|
Post by jeffolie on Jun 28, 2012 10:55:11 GMT -6
ObamaCare Nov Rep issue'repeal it'
The Sup Ct. ruling ACA, Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare including the individual mandate as constitutional because Justice Roberts voted for it ... now gives Republicans a campaign isssue: vote Republican inorder to repeal it.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 28, 2012 11:39:53 GMT -6
My question is: Do the Republicans really want to repeal it?
It's a bonanza for Health Insurance Companies due to the forced "demand" increase caused by the mandate.
Republicans are all about helping Big Money interests get richer.
Do they really want to repeal such a windfall for the Health Insurance Racket AND for Big Pharma?
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Jun 28, 2012 12:16:18 GMT -6
My question is: Do the Republicans really want to repeal it? It's a bonanza for Health Insurance Companies due to the forced "demand" increase caused by the mandate. Republicans are all about helping Big Money interests get richer. Do they really want to repeal such a windfall for the Health Insurance Racket AND for Big Pharma? Chief Justice John Roberts wrote a very canny ruling. Chief Justice John G. Roberts is an evil genius. The ruling to uphold the Affordable Care Act is, on its face, a win for President Obama both because the media are saying it is and because it is the signature piece of legislation of his first term. But it may turn out to be a pyrrhic victory, as Roberts accomplished numerous, subtle victories for conservative Republicans. First, remember that “Obamacare” and the individual mandate started out as a proposal from the conservative Heritage Foundation as a counterproposal to the Clinton administration’s health care plan. The only reasons Republicans are now opposed to it is because Obama proposed it and is getting credit for it. Before it was Obamacare, the program was known as Romneycare in Massachusetts — and if the 2008 election had gone the other way, it might be known as McCaincare today. Meantime, the survival of the Affordable Care Act eliminates any clamor for real, progressive health care reform, whether universal Medicare or for the creation of a public insurance option. Such programs are anathema to conservatives who want most things privatized — either for ideological reasons or so that their corporate masters can further enrich themselves. The effect of the law will be to drive millions of people to buy insurance from insurance companies in many cases with federally subsidized funds, lining the pockets of those corporations with the public’s money. Is it any surprise that health care stocks were surging in the wake of the ruling? And while the decision is a political boost for Obama in the near term, it will also energize the Republican base this fall. Before the decision was announced, House Speaker John Boehner was already saying he would lead the charge to repeal the ACA if any part of it survived. The decision may or may not affect Obama’s reelection chances, but it could well make it harder for Democrats to hold the Senate and take the House. Conversely, if the court had struck down the ACA, it would have energized the Democratic base — and activated many of the 30-40 million people who suddenly saw the promise of affordable health ripped away from them. But Roberts’ really brilliant move was to uphold the individual mandate under Congress’s taxing authority and explicitly to reject its constitutionality under the commerce clause. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed out in her opinion, there was no reason for Roberts to rule on the commerce clause question, because a majority agreed that the act was a constitutional tax penalty. Roberts did so regardless to create with the four conservative dissenters a majority view that a health insurance mandate violates the commerce clause. This result is in keeping with Roberts’ conservative view of restricting federal power and leaves him free to vote to strike down progressive federal legislation as unauthorized by the commerce clause. Moreover, by characterizing the individual mandate as a tax, Roberts hands Republicans a facile campaign cry that Obamacare Means New Taxes — and that Democrats are the party of taxation. Finally, his decision allows Roberts to falsely paint himself as a neutral arbiter whose principled constitutional interpretations cannot be overridden by his politics. He implies that he thinks the law is a bad idea by adding a note at the end of his decision that the court expresses no opinion on its wisdom. If the court is not expressing an opinion, there would be no need to say so. But Roberts adds the line to underscore what a principled jurist he is voting that the law is constitutional even though he disapproves of it. The reality, of course, is that Roberts has permitted the implementation of a conservative health-care regime, energized the Republican base, preserved his ability to vote against liberal congressional measures as violating the commerce clause and aggrandized himself as an apolitical Chief Justice. I tip my hat to his evil genius. Malchman is an attorney and associate adjunct professor of law at Cardozo Law School. Read more: www.nydailynews.com/opinion/john-roberts-evil-genius-article-1.1103982#ixzz1z73PluPM
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Jun 28, 2012 16:12:54 GMT -6
Like great ping pong players, the super PACs know how to hit the incoming ping pong ball spinning to the right and return the ping pong ball across the little net with a counter spin to the left. Spin, Counter spin: Karl Rove spin vs Matt Canter counter spin ==================================== " ... "While we would have preferred to see Obamacare struck down, this decision will drive Republican voter intensity sky-high," Steven Law, president and CEO of American Crossroads said in a statement Thursday. " The last time Obamacare was litigated in a general election, Republicans picked up an historic number of seats in the U.S. House and made big gains in the U.S. Senate." American Crossroads is one of two major super PACs connected to Karl Rove which each ran health care-based attack ads in 2010. The GOP netted six Senate seats that fall. In an email to the press Thursday morning, the National Republican Senatorial Committee highlighted political expert Stu Rothenberg, who wrote that the decision "enhances the Republicans' political position heading to November" in reference to party strategy overall. But Democrats strongly disagree, arguing that the decision doesn't change the landscape for Senate races. "This desperate spin game from Republicans is a shameless attempt at distraction from more important issues," Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokesman Matt Canter told Yahoo News, calling the economy, the middle class and Republican efforts to privatize Medicare the most pivotal issues. Canter conceded that there are Democrats who believed prior to the ruling that portions of the health care law should be changed. "Democratic candidates have and will continue to make their own proposals to do just that," Canter wrote in a follow-up email. "I do expect that today's decision will have a positive impact on our campaigns around the country, motivating our supporters, and giving our candidates a chance to talk about many of the specifics of this bill—like insuring coverage for Americans with pre-existing conditions and expanding coverage for our country's veterans," Canter wrote. Democrats running for the Senate in competitive states stuck to their positions Thursday, with many mentioning potential improvements for the law. "The Affordable Care Act is an important first step in curbing discriminatory... news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/republicans-claim-supreme-court-ruling-boost-downballot-races-182224798.html
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Jun 28, 2012 16:38:15 GMT -6
economic plus political gridlock was my prediction for 2011 & 2012...no surprises from the main players who 'privatize profits' and stick the taxpayers with the losses as 'socialize the losses' Jesse [jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com] and I are on the same page now============================ '... I think the most reliable forecast is that rational discussion will continue to decrease, while polarized hysteria will dominate much of the commentary and most of the conversation. "... All this is of most interest to us because of its significance on the inability to generate economic recovery. www.jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 28, 2012 23:17:13 GMT -6
This is not going to have a "positive" impact on most Democrats' campaigns.
Forcing people to participate in a Federal program for which they must pay is the mark of a dictatorship.
Democrats now own this one.
Even though many Republicans secretly love the mandate, they can claim the contrary--and their voting records may well support their feigned opposition.
Kind of like the Financial Industry bailout.
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 29, 2012 5:03:46 GMT -6
The concept of mandatory auto insurance is often used to justify the mandate for health insurance.
But that comparison has NO application.
If the "mandated" Auto insurance prices rise too high, people can just stop driving--and thus avoid higher insurance prices.
But if "mandated" Health insurance prices are too high, people STILL have to buy it. There is no way to avoid the higher prices.
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Jun 29, 2012 10:24:01 GMT -6
Energizing the base...issue that is independent of the jobs issue Romney never overwhelmed Republican conservatives and still he managed to energize the base getting 43,000 donations quickly...in 24 hours The conservatives now have a campaign issue that is independent of the jobs issue=========================== Smith & Wesson up over 17% stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=SWHC&p=D&b=5&g=0&id=p11487041235============================= " .... Romney started raising funds immediately after the decision, and in a message to supporters Friday morning his campaign spokeswoman said he had raised $4.3 million from 43,000 donations... Early signs indicate the ruling also stirred up voters who could be active in the November election ... " more ... thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/235551-romney-campaign-reports-42m-raised-off-healthcare-ruling-
|
|
|
Post by jeffolie on Jul 5, 2012 14:17:45 GMT -6
Robert Frost: 'miles to go before I sleep, miles to go before I sleep'...the road less traveled The road less traveled here is the healthcare, ACA, ObamaCare issue. Romney has an issue 'less important' than jobs, independent from the economy and jobs issue in healthcare which is meaningful or significant to maybe 20% of the voters. Romeny 'must travel the road less traveled' aka healthcare until the economy shows its hand for the month or 2 before the Nov voting. Future events will shape the Oct debates, healthcare may or may not be an independent for the economy issue by then...hence until then time passes the press, main stream media and super PAC have time to kill, waste money: 'miles to go before I sleep, miles to go before I sleep'... ============================= July 5, 2012 Americans See More Economic Harm Than Good in Health Law Independents help tilt the balance to the negative by Frank Newport PRINCETON, NJ -- Americans are more likely to say the 2010 healthcare law upheld by the Supreme Court last week will hurt the national economy (46%) rather than help it (37%), while 18% say they don't know or that it will have no effect. Healthcare spending accounts for between one-sixth and one-fifth of the U.S. gross domestic product. Thus, the overhaul of the U.S. healthcare system that the Affordable Care Act provides will certainly have an effect not just on the U.S. healthcare system, but on the U.S. economy more broadly. Not even economists who study this for a living can estimate the ACA's precise impact on the U.S. economy over the years ahead, given that the bill is huge and multifaceted, and carries with it many assumptions about cost savings and how the healthcare system will react to its provisions. Additionally, while some of the law's provisions have gone into effect, the majority of them have yet to be implemented, providing no real-world empirical evidence on its full economic impact. Average Americans are certainly in no better position than economists to know exactly how the legislation will affect the economy, but their assumptions and perceptions have political repercussions nevertheless. And at this point, Americans' views on the economic impact of the ACA are more negative than positive. Views of the economic impact of the ACA are, as is true with everything else about the legislation, bound up with politics. Republicans, who generally oppose the ACA, overwhelmingly think it will hurt the economy, while Democrats, who generally favor it, think it will help. Independents tilt toward the "hurt" rather than the "help" position. Democrats are a little less likely to say the ACA will help the economy than Republicans are to say it will hurt it. The fact that independents are more likely to say it will hurt than help the economy -- by a 14-percentage-point margin -- is important in the context of the current presidential election. Implications Proponents of the ACA argue that it has many benefits, including in particular decreasing the number of Americans who don't have health insurance. Opponents argue against it partly on philosophical grounds, decrying the ACA's reliance on government to control this personal aspect of Americans' lives. The practical impact of the law on the healthcare system and the economy will not be fully known until it has been place and medical providers and consumers react to the changes. But with the economy continuing to top the list of Americans' perceived most important problems facing the country, the impact of the ACA on the national economy is a major consideration. The current data show that Americans are as divided on the question of the ACA's economic impact as they are on the bill itself, heavily along political lines. But Americans' overall tilt toward the view that the ACA will hurt the economy may be a liability for President Obama and the ACA's proponents. www.gallup.com/poll/155513/Americans-Economic-Harm-Good-Health-Law.aspx?utm_source=alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All Gallup Headlines - Economy
|
|