Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
Kevin Williamson’s recent piece on Obama contains this graf about what to expect from a Romney administration post-election, which puts a lot of caveats around the idea of repealing and replacing Obamacare (emphasis mine):
“This will be especially important when it comes to repealing Obamacare, the first step of which is: Do not announce that you are repealing Obamacare. The smart way to repeal Obamacare is to revisit the legislation and to amend it in ways that remove the worst of its statist overreach and replace it with the best available free-market alternatives. The Wyden-Ryan approach is one possible model for amending Obamacare, but it is not the only one, and it is not sufficient by itself. In any case, it will be more effective to amend the legislation in such a way that it is effectively repealed and replaced than to have an emotionally satisfying but probably unwinnable fight over repeal per se.”
At New York Mag, Jon Chait responds with laughter.
“Williamson is arguing that conservatives should abandon their obsession with the repeal crusade, and allow Romney to build a consensus for radical changes to the Affordable Care Act... First of all, in the Wyden-Ryan approach, subsidized private insurance through exchanges, is not a reform of Obamacare. It is Obamacare. And this fact illustrates the broader problem with Williamson's argument. He wants conservatives to stop demanding that Romney commit to a full and total effort to repeal every single part of the Affordable Care Act, and instead let him muck around in the legislation so that it conforms with conservative principles. But the reason conservatives are so insistent on pinning Romney down is that, if he were allowed to muck around in the legislation, he'd wind up with something very similar. What conservatives want is for Romney to ignore his technocratic impulses. They have good reason to want that.”
Perhaps this is part of a growing recognition that the best case scenario outcome of the 2012 election could be what Romney promised in 2010: to “Repeal the bad and keep the good.”
- Comment (42)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
Aug '10
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
Percival: Just accept Obamacare as a fait accompli, as John Kerry would say? I'm starting to get that old tingling feeling in my leg again...
...probably just sciatica. I really need to have this checked out by a Government Approved Healthcare Provider. · Jan 16 at 9:05am
Sorry Percival, you'll have to wait. By the way, did you ever smoke a cigarette in the past 15 years ? Eaten a twinkie, had an affair with a teacher, or gotten less than 12 mpg ?
Please leave your name, a scan of your iris identifier, and the Board will review your case. How old did you say you were ?
That old.?.......tsk tsk .
Oct '10
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
The way things appear to be shaping up here, I suspect I'm moving to Scotland in the near future. No, life's not better there. But the golf is.
Apr '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
Ben Domenech
As Klein accurately noted, the waiver method Romney referred to doesn't kick in until 2017, unless Wyden and Brown's bill was to pass changing the relevant date.
This is true, as I noted. If the expected law is different than Romney expects it to be when he arrives, there may be details adjusted.
Nonetheless, the waiver is intended as a band-aid to be applied while repeal is worked on, as Romney emphasizes in virtually every speech.
Oct '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I slipped over and read J. Chait's article. I usually avoid Chait, but ok, this time ...
1) I just realized they call it "Masscare". That is just too easy to lampoon. Massacre. Hee hee. The media is going to have an absolute ball destroying Romney after we nominate him. Half of what they write will be true, and we won't have an answer for it.
If Romney's our candidate, then MassaCre is here to stay, one way or another.
2) Rep. Ross is right - our arguments have to cohere around a rational vision for health care. How about "Repeal the whole thing, keep none of it. Start clean. Turn Medicare and Medicaid over to the states. Fund them initially with block grants from federal taxes, which transition to state funding via state taxes. Then wait 5 years and see what the states come up with." Can we sell something like that?
3) We should have never gotten to this point. The party of the right was co-opted by the progressive project half a century ago. Our first task is to clean house.
Apr '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
Barfly:
3) We should have never gotten to this point. The party of the right was co-opted by the progressive project half a century ago. Our first task is to clean house. · Jan 16 at 11:08am
To my mind, the removal of Progressive Republicans from the party, about a half century ago, is one of the defining features of 20th century political history. Through the first half of the century, Progressives dominated the party. It's true that no Republican president defended the New Deal and expanded the Great Society until Reagan, but McCarthy was really the last gasp of the Roosevelt/Curtis/Hoover party faction. Since then we've just had liberals and conservatives in the party.
Oct '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
No, no,no. This would rapidly devolve into socialized medicine where the only debate is about which party can administer it better. Anathema!
Apr '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
The Chait article is pretty skippable this time, too. Romney railed against Obamacare last cycle, too (although not under that prescient name). He wanted portability in health insurance and other measures, but was pretty keen on respecting the Constitution. MassCare may seem similar to Obamacare to you, but respect for the Tenth Amendment in healthcare has been a big deal for Romney since he first discussed the issue in 1994.
Jan '12
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I very much like the idea of turning Medicaid into a block grant program in which States can match funds, design their own programs, but most importantly, maintain accountability and prevent fraud far better than the feds.
I think many of our problems could be solved by allowing for the interstate sale of health insurance. For example, today, in Florida, if you want to insure people, you have to cover cleft palates, in vitro fertiliaztion, etc. regardless of the patient's age, gender, etc. A "mandate-less" interstate sale would allow for optimum customization. We seem to be a customization country stuck in a one size fits all marketplace.
Second, we should allow for the sale of health insurance like term life. Why can't you, at 18, lock in a rate through age 65 and pay a premium - let insurers take a bet that you will be healthy and give you incentives (think "safe driver") to do so? Employers could then simply offer to pay YOUR premium, but the policy would still be yours.
These are just a few ideas, but step one needs to be full repeal, followed by the end of McCarron-Ferguson.
Aug '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I am beyond frustration with the "roll over-play dead" routine that our party leaders are too happy to employ fight after fight. Oh, they make a lot of noise and draw a few lines in the sand but at the end of the day...it's "here..swallow this one this time and we'll get the next one!" Next time rarely comes and worse yet, the party is still made to look like party of "No" even though we were the ones who compromised. If we don't get better at coming together, forming a direction that is coherent and easy to sell, and above all...staying the course...2012 is a lock for Obama and many other Dems who will ride in on his coat tail. Quit playing nicey-nice and go get it. Repeal it and start over (if you must) and this time but some common sense into it.
Aug '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
First, to answer the question directly, no, the GOP must repeal, completely.
Welcome Rep. Ross...nice post.
Dec '10
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I'm more interested in just leaving the money in the states to begin with rather than running it through the Washington bureaucracy for their cut.
Remove the mandates, yes, but how do consumers purchase what they need when they cannot know their needs? My son was born with a cleft lip/palette, and the quarter million dollars of paid doctor bills I put in my back pocket and ran away from kept me fit enough to stay in the military for years.
Feb '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
This sort of post is why I think the GOP is a thorough, comprehensive failure.
It doesn't even matter if it wins elections or not. It will surrender anyway.
In 2010 Obamacare gave the GOP its greatest electoral success in generations- yet here we are already speculating about the precise mechanics of how the GOP is going to betray the people who are expected to vote for it in 2012.
Hilarious, as well as tragic.
Mar '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
If a bill is 80% or 90% beneficial, it probably has enough structural soundness to warrant editing. If not, it’s always best to scrap it and start from scratch rather than tinker with a framework built on dubious assumptions. Republicans shouldn’t waste any time trying to bash real healthcare reform to fit Obamacare’s Rube Goldberg-like infrastructure. That would simply be a waste of time and Republicans will have a limited time to prove to a skeptical public that market-oriented reforms can and do work.
Mar '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I don't want it repealed. I want it killed in the Supreme Court so that they can never try anything like this again.
Jan '12
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
King Prawn, I don't necessarily disagree with you on the insanity of running the money through the federal govt. But, there would have to be some sort of conference or meeting to reassure folks that when the feds gave up involvement in Medicaid, the transition to something in the States would be seamless.
Second, on the issue of coverage mandates, it would be very easy. You could shop for a policy in any State. Rather than, for example, in Florida where you can buy maybe 3-5 policies, you would have over a thousand. You could tell an insurer i need coverage for X, Y and Z and then get several prices. We do it with Auto, Home, Life, etc right now. The idea of an exchange is a good idea, but where Obamacare gets it wrong is that it needs to be done by 1000 bureaucrats at HHS. Ehealth.com is an example of how you would buy the coverage you need and let insurers bid on your business.
Jan '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I have a question for Rep. Ross or anyone else that may know. I understand that it is currently illegal for hospitals or clinics to sell health insurance - why? I have several fine hospitals w/ peripheral clinics that I'd gladly contract with as an insurer/provider (I'm guessing it would also help the hospitals & clinics with their cash flow problems and help them better acertain what types of specialists they'd need to serve their customer base).
I'd also like the option of tax deductable HSA's,get employers out of the health insurance business and give stipends to employees that could be banked & built-up over a lifetime. I'd cover the 'small stuff'' while building up a privately owned health account that could be gifted to relatives, fellow church congregants, disaster victims or specific disease sufferers.
I'd estimate that that my employers have paid in the hundreds of thousands for my health insurance the past 25 years - I've been very fortunate health-wise. It would be nice to have $100,000 in an account while being insured for catastrophic events, pay cash for routine items.
Jul '10
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
Rep. Dennis Ross: I very much like the idea of turning Medicaid into a block grant program in which States can match funds, design their own programs, but most importantly, maintain accountability and prevent fraud far better than the feds.
...
Two objections to block grants:
1) Why the middleman? Why tax citizens at the federal level, with its runaway deficits and history of pathological fiscal irresponsibility, rather than at the same state level where programs are being administered? States with real checks against runaway spending and reckless fiscal and monetary policies.
2) Why continue the charade that this should ever have been a federal responsibility? Placing it there has just been one more distraction from federal incompetence in protecting the border and monetary policy. Much less nationalization of banks, auto companies, the education industry, and whoever else they can buy or terrorize into kneeling with our tax dollars.
I say pare it down until we find the federal government's core competency.
Thank you for your service.
Dec '10
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
But, the coverage mandates are driven by each state. Florida only has 3-5 policies because only 3-5 companies are willing to offer what the government of Florida demands on behalf of its citizens. If the federal government starts telling state governments what they can and cannot do on behalf of their citizens we're trading one tyrannical road for another. Forcing health insurance to be interstate commerce rather than intrastate just so the federal government can constitutionally get its tentacles into the process is no more savory than Obamacare. The only reason healthcare has any national implications is because of the national government's interference. Once the federal government took on responsibility of an enormous part of the market it became a national problem.
Of course, I'm arguing from where we should be and not from where we are...
Edited on January 16, 2012 at 11:05pmDec '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
I think that falling back on the talk of repealing Obamacare is a mistake. The biggest mistake of this plan is that it relies on politicians to choose which parts are good and which are bad. Also it will probably leave the framework in place so that it could be expanded once again in the future. It relies on the current and future politicians of this country to resist the urge to easily acquire more power over individuals via healthcare. Also it plays into the worst danger of healthcare, which is the slow-encroaching corruption of the populace. Imagine if social security was repealed a few years after is was introduced. Now it IS practically impossible to do anything to it.
No the correct answer is toward repeal with conviction, without any doubt, and without ANY compromise. Its framework must be dismantled completely, and it must be the people that push the politicians to do this. You can't give the other side an inch on this one; the long term effects of Obamacare are too dangerous.
May '11
Re: Should Republicans Stop Fighting for Obamacare's Repeal?
Sisyphus: Either ObamaCare will be repealed or the GOP will permanently lose any pretense of having co-opted the principles inherent in the Tea Party movement. Beginning to prepare the "masses" for the Romney non-repeal predicted by the Economist months ago is premature, but welcome as it reveals Romney and the GOP leadership for what they are and provides the necessary time for a Tea Party alternative to the Parties of Washington rather than wasting another election cycle.
Repeal is "unwinnable" because it is against the graft sucking interests of the Boehner/McConnell led GOP caucus. Trial balloons like this one are just symptoms of the greater sickness, floated too early because, well, it is the stupid party. · Jan 16 at 9:18am
Dead on. If the O-care law is not repealed in 2013 the GOP totally loses the Tea Party and any reason for existence.
Edited on January 17, 2012 at 12:36am