Republican leadership fighting to stop illegal immigration amnesty . . .
But health care will be different by gummy!
Obamacare’s tax season chaos hurts Dems’ Supreme Court strategy
Phillip Klein writing at the Washington Examiner:
On March 4, the Supreme Court will hear another significant case on Obamacare — this one concerning the subsidies that the law provides for individuals to purchase insurance.
If the justices rule against the Obama administration — invalidating subsidies for Americans who have purchased insurance through Obamacare’s federal healthcare.gov website — the Democrats’ political strategy will be obvious.
They will focus on the millions of Americans who stand to lose Obamacare subsidies, and they’ll pressure Republicans to pass a “simple fix” to restore them. The assumption among Democrats is that Republicans would be blamed for the disruptions unleashed by any ruling, and would be forced to cave.
Not to worry. It’s ridiculous to think the media would blame Republicans for a Supreme court rejection of Obamacare subsidies . . . or that the GOP would panic and “cave”.
We can be confident that the GOP leadership has already developed an unassailable strategy. Majority Leader McConnell will echo the words of Speaker Boehner in insuring that Obama’s illegal executive action on illegal immigration would not stand: “We’ll fight it ‘tooth and nail’ “.
After all, isn’t that how we were persuaded to vote for these guys?
Anyway, Klein continues:
By the time the Supreme Court rules, Republicans will have a litany of examples to use making the case that Democrats mishandled subsidies. So maybe it’s time to rethink the operating assumption that Republicans will automatically be put on the defensive by any Supreme Court ruling that invalidates the subsidies.
Phil, (Klein, not our own Fifty Watt Phil) might be a little more optimistic than events justify of late. What he says about Democrats is true but “Republicans” and current Republican leadership are two different species, and the latter are in charge. What level of confidence can we have that they will be prepared and not be befuddled or easily fall apart, blowing the last chance to stop the takeover of healthcare by government and all the controls that implies?
Fortunately some Republicans have been thinking ahead to the Supreme Court decision, as Klein to his credit reported the next day. Will “Republican leadership” forcefully and adroitly insure that Obama is handed solid healthcare legislation replacing Obamacare whichever way the Supreme Court rules in King v. Burwell ? Klein reports:
Meet the senator who thinks he’s solved the GOP’s Obamacare dilemma
Klein describes the thinking of Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse. We think that what Sasse proposes, if the Supreme Court rules that Obama has gone outside the law on subsidies, serves as more of a companion legislation to the approach proposed by former Senator Phil Gramm (all these Phils gets confusing).
Sasse’s solution is to adapt “Cobra,” the law that allows workers who have lost or changed jobs to maintain their health coverage for 18 months, to enable Obamacare subsidy recipients to maintain their coverage for a temporary amount of time. Unlike Cobra, however, under which individuals have to pay the full cost of their health insurance premiums, the Sasse plan would provide financial assistance.
“We need a long-term conversation about the alternative to Obamacare, but you can’t do that in the 30 days after the court ruling,” he said.
We think Gramm’s approach could win with the right leadership, whatever the Supreme Court decision because of the great dissatisfaction with Obamacare. Saving the country from Obamacare requires the right leadership, and there’s the rub.
Republicans need a strategy that is easy to understand, broadly popular and difficult to oppose. It must unite Republicans and divide congressional Democrats, while empowering Republican governors and legislators to resist administration pressure. I believe that strategy is what I would call “the freedom option.” Every American should have the right to decide not to participate in ObamaCare: If you like ObamaCare and its subsidies, you can keep it. If you don’t, you are free to buy the health insurance that fits your needs.
The freedom option would fulfill the commitment the president made over and over again about ObamaCare: If you like your health insurance you can keep it. If Republicans crafted a simple bill that guarantees the right of individuals and businesses to opt out of ObamaCare, buy the health insurance they choose from any willing seller (with risk pools completely separate from ObamaCare), millions of Americans would rejoice and exercise this freedom. Such a proposal would be easy for Republicans to articulate and defend. And it would be very difficult for Democrats to attack.
Of all potential Republican proposals, the freedom option seems the most likely to garner the six Democratic votes in the Senate needed to break a filibuster, pass the bill and put it on the president’s desk. If the freedom option were combined with a provision that allowed federal-exchange subsidies or state actions setting up state exchanges, existing providers and recipients of subsidies would not be threatened.
There are other well thought out Republican plans. Leadership needs to promote them now, regardless of the Supreme Court decision.
DLH and R Mall
terrific. they’ll fight just like they fought against blue collar job development since 01-20-09 > they KNOW AHCA nullification is a lost cause > it’s now just to raise money. is that “Lib” enuff?