[svcw]

To the headline: of course they will.

[opentalk]

related:

Mark Levin calls out Boehner over plan to keep ‘popular’ parts of ObamaCare

Mark Levin is livid over a Politico article suggesting that Republicans are already planning to play politics and leave ‘popular, consumer friendly’ portions of Obamacare in place if the Supreme Court partially or fully overturns the law.

Levin says if this is true that Boehner needs to go

[GreaterSwiss]

f the law is partially or fully overturned they’ll draw up bills to keep the popular, consumer-friendly portions in place — like allowing adult children to remain on parents’ health care plans until age 26, and forcing insurance companies to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. Ripping these provisions from law is too politically risky, Republicans say...

-The above two reasons will bankrupt health insurance companies. Anyone who votes for them should be kicked out of office.

A child is not 26!
Can I get in an autoaccident and then get insurance?

[trebb]

If the law is partially or fully overturned they’ll draw up bills to keep the popular, consumer-friendly portions in place — like allowing adult children to remain on parents’ health care plans until age 26, and forcing insurance companies to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. Ripping these provisions from law is too politically risky, Republicans say...

[circlecity]

"they’ll draw up bills to keep the popular, consumer-friendly portions in place — like allowing adult children to remain on parents’ health care plans until age 26, and forcing insurance companies to provide coverage for people with pre-existing conditions."

This is impossible. You can't get rid of the individual mandate and still require Insurance Co.s to "insure" preexisting condition. Every insurance company would go bankrupt within a year. Nobody would buy insurance until they were sick or injured. Accepting a preexisting condition isn't insurance - its a subsidy.

[sickoflibs]

This post is what I referenced earlier without a link.

Let’s assume that this is simply an election year strategy to puts Dems on the defensive assuming that any house passed bills will die in the Senate, much like Reid is doing in the Senate to Republicans.

Then we still have to ask what Republicans would pass if they had control of both Houses (but under the 60 in the Senate) and Romney in the WH in 2013.

And Romney has also consistently said that he wants to keep the popular mandates in law just as Republican House leaders do, Those popular handout mandates are terrible policies but good politically (in the short term anyway.)

[Sirius Lee]

It’s okay. Boehner is going to hold Mitt’s feet to the fire and “force him to be Conservative.”

[apillar]

Don't worry! If elected Romney's first priority is going to be repealing Obamacare and replacing it with something conservatives will LOVE...Romneycare!...which actually is exactly the same as Obamacare...but conservatives should accept it and get on the bandwagon because Romney has a “R” after his name instead of a “D” and that makes all the difference! /sarcasm

[Diogenesis]

IT’S UNANIMOUS FOR RINO ROMNEY
From the Kennedy Seat in Massachusetts to the entire DNC

Mitt Romney wins much coveted Jimmy Carter endorsement

Gore Praises Romney's 'Climate Protection Plan'

Carville(D):
"It's a feel-good story, this Romney thing.
Romney is an ascendant guy."

Sen. John Kerry (D) to Don Imus on RomneyCARE:
"I like this health care bill".

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) on RomneyCARE:
"To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable."

George Soros Wants Mitt Romney

---

[Yashcheritsiy]

"I expect Obama-Care will be overturned and rendered moot..."

Perhaps you should revise your estimation.

[cotton1706]

No! Repeal the whole damn thing. Then throw the signed repeal on Ted Kennedy’s grave!

[cymbeline]

“GOP might keep parts of ObamaCare ...”

The law as it stands has thousands of “parts”. Some are bound to be good.

Hopefully they’ll annhiliate the current law and create a new one from scratch rather than try to modify the current law.

[Yashcheritsiy]

Wait a second - I thought that all of the “no other choice” Freepers were telling us that surely, against all available evidence, Romney was going to take an axe to ObamaCare, and that if he didn’t, then the heroic GOP in Congress was going to hold his feet to the fire until he did.

You mean we got snookered again?

[kabar]

Obamacare is 2700 pages long. It is a catch-all bill with all types of issues involved. The Reps will have to come up with an alternative. Repeal and replace should be the motto.

Obamcare should be abolished completely and the Reps should not indicate in any way that they will try to salvage and revise it. It doesn't make good sense, politically or otherwise. Their alternative could address those with pre-existing conditions, health care coverage for "children," etc. I have no doubt that the Reps would like to get rid of the Medicare Advantage programs as is the case with Obamacare, which cuts $500 billion from Medicare.

And the Reps could highlight what will be gained with the repeal of Obamacare including the costs and the elimination of the death panels.

[HamiltonJay]

single biggest thing that could be done to “fix” insurance access for those currently denied or priced out would be the very simple thing that some states already have...

Community Pricing.

Require Community Pricing, and you get rid of the biggest issue with folks not being able to get coverage.

[Rational Thought]

Expecting we will continue to see the move away from repealing Obamacare to “tweaking” it, much like the Team Romney evolution on Dodd/Frank.

I'm still remembering how Republicans ran successfully in 2010, with all the big talk if they controlled the House, Obamacare would be defunded. Of course, after they gained control, it was then said there was nothing they could do.

This is today's GOP, publicly talking tough (in opposition) while supporting the growth and control of government behind the scenes.

[Colonel_Flagg]

DeMint — a power broker on the right — said the public opposes Obama’s healthcare law in part because of the messy process through which it passed. He wants conservatives to take an incremental approach that keeps the focus on individual policies.

Wrong. We oppose Obamneycare because we don't want government making our health care decisions. PERIOD.

[I_be_tc]

Why is there a double standard. They are children to 26 when it comes to insurance, but adults when it comes to voting. Let’s change the voting age.

[EternalVigilance]

Of course they will.

Romney Republicans have been signalling this all along. “Repeal and Replace,” anyone?

Romney doesn’t oppose socialism. He just thinks he can do socialism better than Obama. And he’s probably right.

The old joke is that in DC in the Democrats propose to tear down the Washington Monument, and the Republicans respond with a workable plan to do it in three easy stages.

I find that unfunny joke to be more appropriate and accurate all the time.

If elected, Mitt Romney’s role is to consolidate the socialist gains of Barack Obama.

[Oatka]

“GOP might keep parts of ObamaCare ...”

Mark Steyn, as usual, nailed it a while back. He said that Republicans were like European conservatives in that they never repeal a Socialist law, just claim to "make it work better".