Given that the Supreme Court has narrowly ruled in favor of the Affordable Care At, its final potential test is now with the voters in the 2012 election. In a supreme act of hypocrisy Mitt Romney, the political father of this exact style of health care program in Massachusetts, and the rest of the Republican party have made repeal of Obamacare a fundamental campaign promise. It is a day one promise from the Romney campaign.
If Romney wins and Republicans pick up solid majorities in both houses of Congress they can and likely will repeal the law. Don’t believe anyone claiming that some arcane Senate custom will stop a determined majority simply because they don’t have 60 votes. Far too many reporters and pundits blindly accept the idea mere Senate customs are rules, and they have absolutely no understanding how technically easy it is for the Senate majority to complete reinterpret any rules they want.
The important thing is that the sole judge of what any Senate rule actually means is a simple majority of Senators. A majority can effectively rewrite the rules at any time. The so called “nuclear option” is simply a majority agreeing to accept a new interpretation of what some Senate rules.
Republican are promising to use reconciliation to repeal the law with a simple majority. Would doing that violate the parts of the Byrd rule? From my perspective it might, but ultimately my opinion on the matter doesn’t mean squat. Does it matter what the Senate Parliamentarian thinks? No, he only advises the Senate, but the actual power to decide what violates the Byrd Rule resides with the presiding officer, who in this scenario would be a Republican. The majority can also always replace the Parliamentarian if they want. There is no legal reason the Republicans can’t simply reject every point of order the Democrats raise against a reconciliation bill to repeal the ACA.
The Republicans have repeatedly promised to repeal Obamacare if they win this year. They technically would have the power to if they are willing to play fast and loose with Senate customs. That makes the 2012 election the last real potential hurdle for the law. After this election, the law begins full implementation before the next one, which makes full repeal infinitely more difficult from both a political and policy perspective.




33 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
So what you’re saying is that we should vote the straight Republican ticket, 2012?
So the GOPers promise to repeal the Heritage Foundation’s Health Plan, the one Romney put in place in MA, while the Democrats are creaming in their pants because the court upheld the Heritage Foundation’s Health Plan, which they put in place for the whole country.
What a perfect example of how completely phony the left vs. right, GOP vs. Dem. nonsense has become. There’s no ideology any more. It’s just 2 rival gangs fighting for power in a 1 party state.
It seems to me that for any progressive thinker the problem of the aca is now somewhat complex. We know that it was a sellout by 0 and written by an insurance lackey for a senator held in thrall by the ins corpses. What we really wanted was snatched away (medicare for all) and replaced by a tease of ‘public option’ which was pushed off of the table. This act was passed. I will stipulate that now it is better than nothing. Many people will now be covered that should have been covered earlier, and probably many people died due to the slow implementation. Apparently there are no real cost controls and that means that the costs may still be prohibitive for many. Probably the most important parts are not being rejected for prior medical problems and not being denied coverage once you actually get sick. Since it was written by ins people, I’m sure that I have overlooked some important out for the corpses, but apparently the ins corpses don’t have the final say on whether you live or die.
It is true. Romney’s hypocrisy knows no bounds. I’m starting to get the feeling that enthusiasm on the right has recently started to wain, though. Evangelicals are not very enthusiastic for reasons we all know here. All groups except white males are moving away from him. This may get some of them riled back up for a while but in the end they’re still left with Mitt Romney.
the Elites who run this nation must laughing all over themselves!
Romney is not going to repeal RomneyCare/ObamaCare
the real genius of this entire 2012 election is the fact that we have two candidates Obama and Romney who love letting insurance companies rape americans.
What happen to progressives and liberals in 2008 is about to happen to the tea party. Yes the tea party is about to get played for fools. Romney is the Republican Trojan Horse who helps the Elites maintain the Status Quo.
Romney will protect Obamacare, just like Judge Roberts done.
welcome to Govt. By Corporations For Corporations.
Corporations don’t vote Dem or Gop, they vote for Both and they Control Both.
We have two Corporate Parties “Dems and Reps” that are totally own by Corporations and do what their master want, and nothing else.
It should not surprise anyone, that the guy who created Obamacare Romney is running as a Rep, and the guy he is running against Obama got RomneyCare/Obamacare pass.
Romney is Insurance for the Health Insurance Companies that want this law protected.
All war is base on deception! Sun Tzu
The general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. = Health Insurance Companies using Sun Tzu ideas and it is working.
Romney is the new chosen one! Period
the Elites know that real progressives hate ObamaCare and they know Conservatives hate ObamaCare.
Yes! the Elites have put this plan together, and you must admire their work here.
In the middle of a USA Depression, they got Dems to pass a for profit Health Care Bill that only benefits Health Insurance Companies, that takes planning.
“There’s no ideology any more. It’s just 2 rival gangs fighting for power in a 1 party state.” Well put.
I will not vote republican because of this decision. The benefits of the act protect Americans from state based corporate health insurers. Some State’s do not have a good record of protecting their citizens. ICC argument was a red herring. Its about protecting people from sate based corporations in the same manner that African Americans needed protections from state based segregationist.
Americans need access to healthcare service, not coercion under fear of tax penalty and servitude to another corporate entity. Now that it has been approved as a tax, even though the law was not presented that way, we can officially call it the “American Life Tax.”
This mandate, a republican idea, is nothing but servitude to corporations achieved under the color of law and policy which was always the goal. The benefits, alleged will be mitigated over time by the relentless power of money and desire for profit.
This is not a left vs right issue. It is about corporate power and money vs the general welfare of the republic and the governed who have been Sanduskitized!!!!
The moment Americans fall into the left vs right debate….. corporations win!!!!!!
Makes the forth of July and what Jefferson and the founders fought for, a joke?
The 60 vote threshold tauted by Reid was merely an excuse to do nothing that would disturb the politican’s corporate masters and political donors. If the dems had been serious about fixing the problems of this country they would have simply reduced the age requirement for medical to 35 or 40 from 65. that would have left plenty of time to correct the banking industry,war crimes and all the other promises so conviently forgotten.
We are getting the quality of politics we deserve because most americans are selfish, stupid and shortsighted. Now we have another clinton like sellout who does not deserve a second term vs a scumbag that does not deserve a first term
This law is lousy, but i won’t vote republican to,see it repealed, unless they tell me what they will replace it with. But even them how,could you trust them? I don’t think so. I’d rather have this in hand than nothing at all. Just sayin.
Well, the growth of income inequality is worse under Obama than under Bush. Also Obama rejected a Bush Administration concession to write down mortgages.
I would guess that Romney, an empty suit and opportunist, would be more susceptible to pressure (from either than right or the left) than Obama. Obama is no empty suit. He is an ardent neoliberal who is committed to expanding the national security state.
The 60 vote threshold tauted by Reid was merely an excuse to do nothing
It’s my understanding that with each new Congressional session, the Senate can change the rules under which they operate. Despite the Tea Party success in 2011, Reid left unchanged the rules of filibuster (even though changing the rules requires only a majority vote.) Don’t think for a minute that if the leadership changes party come January 2013, the Republicans won’t craft rules that benefit the current ‘win-at-all-costs’ paradigm that defines our politics. To think that Democrats will be able to successfully use the filibuster, anonymous ‘holds’, or any other tool so ably employed the past 3 years by the Republicans is naive. Those ‘rules’ will be disappeared down the conservative rabbit hole, and just as we’ve seen in the House, the Senate will no longer be a deliberative body–but a rubber stamp for conservative policies.
Nearly all our politicians on left and right are neoliberals. Same for Europe. Some more extreme than others is all.
If the Reps win, they won’t be repealing shit. The ACA is corporate friendly. Ye fucking gods, Justice Roberts wrote the majority opinion. What does that tell us?
However, I suspect that the SCOTUS decision could be used to drive even more lower and working class voters to the polls in support of Rep candidates who promise to get rid of ACA. If you can’t afford health insurance to begin with and are faced with (or scared into believing) paying a regressive tax for being too broke, then you very well might vote for the Reps who promise to relieve you this dilemma. And why not? ACA is just one more thing to demonstrate that so called liberals, progressives, and Democrats haven’t given a shit about the working and lower classes since the 1960s.
Nailed it!
Good stuff. I think brainwashed into selfishness and shortsighted stupidity. Like America’s energy policies and use of energy. Wasteful, short sighted, wasting billions of dollars weekly and stupid. Almost like what’s taking place in the state based health insurance corproations preservation act erroneously called ACA Healthcare reform.
Pounding my chest like Tarzan and calling all my primate friends, to action, Planet of the Apes style…. BINGO!!!!!!!!!
All beholding to that corporate dollar as Jefferson feared, for sure!
Your right about Senate rules. At the beginning of each session they can change any rule with a simple majority. I think it likely that no matter who controls the Senate next year, the filibuster will be history.
I would like to think that ACA is better than nothing, but I just can’t. Perhaps the major reason being this analysis from Naked Capitalism that someone else posted a link to yesterday: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/06/obamacare-the-market-state-and-the-nudge-theory.html
Relevant excerpt re “the change in the constitutional order”:
“Bobbitt defines the “market state” here (quote from The Shield of Achilles):
Whereas the nation-state, with its mass free public education, universal franchise, and social security policies, promised to guarantee the welfare of the nation, the market-state promises instead to maximize the opportunity of the [some] people and thus tends to privatize many state activities and to make voting and representative government less influential and more responsive to the market.
Using the tax code to optimize rental extraction — in this case, by health insurance companies — is the very essence of Cass, Sunstein et al’s. Nudge Theory (via Time). And even if the Hobson’s choice between paying the health insurance weasels and paying the IRS is more like a shove than a nudge, it’s not a solution that the nation-state, as Bobbitt defines it, would adopt. But it is a solution the market state would adopt. After all, you have a choice!
Oh, and all the yammering from career “progressives” about how ObamaCare is a step towards a greater reform, or even single payer/Medicare for All, obscures the central issue: The change in the constitutional order. That’s their job, of course; no harm done if you take no account of their policy decoys.”
I’m not sure I can think of a Presidential election in my lifetime where the two candidates were as indistinguishable as Romney and Obama.
Sorry to disagree . . . but I expect a win by R’s will effect change, and conservative/corporate policies will all pass quickly by simple majority vote. OTH, continued leadership by the D’s will retain the bipartisan meme, spouting Senate history of ‘collegiality’, and allow D’s to continue to do nothing with the cover of R obstructionism. What a way to ‘work for the American people’!
Overturning the filibuster is impossible. This is because the Democrats will allow the Republicans to ram shotguns up their asses and fired to preserve their precious kabuki filibuster. This is what happened in 2005 and the Democrats agreed to everything the Republicans wanted unconditionally (wiki gang of 14). DemocRats (and their supporters) are truly scum (idiots).
Isn’t it fucked up that we are in such a state that we have to count on repubs to clean 4 years of obama dem bullshit.
Even though I was quite aware that fascism was here, this obamacare decision really has me saying, fuck it to the whole political processs.
The constitution is meaningless with the congress, president, and courts just making it up as they go along to support corporate interest.
this will be the new normal
Govt. By Corporations For Corporations can’t work unless all the players agree to keep the Status Quo.
The Elites knew that Obama would be a 1 termer, thus the need to make sure Romney won the GOP nomination.
Romney and Obama must laugh at all the fools who think, they hate each other,
Romney and Obama play on the same team, and their team loves screwing the USA middle class.
For all we know Romney and Obama call each other every night, and plan the next lie they are going to tell Progressives and Conservatives.
Look at Ed, Rachel, and Lodo, the so call liberal media, they act like OBAMACARE is a liberal bill? knowing that Obamacare is Romneycare.
the one thing Ed, Rachel, and Lodo, never do is say, Progressives don’t like Obamacare.
thus reason I think Keith Olbermann had to be taken off the air waves this election season.
I’ve been following this very careflly and I am firmly of the belief that…..
if you watch real close, you may realized that Obama = Romney
and Obamacare = Romneycare
and Obama does trade deal that send USA jobs Offshore, just like Romney done at Bain.
newcarguy what did progressives get for helping DEMS control DC
1. Hoover Economic Policies
2. Bob Dole Health Care Bill
3. Bush Tax Cuts
newcarguy, all the above are GOP ideas? WOW!!!
if you watch real carefully you will see that GOP = DEM and there is only 1 political party in the USA, the Corporate Party
welcome to the Lake
Obama’s soldiers,meaning IRS VS household earnings and small business,read the law at scotus webpage,now even who you live with can affect you,appaling!
Bingo!!!
This argument can be expanded to dispute the standard narrative about “competence.” The Obots like to portray Romney at incompetent, while leaving the question open as to what exactly Barack Obama is competent at doing.
I would argue, then, that Obama is a strong, competent President, and so not only is the world going to hell in a handbasket, we will like it.
Speaking of corporations and Supreme Court Decisions…
I reside in the state where Gov. Romney signed the law.
I opposed the law on these points.
A review of the Public Charities Listing from the State’s AG’s Public Charities division revealed incredible number of tax-exempt corporate insurer’s and providers in the Healthcare Industry, in Massachusetts.
No one ever addresses the fairness of using the tax code to compel people to enter into contracts with tax exempt Insurers as BCBS TUFTS HARVARD FALLON. They even stifled debate on the question and DOR boxed people in.
They all claimed it was the cost of medical services for uninsured in the emergency rooms of hospital considered public charities and tax exempt, because they gave that free care? What the was wrong with making sure there was enough money in the UNCOMPENSATED HEALTHCARE POOL? BTW they did a great job of controlling inflation and HC cost as oil hit 147.50 per barrel, not!
They created the issue, to make an issue for political purposes. However, Senator Kennedy’s intentions of universal healthcare is correct. It protects people…
Charlie Baker et. als. met with the top leadership on Beacon Hill, and shoved this down the throats of the voters. It was signed into law and called a victory. Brown supported it and Romney signed it…..
The benefits of the ACA could have been done without a mandate. In my opinion it has always been about getting the mandate, first and ignoring the underlying tax realities of the system, because therein lies the fucking.
State based corporations now getting billions of dollars from the governed, who are coerced under fear of a punitive tax penalty to buy insurance they can’t afford, from in many instances tax exempt corporate insurers considered public charities.
I wonder what Jefferson would say, knowing of his disdain for monopolies in commerce obtained by corporations using money?
http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/archive/2010/02/07/corpspeak-on-the-dangers-of-corporations-and-of-the-supreme-court-quot-jefferson-was-right-quot.aspx
#CorpSpeak: “Jefferson Was Right” about the dangers of corporations and of the Supreme Court.
“I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”
–Thomas Jefferson, letter to to George Logan, 1816
“Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters.”
–Grover Cleveland, 1888
Congress never presented the legislation as a tax, to the Court. In America, using the tax code as a punitive financial mechanism to coerce servitude, to a corporation because you exist is wrong. Then to find the insurance corporation is tax exempt / public charity. That dead wrong…. Jefferson was one smart dude! This 4th we can celebrate new found American servitude under the color of law to another corporate interest group?
I’m tempted to vote for anyone who vows to repeal Obamacare, except I don’t believe the Republicans will really do it.
Jon, two typos that need fixing:
“ultimate” should be “ultimately”
“think” should be “thinks”
bd, I agree that a “Bird in the hand is better than no bird at all.”
Regrettably, it’s an ugly, smelly bird.
The Ship of State has been taking on water for decades. Now that the stern is underwater, the Coast Guard has replaced the captain.
Is it any wonder that the new guy also works for the White Star Line?
Conservative Republicans want to clean away 150 years of law including their own Republican law.
Careful what you wish for, or you might be arrested for walking on the sidewalk and sold by the sheriff to a mining company to die in a mine, something that didn’t end until WWII when you could get away from that sheriff by signing with Uncle Sam.
On health care, you imagine some fantastic simple solution that is so obvious and so cheap and efficient that only by corporate CEOs casting one vote per share to elect their puppet is it not passed by unanimous consent in both chambers. Yet not a single nation in the world has a simple health system anything close to what you think would be 100% embraced by citizens.
No nation in the world has a single payer system. Not Canada. Not France. Not Israel. Not Japan. Not Germany. Not even the UK which has been dismantling the NHS for more than a decade adopting US corporate for profit medical delivery reform advice. Why would the UK dismantle the superb UK single payer with no insurers? Because no one liked it enough to be willing to pay 50% more to fix its problems – no one trusted the NHS to improve.
When 60% want the assurance of being able to get health care without being told they must pass a wealth test, but otherwise can not agree on which of the dozen or so models that a health system can be, and have one priority: choice, what is your solution? A dictator?
For 15 years I was served extremely well by an HMO, but conservatives didn’t like them for a lot of reasons, so they forced them to split into insurance and delivery units. Then insurers created “products” called “HMOs” which were not “health maintenance” but were rationing, so HMO because a dirty word. A new word has been invented: ACO, which is the HMO of the 60s, 70s, and 80s. If I were dictator, I would dictate you chose from competing HMOs in your region, like you must in Israel. unless you agree with me 100%, I will never agree to your health system unless it supports restoring HMOs, or as they are called now ACOs.
Obamacare creates the framework and promotes integrated care and risk and payment to create the alternatives you have for cars or colleges, because a single option is never going to be the best, and will become mediocre, like the NHS did – it was cheap, but it treated people like commodities, like McDonalds where workers and customers are cheap and uniform commodities connected by the cheap commodity food.
But if you let me have my choice, I’ll let you have your choice, which you get to setup – create a not-for-profit ACO that negotiates a single price for total health care so you can sign up Medicare, Medicaid, corporate benefit, exchange, and individual customers at one uniform price and then you become the perfect single payer. If you are the best at it, then everyone will sign up with you because you have the perfect system. If not, individuals will go elsewhere.
Have you actually looked at the Obamacare mandate???
This is like Scalia sitting in the chamber with you loudly mocking him while chained to the floor and him saying “if you don’t shut up I’ll kill you” which he can’t do within the system that exists, even though the books say Scalia can say he can kill you for contempt of court. The IRS compute the tax penalty but can not by law collect it, unless you have a refund due. The law was specifically written to have a tax penalty that can’t be enforced.
Perhaps the conservatives screaming “if you don’t buy insurance, jack boot IRS agents will knock down your door and send you to gitmo” will convince people they should shop for and buy health coverage, because anyone who is rich and avoids paying taxes can easily ignore the mandate and go “naked” without ever paying a dime in IRS tax penalty.
And if the cheapest policy for you as a single person costs more than $8000 (mine today costs $10,000 in the horrid NH market) then no tax penalty if you earn $100K because “affordable” is less than 8% of adjusted gross income. The mandate is a fig leaf to meet the insurance industry demand for a mandate.