Media coverage now implies that the U.S. Supreme Court will determine the fate of President Obama's health care law. But nothing the court decides will keep the law alive for more than a brief period of time. Posted on 03/30/2012 8:04:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
Media coverage now implies that the U.S. Supreme Court will determine the fate of President Obama's health care law. But nothing the court decides will keep the law alive for more than a brief period of time.
There are three ways the health care law could meet its end. The first, obviously, is the Supreme Court could declare some or all of it unconstitutional in June.
If it gets past that hurdle, the law also could be ended by Election 2012. If a Republican president is elected, the GOP will almost certainly also win control of the Senate and retain control of the House. While the details might take time, a Republican sweep in November would ultimately end the Obama experiment.
But even if the law survives the Supreme Court and the next election, the clock will be ticking. Recent estimates suggest that the law would cause 11 million people to lose their employer-provided insurance and be forced onto a government-backed insurance plan. That's a problem because 77 percent of those who now have insurance rate their current coverage as good or excellent. Only 3 percent rate their coverage as poor. For most of the 11 million forced to change their insurance coverage then, it will be received as bad news and create a pool of vocally unhappy voters.
Additionally, the cost estimates for funding the program are likely to keep going up. Eighty-one percent of voters expect it to cost more than projected, and recent Congressional Budget Office estimates indicate voters are probably right. But it's not the narrow specifics and cost estimates that guarantee the ultimate demise of the president's health care plan. It's the fact that the law runs contrary to basic American values and perceptions.
This, then, is the third hurdle the law faces: Individual Americans recognize that they have more power as consumers than they do as voters. Their choices in a free market give them more control over the economic world than choosing one politician or another.
Seventy-six percent think they should have the right to choose between expensive insurance plans with low deductibles and low-cost plans with higher deductibles. A similar majority believes everyone should be allowed to choose between expensive plans that cover just about every imaginable medical procedure and lower-cost plans that cover a smaller number of procedures. All such choices would be banned under the current health care law.
Americans want to be empowered as health care consumers. Eighty-two percent believe that if an employer pays for health insurance, the worker should be able to use that money and select an insurance product that meets his or her individual needs. If the plan they select costs less than the company plan, most believe the worker should get to keep the change.
It's not just the idea of making the choice that drives these numbers, it's the belief held by most Americans that competition will do more than government regulation to reduce the cost of health care. For something as fundamental as medical care, government policy must be consistent with deeply held American values. That's why an approach that increases consumer choice has solid support and a plan that relies on mandates and trusting the government cannot survive.
” I hope SCOTUS nukes it. I don’t see a McConnell/Bohner led Congress having the stones to repeal it. “
Seems like they are not even alive..
McConnell has already said as much. There was a thread about it a couple of days ago. He was saying he doesn't see how they can overcome a filibuster. He may have the stones, but he certainly lacks the confidence and certainly does not inspire confidence in me when he says that attempts to repeal it will likely fail.
We need to acknowledge that medical care in the USA is ALREADY controlled by government.
Government directly pays for more than half of all medical care.
Government pays for almost all basic medical research.
Government is by far the largest contributor to medical education and training, and, consequently, government decides which people will be trained, and which specialties will be funded or not funded.
States control which private companies are allowed to offer health insurance.
Government mandates which medical conditions must be insured.
States control how many hospitals may be opened and where they may be located.
Government directly sets the cost or compensation for thousands of procedures for millions of patients.
Did someone imagine I was trashing nurses? Far from it ~ but the point was how far the Democrats would go to screw everybody, and there you have it.
I will repeat to you that 47 states..DO NOT HAVE UNIONIZED NURSES.
There is no constituency of unionized nurses or other healthcare professionals worth anything but a small drop in the bucket for the Dems to pander to for so-called benefits.
In healthcare, benefits are paid for by the private sector. Let's keep it that way, kill O'deathcare.
Yes, I know UNIONIZED NURSES are a very, very, very teeny tiny itty bitty part of Nursedom.
The Democrats don't care about the NONUNIONIZED NURSES.
Touche'!
And a rimshot...
One of McConnell's problems is his RINOs. In the vote you are referring to, an attempt to rein in the EPA, the final tally was 56-42 -- four votes short of defeating the filibuster.
With 47 Republicans in the Senate, one would initially think that nine Democrats crossed over to vote with 'Pubbies. Actually, there were thirteen!.
Because four 'Pubbies crossed over and voted for the EPA -- Scott Brown (R-Ma), Susan Collins (R-Me), Olympia Snowe (R-Me) and Lamar Alexander (R-Tn).
If those four had stayed home, the GOP initiative would've succeeded.
One can legitimately criticize McConnell's leadership if he is unable to control his caucus.
It wouldn't take time for Newt. It would be repealed on Day 1. RINOmney on the other hand....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.