« | »

Obama Better Off If Obama-Care Overturned

From the Obama re-election campaign strategists at the Daily Beast:

The Case for Losing Obamacare

By Peter J. Boyer
March 27, 2012

While a Supreme Court rejection of Obamacare this summer would be an embarrassment for the president, and an obvious blow to his legacy, a case can be made that a health-care defeat in the high court might actually benefit Obama in his reelection campaign.

Apart from the fact that Republicans would lose their most animating issue in the presidential race, the overturning of the health-care reform law would free Obama of the burden of having to mount a broad defense of his health-care plan as a centerpiece of his campaign.

The president, who can read polls, managed to absent himself from any public observance of the reform law’s second anniversary last week.

What public observance? The news media and the rest of the Democrat Party have studiously avoided giving any attention to Mr. Obama’s historic achievement.

A Supreme Court invalidation of the reform law’s individual mandate, the feature that Americans find most odious (PDF) would allow Obama to embrace the issue anew, focusing on those portions of the reform (such as the provision allowing families to keep their children on their policies until they reach the age of 26) that most people actually like. Obama’s Democratic allies, meanwhile, could hammer home the importance of deciding who will be making the next appointments to the Supreme Court

Oh, yeah. Judicial appointments will be a sure winner for Obama.

If Obamacare stands, on the other hand, the president faces a politically vexing dynamic that is an inevitable consequence of his health-care reform—the ongoing process of actually implementing the sweeping law.

When the 2,700-page bill was passed into law, critics complained that few in Congress had actually read the legislation (a complaint underscored by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s remark that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it”). The writing of health-care regulations by federal bureaucrats amounts to a loudly amplified, slow-motion reading of the Affordable Care Act, a process fraught with the prospect of unwelcome surprise.

Unless you actually took the trouble to read the bill and realize what was in store for the country. Unlike the Democrats in Congress or the reporters at the Daily Beast.

That is what happened in January, when the Department of Health and Human Services announced that its interpretation of the health-reform law required employers to provide their workers with contraception services, including sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs. That was an incitement to many Catholics, and church leaders were not assuaged by the administration’s subsequent tweaking of the mandate, shifting the contraception obligation from employers to insurers…

The unfolding reality of Obamacare is only likely to intensify such opposition

How hilarious. Even the hardcore Leftists at the Daily Beast realize that Obama-Care is just a Pandora’s box of horrors.

Earlier this month, HHS announced the finalization of yet another health care rule, this one (PDF) regulating the state health-care exchanges that were established by the reform law. In an apparent effort to avoid an abortion controversy, the HHS regulation requires people insured by policies that provide elective abortions to pay a separate premium ($1), in addition to the cost of the policy. Prolife activists seized upon this regulation, calling it an “abortion premium” that would require citizens to unwittingly help pay for others’ abortions out of their own pockets. This newest controversy became the basis of yet another amicus brief (PDF) filed in opposition to Obamacare.

And never mind that Obama and the Democrats swore up and down that Obama-Care would not involve abortion.

If that or any other legal argument against Obamacare persuades a majority of the justices, it would certainly place a cloud over Obama’s first-term record. But Obama might well see a silver lining in November.

How hilarious is that?

This article was posted by Steve on Tuesday, March 27th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

8 Responses to “Obama Better Off If Obama-Care Overturned”

  1. tranquil.night says:

    The Left is coming totally unhinged lately.

  2. artboyusa says:

    If it gets overturned, Obama loses. If it doesn’t he still loses, is how I see it. Remember when people said he was the smartest person ever to be president? You don’t hear that too much nowadays. Thank god for his arogance, his narrow mindedness and his general incompetence, though. That’s all that stands between us and social democracy but give him another four years, and he might actually learn how to do the job – then we’re screwed.

  3. Rusty Shackleford says:

    “A Supreme Court invalidation of the reform law’s individual mandate…”

    ….will invalidate the entire law as the hippie-dippie democrat congress didn’t write in a separation clause. They either knew this going in, thinking that it’s too important to leave out or didn’t think that it would ever be struck down.

    On the individual mandate alone, the entire law becomes unconstitutional. Congress can not go back and re-write it and try again…at least not until there’s a democrat majority in the house (God forbid). So, if the supremes strike it down….in 6 or 10 years the national socialists will try again. They never sleep, never give up. Their hatred of the US is surpassed only by their love of power and communism.

  4. NoNeoCommies says:

    I have suspected that someone involved in the bill’s creation wanted to be able to say “Well, we tried.” while actually having it shot down so it would never be exposed to the ignorant for the failure it is.

    How could they forget to include the boilerplate severance clause?

  5. JohnMG says:

    …..”would free Obama of the burden of having to mount a broad defense of his health-care plan as a centerpiece of his campaign…….”

    It is to laugh. Without this turkey of a health-care plan hanging around his neck like an albatros, the public could devote full time to tearing him a “new one” over his dismal failure in handling the economy, jobs, fuel prices, and a seemingly endless list of hot-button items he’s spent the last three years ignoring.

    No. I really prefer he defend this Obama-care debacle along with the rest of his record. Actually, I’d like to see something else added to his resume`…………his criminal record.

    • Liberals Demise says:

      Semper Fi , Marine!
      “Well said”
      The house boy did say that if he did not accomplish anything in his first 3 years, he didn’t deserve a second term.
      Another lie from the liar.

    • JohnMG says:

      Back at ya’, LD. Thought maybe you’d shipped over for the duration. Good to hear from you.


  6. David says:

    This could work. I was looking back over videos of the candidate Obama’s grilling of Hillary over her health care plan and what he brings up are the individual mandate and taxing medical devices. Seems like the democrats got the person of Obama but Hillary’s policies. Changing to a moderate reform (even if it isn’t but the media sells it that way) and throwing Hillary and (the now re-branded) Hillary-care 2.0 under the bus could actually save him from facing the flip-flop criticism.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »