Politics
The Dems get rid of their "pro-lifers," who will be wiped out in 2010. Republicans get to run against "deem and pass" Dems for a good decade or so, at least, if they understand how to teach constitutional government and the rule of law. Impeach Obama for signing an executive order he knows is unconstitutional? What about Bush signing McCain-Feingold into law, while saying he believed it unconstitutional? Republicans need to convince themselves about the Constitution before they can preach it to others.
Of course now GOP can demagogue about how every medical tragedy and disparity in treatment results from Obamacare, just as the Dems did with insurance companies.
See Paul Ryan for a higher road.
I have to agree with much of this. I wish the GOP much luck in winning a majority and repealing this bill. And I then most devoutly wish that it immediately thereafter, in every way, shape, and form, drops completely, and totally, dead. As an encouragement to future others...
This seems pretty off-base to me. With the amount of people who don't have health insurance now, or those who have to decide between paying rent and paying a health insurance premium, you are going to have a hard time demagoging that this plan makes their treatment worse. Everyone else's plan stays the same, so their treatment won't get worse
Like Social Security and Medicare this program is likely going to be very popular, and thus politically untouchable.
"Everyone else's plan stays the same, so their treatment won't get worse."
If you believe that then you must be very stupid.
Nate, who is being demagogic?
Doesn't that popularity depend on how much the plan costs people? If I understand the plan, and we might none of us understand it at the size, people who have currently decided to pay rent rather than for health insurance will now have to pay for health insurance. Is that going to be at the expense of rent?
Its popularity also depends on the extent that Americans are willing to embrace government dependency. Yes, I do know plenty of people willing to give up personal independence for the security of government care. They are also the first people I hear complaining about the inadequacy of government's performance.
I think it truly fitting that today is the anniversary of the enactment of the Stamp Act, the first egregious instance of taxation without representation in our fledgling country. https://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Stamp+Act+1765
“Although opposition to this possible tax from the colonies was soon forthcoming, there was little expectation in Britain, either by members of Parliament or American agents in Great Britain such as Benjamin Franklin, of the intensity of the protest that the tax would generate.”
Look out Dems, the storm is coming!
Kate,
I was referring to the original post, in which the author says the GOP can now "demagogue" on certain issues. I know he was probably being a bit ironic, but I still answered why I think this won't work.
The current plan helps the person who who has to decide between health care and rent by substantially subsidizing the health care cost, which means the person will be able to afford BOTH rent and health care.
Because I personally work for a large employer, my health care is subsidized, and I pay very little every month for health care. This bill makes my sistuation possible for self-employed people, or people at small businesses, and other situations.
Getting back to my original post, I think this notion that the bill increases our dependency on the government isn't likely to work politically, simply because right now the reliance on the private market means a dependence on the insurance industry. And that's not much comfort