- Staff
- #51
Day 2 Of Argument...Not A Good Day For The Mandate
- Thread starter CHUMPS FROM OXFORD
- Start date
- 2,908
In regard to the free stuff, that is certainly true but that issue cuts both ways. Over time people have come to get the message that Obamacare is going to cost them more - not turn out to be free stuff. That is why even though people want free stuff, over 50% of the people in the country are now opposed to Obamacare- according to the polls. And most people do want health reform but not reform that is going to cost them more. If I am wrong on all those points then fine. It's Obama's job to explain why less than half the country supports Obamacare even though they want reform and cost savings or even free stuff. His frigging job, not mine.
People like winners. Fair weather fans tend to abandon their team when it's losing. If Obama can be portrayed as enough of a loser (failed subsidies, repealed healthcare reform, serious republican wins in the 2010 election) and not enough of a winner (troop withdrawal) he may never recover.
This case before SCOTUS may serve to remind many people why they dislike PPACA. I'm not backing Romney here, but he has an ace if he'll use it. He can say that the biggest problem with the passage of PPACA was that it wasn't bipartisan, its passage was manipulated behind closed doors, and he (Romney) is the candidate who can bring both parties together for a true bipartisan reform of health care. He can point to his MA history as experience and say he learned what was wrong, what was right, and how to bring reform for the whole country. Again, not that I'm a Romney supporter, but it's better than Obama. There are a lot of people who still want health care reform... If Romney can attract some of the independents, he has a better shot.
As for dependents to age 26, I predict that insurance companies will voluntarily continue that. Before PPACA Blue Cross of AZ was covering children to age 30 on their IFP plans already. Carriers will probably want to look like heros in some ways, and this is one of the less expensive ways to do it. Carriers might also continue the unlimited max benefits on some plans to save face. They'll undoubtedly continue 100% preventive care (most of the plans here in AZ had nearly 100% preventive care prior to PPACA). I also don't see them kicking off any kids currently covered through GI (they may not take any more, but I doubt they'll risk the negative PR by kicking them off).
This case before SCOTUS may serve to remind many people why they dislike PPACA. I'm not backing Romney here, but he has an ace if he'll use it. He can say that the biggest problem with the passage of PPACA was that it wasn't bipartisan, its passage was manipulated behind closed doors, and he (Romney) is the candidate who can bring both parties together for a true bipartisan reform of health care. He can point to his MA history as experience and say he learned what was wrong, what was right, and how to bring reform for the whole country. Again, not that I'm a Romney supporter, but it's better than Obama. There are a lot of people who still want health care reform... If Romney can attract some of the independents, he has a better shot.
As for dependents to age 26, I predict that insurance companies will voluntarily continue that. Before PPACA Blue Cross of AZ was covering children to age 30 on their IFP plans already. Carriers will probably want to look like heros in some ways, and this is one of the less expensive ways to do it. Carriers might also continue the unlimited max benefits on some plans to save face. They'll undoubtedly continue 100% preventive care (most of the plans here in AZ had nearly 100% preventive care prior to PPACA). I also don't see them kicking off any kids currently covered through GI (they may not take any more, but I doubt they'll risk the negative PR by kicking them off).
- Thread starter
- #54
- 10,275
Great minds think alike...
"Preventive benefits (no copay, etc...), elimination of caps and kids on parents policy until 26 can stay. We have them and everyone is adjusting well to them. But other than that...
Child only policies would be underwritten again. Every day (no exaggeration), I correspond with someone wanting coverage on their child (only)."
"Preventive benefits (no copay, etc...), elimination of caps and kids on parents policy until 26 can stay. We have them and everyone is adjusting well to them. But other than that...
Child only policies would be underwritten again. Every day (no exaggeration), I correspond with someone wanting coverage on their child (only)."
- 2,908
Correct in regard to Romney. Romneycare hurts him in the primary but that primary is going to end. The dems have/had an entire strategy of saying "sure, Obamacare is not all that popular but the pubs didnt want to do anything." But that strategy doesnt work that well against Romney because obviously he has a history of trying to do something with health reform. It is used as a weapon against him the primary but for the limited number of hard right voters who will refuse to show up at the polls because of it (unless one thinks they are going to show up and vote for Obama) he gains access to the entire moderate independents and disenfranchised dems. That is a pantload of people.
Romney is a dud and I am not saying otherwise but that only accounts for part of his failure to close the sale with the nomination. The other part is a deliberate strategy to not run so hard to the rigth that he can't still be a mod/lib when the general election time. And if he plays his cards right and spins it right, his experience with Romneycare becomes a plus in the general election. Santorum ran hard to the right to hit every note the archcons wanted and they drew him over into the muck of fighting social issues and then on to the rocks. Romney is a dud, but not every part of his strategy is a loser. After all, he is going to get the nomination, and winning is always a good thing in politics.
Not a good week for Obama. That little 3/4 of a percent employment blip last month is only goin to get him so far and could be very fleeting. Add to that gas prices and everyone feeling flaccid about Obamacare, dems included and the Baby Jesus Obama needs a makeover.
True, the court hasnt decided yet so we can only presume so much but even so- everything around Obamacare just seems to get more and more sour. What does Obama get if by chance the court upholds it? A chance to go out and hump for one of the most unpopular programs in the country? How zippy is that?
Last edited:
- 2,908
The question of the day, along with that, is (if/when Obamanightmare is overturned) will Joe Biden give Obama a high five and say "this is a big Fng deal." Am looking forward to that.
Either way. Joe is da man. Chu-chu Joe. He said this country needs a multi-zillion dollar high speed rail system to Cut Bank, Montana because he likes to ride Amtrak so it must be good. You da man Joe.!
Either way. Joe is da man. Chu-chu Joe. He said this country needs a multi-zillion dollar high speed rail system to Cut Bank, Montana because he likes to ride Amtrak so it must be good. You da man Joe.!
- 2,908
Just as a little trip down memory lane: Was it not Bill Clinton who said that he was going to stay out of the health reform debate this time around (back in the last election) but said that if he had one word of advice it would be that the dem president "should be willing to take half a loaf rather than none" which and Hillary had refused to do.
I am sure the dems are glad to see that Kagan is still working with the dem talking points.
- Staff
- #60
