socialist endeavors do.
The problem is, it is going to take all of us down with it.
And I have come to believe that will not be by accident, but will be by design.
??? Is this guy serious? 2012 told us all about how elections will be conducted from here on out.
Haven’t you heard? They steal elections! What should they care if they’re in trouble?
The fight should begin now. The GOP should be funding an aggressive ad campaign that clearly explains how Obamacare is destructive to good health care and the economy. This campaign should only focus on aspects of the law that inevitably will lead to very apparent problems by Election Day 2014. This way the voters will see at that time that the GOP was and is correct on the issue. In other words, preemptive action right now so that later we can honestly say “I told you so.”
At least until it all collapses.
The American voter no longer is able to wipe himself.
There are no longer consequences for actions in the ballot box.
The fight should begin now. The GOP should be funding an aggressive ad campaign that clearly explains how Obamacare is destructive to good health care and the economy.
And it will be in all the media? HAW HAW HAW.........
The backlash will be against those who understand and hold fast to reality and refuse to be brainwashed into embracing the government model of deception and destruction.
The corrupt aren't interested in seeing the error of their ways. They now have the green light to use the government god they fashioned to persecute those who won't fall down and worship.
I am curious about the absentee ballots and other vote-by-mail schemes. Wouldn't states such as OR and WA be able to create a database of every voter's voting record?
He appointed Roberts who let the law stand.
Thus. BUSH’S FAULT!
All the desperate people will be pounded into government submission - and they’ll completely lose the incentive and belief that they could ever make it on their own without some rat politician redistributing money for them.
Forget that for many people it’s their own money being redistributed - through the filter of SEIU and they only get a fraction back. Quite the hat trick by the marxists to dumb people down this much. A lion in the jungle knows better.
What is there for fight for?
Could it be because the republican candidate was the father of obamacare and couldn't make a valid argument against it? The most romney could do is shut up about it and hope others didn't bring it up.
Obama should have been hammered constantly about obamacare, republicans didn't have a hammerer.
I’ve bought this kind of crap for the past two years. It’s all BS. The freeloading piggies in this country now outnumber normal, freedom-loving Americans. NOTHING can spell trouble for the DemocRATS except for maybe the local tattoo shop closing down, they puncture a breast implant or run out of KY jelly on date night. This is not our Forefather’s America anymore.
(There ain't no such thing as a free lunch)
The author’s thesis is entirely dependent upon three things:
1) Voters identifying the problem.
2) Voters identifying the source of the problem.
3) Voters accepting responsibility for creating the problem.
The odds of any of the three happening are slim. The odds of all three happening are none.
Besides, America’s last honest election is in her rear-view mirror. There will be no getting rid of these people, no matter how hellish life in this country gets.
Oooh, what will happen then, the Republicans will be elected instead? BFD. The Pubs are only a pretend opposition and are really only a subset of the larger Party of Ivy League Incumbency that has ruled for quite a long time. Keep focusing on Obama and pretending they would do anything different if you can get them elected.
One side of the party has to die first.
What they've accomplished is truly amazing. The generational dedication involved in the long march through the institutions, the obsessive, all-consuming commitment to the obliteration of all that is good... it's like nothing I've ever seen outside of islam.
Download and read that Cato Institute paper. President Obama and Kathleen Sebelius assumed that states would run these exchanges and foot the bill for it, though the exchanges would be run by Washington anyway. The problem is the 2009 and 2010 gubernatorial elections happened which expanded the number of governorships the GOP held. Why should states bankrupt themselves for this kind of deal? Why do you think the Obama Administration extended the deadline for states to set up the state health exchanges from tomorrow to now December 14? Its not from the goodness of their own heart I can tell you that. They know if a huge number of states refuse to set up the exchanges and foot the bill, it is highly unlikely Obamacare can be implemented. The only thing left is the tax increases and then that runs into legal trouble because then youll see lawsuits from individuals who claim harm because they are getting unduly taxed for health care they were supposed to get. What a lovely mess. Heck, even Democratic governor Jay Nixon said Missouri wont set up a state health exchange. Yes, this bill is that bad.
It would be nice to believe this, but it is also unlikely.
Obamanation Communism File.
[[Obamacare implementation could spell trouble for Democrats in 2014]]
Don’t bet on it- We’ve officially turned into a socialist nation- everyoen has their hands out to get whatever they can get NOW irregardless of how it might affect the future- More andm ore people are turnign democrat for htis very reason, andm ore andm ore aliens are infultrating htis coutnry in the belief that the liberals will give htem everythign they ever desired- and they ar finding out that that is true- This coutnry is turned- there’s no goign back- too many peopel now feel that it’s the government’s job to give htem everythign they waqnt- they feel entitled to it
It took 70 years in the USSR.
Did anyone besides me notice that --in spite of the fact that devout Islamists do not have to participate in Obamacare -- there is a man named "Mohammad Akhter" chairing the "D.C. Health Benefit Exchange Authority Executive Board" ?? Ironic, no?
Once you give mice free cheese, they will never work for food again.
You just totally made that crap up !
OK, I’m busted........but it sounds cool, no ?
Cool from a fool ?
More like drool from a tool.
Especially old farts like me with health problems. They don't even tell you to take an aspirin and call in the morning. They schedule you some time in the next 12 weeks.
They won't have a problem with that one, why do you think they let us keep the House.
Ever since 2000, the options to vote have become far looser and varied, or so it seems to me.
I have been against it since day one. Don’t get me wrong, there has been and is a place for absentee ballots. I voted in my first election in 1976 when I was in the USN that way.
But to make it simply convenient for people was and is wrong. All it does is open wider doors to voter fraud, and that is it. The early voting ballots and absentee ballots have a longer journey through more hands, and the chain of custody is complete crap. We know how the government at all levels works when things get complicated. It doesn’t. And there are plenty of people who have been exploiting that.
When someone’s livelihood depends on quality, you usually get just that. When the result of a difference between quality work and a shrug of the shoulders is exactly ZERO, you will get a shrug of the shoulders. It is FOOLISH to depend on the good will, good intentions and ingrained work ethic to deliver results in the vast majority of people. Yet that is just what well-meaning liberals and utopians depend on, and it is why liberalism is doomed to fail. And it is why government and unions at all levels operate far less efficiently than capitalist alternatives.
That last paragraph is, in a nut, the heart of the difference between liberalism and conservatism.
Exactly. See my post at #6.
I should have been more clear on my last comment/question:
Wouldn't states such as OR and WA be able to create a database of every voter's voting record for the purpose of political persecution?
The secret ballot is going the way of the dinosaurs. But aside from the normal concerns about prying/threatening eyes or someone other than registered voter doing the voting (those are bad enough), what happens when the ballot reaches the folks opening the mail (assuming it gets there)? Somebody knows how the name on the envelope voted. It's much more specific than a generic party affiliation. From the private voting booth the ballot goes into the box with all the rest.
If absentee ballots had remained rare then the problems associated with them would have remained rare. But when all voting is by mail, it sure seems like a recipe for not only fraud, but a complete undermining of the secret ballot process and a high potential for data-mining abuse or outright persecution. Proponents point to the fact that there are hard copies, but at what price?
And of those not-so-good intentions, what is the matter with liberals? The evil profit motive weeds out a great deal of the do-gooder incompetents. Need a brain surgeon? Better the guy who wants to stay in top demand in order to afford a fifth Ferrari than a government paycheck collector who shrugs and says, "Oh well better luck next time. Is it lunch yet?"
Looks like America opted for the union surgeon. Brains are all over the floor. But he is such a nice man with good intentions, unlike that rich man with the giant carbon footprint.