Obama Offers a Blueprint for Democrats to Defend Health Law
Obama offers a blueprint for Democrats to defend health law
President Obamas remarks on Tuesday hailing the 7 million-plus Americans who enrolled in the health-care exchanges were more than a victory lap. They also served as his blueprint to the Democrats running for re-election -- from Mary Landrieu in Louisiana and Kay Hagan in North Carolina, to Mark Udall in Colorado and Gary Peters in Michigan -- on how to defend the law in this tough political environment for their party. The question is whether these Democrats make the same arguments and borrow the same language; many of them would prefer that health care simply fade as an issue. Heres what Obama said:
Because of the Affordable Care Act, 100 million Americans have gained free preventive care, like mammograms and contraceptive care, under their existing plans. Because of this law, nearly 8 million seniors have saved almost $10 billion on their medicine because weve closed a gaping hole in Medicares prescription drug plan And because of this law, a whole lot of families wont be driven into bankruptcy by a serious illness, because the Affordable Care Act prevents your insurer from placing dollar limits on the coverage they provide.
Why are folks working so hard for people not to have health insurance? Why are they so mad about the idea of folks having health insurance?
Those who have based their entire political agenda on repealing it have to explain to the country why Jeanne should go back to being uninsured. They should explain why Sean and his family should go back to paying thousands and thousands of dollars more. Theyve got to explain why Marla doesnt deserve to feel like shes got value.
Nobody remembers well those who stand in the way of Americas progress or our people. And thats what the Affordable Care Act represents. As messy as its been sometimes, as contentious as its been sometimes, it is progress.
Of course, its one thing for the president to say these things; he isn't running for re-election again. He also isn't an asset to red-state Democrats like Mary Landrieu in Louisiana, Mark Pryor in Arkansas, and Mark Begich in Alaska. And with an approval rating in the low- to mid-40s, he also isn't an asset to Mark Udall in Colorado, Gary Peters in Michigan, and Bruce Braley in Iowa. But the way to read Obamas remarks yesterday was essentially this: As someone whos won two presidential elections and run two outstanding campaigns, heres how I would defend the law if I were running again And this isn't really a new way to defend an entitlement program. Its a formula defenders of Medicare and Social Security have used for years -- personalizing the idea of cuts.
*** What does the GOP do now?
The next few months for Republicans will be fascinating, because there are two different viewpoints among conservatives: 1) Lets keep on pushing repeal, and 2) Weve got to deal with a law that isnt going away. Bill Kristol advocates the first viewpoint. Conservative writer Ramesh Ponnuru argues that Republicans need to accept the second viewpoint in a piece entitled, Stop Waiting for Obamacare to Implode. He writes about the 7 million who are now enrolled in the exchanges: Of course, those numbers don't give us any reason to think that the law will do a lot of good at a reasonable price, or that its basic structure can be modified to pass that test. But the supporters are right that meeting the target of 7 million enrollments will make repealing and replacing the law harder. More from Ponnuru: The likelihood of replacement would be higher if there was an alternative that didn't take away people's insurance -- one that promised to cover roughly as many people as Obamacare does, or even more. No doubt, Republicans can paper over their differences through November and essentially avoid dealing with this issue now. But there is this reality staring them in the face: According to the CBO, enrollment in the exchanges is expected to double by next year and quadruple by 2017 -- the earliest date wed see a Republican in the White House when they could actually make any MAJOR changes to the law. It already seems politically hard to figure out how Republicans would sell a repeal and replace that would potentially impact 15 million folks (adding up private/Medicaid and young folks staying on parents policies). By 2017, the number of folks receiving health insurance under this law could be closer to 30 million. Its why were convinced this law is now politically impossible to repeal.
*** Quinnipiac poll: Majority still opposes the health-care law
See the rest here: