With only a little more than six weeks to go before the election, most consumers of political journalism have long since given up hoping major media outlets will write about anything but the horse race element of the story. The strategies, the gaffes, the attacks and, most of all the polls, are the main elements of coverage, as well as the topics for those of us who provide analysis. But every once in a while, we get a piece that reminds us of what all the shouting is actually about. Politico’s story published yesterday titled “Obamacare foes fear GOP losses,” is one such article. The headline may be fairly accused of stating the obvious but the story reminds the reader that the election this year is about something more than the egos of the politicians or their campaign gurus: if the Republicans don’t sweep Congress and the White House, the country will be irrevocably changed by the survival of the president’s signature health care legislation.
Obamacare isn’t the only important issue for voters to consider in November. Spending, taxes, the national debt and the related issue of entitlement reform are all crucial. So, too, are the foreign policy challenges that face the next president, a list that includes the deadly nuclear threat from Iran. But on no other issue is the choice so stark. It is, for example, theoretically possible that either Barack Obama or Mitt Romney will do what must be done to halt the debt crisis or to stop Iran. It is also possible that neither will do so. But there is no doubt that unless the GOP secures the presidency and majorities in both the upper and lower chambers of Congress, Obamacare will not be repealed. By the next midterm election, it will be too late to prevent the full implementation of the health care bill. Once that happens, dismantling the infrastructure of the new federal bureaucracy and entitlement will be beyond the capacity of even future conservative majorities. 2012 is simply the last chance to prevent the transformation of the nation’s health care and the massive expansion of government power. If that doesn’t concentrate the minds of an American people that polls tell us overwhelming favor repeal, nothing will.
Opponents say they will never stop fighting the bill. But after the unprincipled and cowardly reversal of Chief Justice John Roberts that enabled the administration to fend off a challenge to Obamacare’s constitutionality, the only plausible option is repeal. Attempts to nip at the edges of the problem via funding cuts would make implementation more cumbersome but it would not stop it. It is simply a fact that once the federal insurance exchanges are put in place and all the other elements of the new infrastructure of American health care have been established, including the personal mandate that will require individuals to purchase insurance, dismantling all of that will be impossible. The quality and the nature of health care in this country will be fundamentally altered for the worse.
Once freedom is lost to governments, recovering those rights is always an uphill climb. The erosion of personal liberty under the Obamacare regime will be great. Along with the intrusion of the government into health care policy that is the inevitable result of the legislation, the mandate to impose payment for services like abortion and contraception will change the definition of religious freedom in the United States for the worse. Liberty of conscience to refuse to pay for things that violate the religious precepts of believers will be severely restricted. Once lost, these rights may never be recovered.
Cynics are fond of saying that while the political class has much to gain and lose on Election Day, the public has little stake in the outcome. There is often a kernel of truth in this observation, but not in 2012. Obamacare means this time the life and the rights of every American will be changed by the results.
Jonathan is absolute right. In my opinion, next to terrorism, the repeal of Obamacare is the most important and convincing reason for Republican victories. If it is not repealed, every nightmare of the welfare state with its consequent reckless spending and taxing will unfold.
I truly believe all religious people should fight against the mandate that imposes on our religious liberty, no matter what religion. As a Catholic, I do not see the Catholic church "giving in". They will refuse to follow the mandate, I believe. As a nurse, I have patients who demand services and they demand these services immediately! Whether CT scans, MRIs, blood tests, etc. They do not realize with Obamacare, these tests will be restricted. They may not have these tests for months, much less a day or two wait. They may not be allowed to even have these tests. People do not realize the ramifications of Obamacare, but I see it occurring already. Very scary. And patients wear blindfolds.
Surely as an ethical and caring provider you don't give tests and services to patients based upon their "demands" but upon medical necessity. Obamacare just makes sure that all providers act with these high standards. There is ample evidence that the pure "fee for service" model has clearly lured too many folks to provide unnecessary and even dangerous tests and services.
I don't want the government telling me when I must wash my car, and I even less want them forcing me to pay someone to hire someone else to then decide when I may wash it, and then to give me back only part of the money I am required to pay someone else to do it. n nCatastrophic care is one thing but as to comprehensive – Obamacare means that I am paying $200 for a $50 office visit, with the doctor only getting $25 of that — neither I nor the doctor are coming out ahead and how is this good?
Also, one of the biggest things is the lack of extending the tax cuts. Most of us in the middle class can't affoard to have 5-10% more of our income stolen from us by the federal government.
There is a consensus in Washington to extend the tax cuts for the middle class, you have little to worry about. The dispute is about helping the rich pay a bit more…just as Mitt Romney VOLUNTARILY did this past year.
John Roberts' name should go down in infamy. He is far worse than the liberals on the court, because he was put on the court by a conservative with the understanding that he would protect fundamental American rights. The liberals are appointed by people like Clinton and Obama who want to overturn American values. Not so Roberts. He knew he had a job to do on the Court, and that was to counteract the villainous betrayal by the liberals. Roberts' is a wretched, cowardly Benedict Arnold of our times.
No, his opinion was brilliantly conservative. He acted as a Chief Justice in the highest traditions of the court, not as a political hack with "a job to do on the Court".
repeal obamacare, give us the same system Israel has.
Oh, so now you hold Israel up as an example we should follow? Or is it only in the rare case when you can use it to support your agenda? If you had any credibility, then your answer to that question would be a test of it.
money is taken out of my paycheck to provide cradle to grave health care to Israelis. Zionism = Racism
Not only are you an anti-semite and an idiot, you can't even stick to your own subject! Somehow Obamacare morphs into aid to Israel! Funny how it all comes back to the same thing. True sign of an anti-semite when All Roads Lead to Zion.
Mitt Romney may not have wished for such a seminal election, but he has it; I hope he can rise to the occasion.
When Romney fought for Romneycare (aka Obamacare) in Massachusetts, he called those who objected to having to buy health insurance "free riders."
Whether or not that is true is beside the point. There are a whole host of differences between the two laws. For starters, Obamacare is a one-size-fits-all for over 300 million people that is an affront to the federalist system on which this great country was founded.
Everyone with health insurance results in one size fits all?
He also may have learned from his mistakes. Romneycare is an unmitigated disaster and you don't want it on the national level!
The wingnuts are true to their history: n nRonald Reagan: “[I]f you don’t [stop Medicare] and I don’t do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children what it once was like in America when men were free.” [1961] n nGeorge H.W. Bush: Described Medicare in 1964 as “socialized medicine.” [1964] n nBarry Goldwater: “Having given our pensioners their medical care in kind, why not food baskets, why not public housing accommodations, why not vacation resorts, why not a ration of cigarettes for those who smoke and of beer for those who drink.” [1964] n nBob Dole: In 1996, while running for the Presidency, Dole openly bragged that he was one of 12 House members who voted against creating Medicare in 1965. “I was there, fighting the fight, voting against Medicare . . . because we knew it wouldn’t work in 1965.” [1965]
I don't know if your quotes are authentic, but the sentiments are true–it is a form of socialized medicine, and it is depriving our liberties, and its logic does extend to many other things. And, sadly, you are right that Romney is not in a good position to argue against ObamaCare. n nYou seem to like ObamaCare. I can't image why. n
> You seem to like ObamaCare. I can't image why. n nIf ObamaCare is repealed, the old failed status quo will be restored. Adults denied care because of pre-existing conditions, ever-increasing costs, and increased numbers of uninsured…these features were in place before health care reform. The GOP will have neither the votes nor the political will to implement a replacement beyond repeal (=the Democrats needed twelve months and a near-filibuster-proof supermajority to pass their reform).
False dichotomy, Marcus. False choice of "ObamaCare of the Abyss". n nSome of these problems are caused by the same things that animates ObamaCare (like spiraling costs) and some could be fixed by other means (pre-existing conditions). In every case, ObamaCare makes things vastly worse. n nMany other ways to improve health care/insurance. ObamaCare doubles down on worst ideas.
Should read: "False choice of "ObamaCare VERSUS the Abyss".
Romney: Uninsured can seek care in ER nThe Hill (blog) – 1 hour ago nBy Elise Viebeck – 09/24/12 12:07 PM ET Mitt Romney suggested Sunday that Americans who lack insurance can find the care they need in emergency rooms – a position that contradicts the rationale behind his Massachusetts healthcare law
Exactly! Once we lose our freedom to buy our own insurance, we will never get it back.. Canada style healthcare is not good enough for America.!
Health care reform is here to stay, folks. Ten years from now we're all going to look back at this and laugh. No doubt by that time the righties will be claiming credit for it ("Hey, the individual mandate was originally OUR idea!"). __
Obamacare is one of a series of issues that would dictate we toss out the President. The economy (which is itself a collection of issues including lowest employment in 30 years, lowest new startups in recent memory, more regulations on business), foreign policy, new taxes (including those in Obamacare, such as taxes on the revenues (not profits) of medical device companies), the debt, and this in the 60 seconds I took to write this. Never mind that the next president will likely re-shape the Supreme Court for a generation, deciding issues like same-sex marriage and other pivotal social questions. 3 justices look ready to retire, including 1 on the left, 1 on the right and a swing justice. We need to stop worrying about who made what verbal blunder (and don't mistake, Messrs. "you didn't build that" Obama and "put y'all back in chains" Biden have their share) and vote real issues. For me, after 4 years of Obama, I've had enough. 12 million jobs and reduce the debt: vote Romney / Ryan.
So this is where the crazy boys hang out… n nWell it's good to know you want to support one of the most inequitable and wasteful health systems in the world today, and no doubt believe that supporting tax cuts for the rich alone is equivalent to freedom. n nIn the real world, the freedom of the poor to prefer to have their teeth out rather than see a dentist is not freedom. No, it's really not. n nAnd why is healthcare not broccoli? Well because you have a moral duty to ensure the health of your fellow human beings, that's why. Good on Obama and good on Pelosi even more for securing this for the US people. And shame on rightwingers who talk abstractly of 'freedom' while their poorer neighbrous grovel in the dust.
Here is the issue: Is health care a right or not? Those on the left trot out emotionally appealing arguments that suggest it is. Those on the right say that nowhere in our Constitution is it listed as a right. The left screams "Evil, cruel, hateful!" The right says "We can't afford it, it's unconstitutional, and it must go." The fact is that to uphold Obamacare is to say "We no longer recognize any restriction on the power of the federal government to act." If that doesn't scare you, liberal or conservative, then we are lost and it's everybody for themselves.
Obamacare must be stopped! The last thing America wants is the longer lifespan and lower infant mortality that countries with universal healthcare has. I mean, does America really want an Israeli style health care system that has given Israelis the fourth longest life spans in the world? Nonsense. Give us worries about what happens if we we lose our health insurance when we get laid off any day.