Given the tone and substance of today’s arguments, it looks like there’s a decent chance the Supreme Court will not only toss Obamacare’s individual mandate (a 62% chance according to Intrade), but all of Obamacare as well.
But then what? It seems highly unlikely—to say the least!—that any sort of replacement would pass this year. So now we are talking about 2013, where the issue would get sucked into the swirling nexus of entitlement and tax reform. It’s actually tough to logically separate out healthcare reform from those two issues, as Obamacare more or less attempts to do. Rising U.S. healthcare costs are driven by a market-distorting, third-party payment system where either government (via Medicare and Medicaid) or business (via the health insurance tax exclusion) picks up the tab for individual healthcare spending. You can’t really “fix” healthcare without significant tax and entitlement reform.
Conservatives want to change the system so markets can work their magic. But Republicans have been unclear about what they want to replace Obamacare with, exactly. Rep. Paul Ryan, the GOP’s resident wonk, gave a speech last September where, in addition to advocating block granting Medicaid to the states and transitioning Medicare to a premium support system, he endorsed “replacing the inefficient tax treatment of employer-provided healthcare with a portable, refundable tax credit that you can take with you from job to job, allowing you to hang onto your insurance even during those tough times when a job might be hard to find.”
[…]
And the Democrats? Given a) liberal disappointment with the lack of a government option in Obamacare, b) the president’s marked shift to the left, c) raging fury over the Supreme Court decision, Dems will likely be in no mood to accept any plan too different from Obamacare. Or, if Romney is president, they will let Republicans take the lead.
But there might be a compromise out there. Look to Switzerland, where there is universal coverage despite no government health insurance programs. Consumers choose among private plans. And the nation spends 40% less than the U.S. on healthcare, as a share of GDP.
Here’s Regina Herzlinger: “Republicans could enact Swiss-style universal coverage by enabling employees to cash out of their employer-sponsored health insurance. (Although many view employer-sponsored health insurance as a” free” benefit, it is money that would otherwise be paid as income.) The substantial sums involved would command attention and gratitude: A 2006 cash out would have yielded $12,000—the average cost of employer-sponsored health insurance—thus raising the income of joint filers who earn less than $73,000 (90 percent of all filers) by at least 16 percent. Employees could remain in with an employer’s plan or use this new income to buy their own health insurance.”
Choice, competition, price transparency, coverage, and innovation should be the building blocks of whatever comes after Obamacare.
Well, they should have been the building blocks to reform prior to ObamaCare, too. And we all saw how that went down.
Again, to the left — the ideological ruling class left, as opposed to the useful idiots they keep about screeching for “social justice” in lieu of having to actually reach into pocket and pay for such things voluntarily — this battle was never over health care. That was but the facade. This was an attempt to fundamentally redefine the relationship between citizen and government. It was an attempt to build on the already flimsy sham that was Wickard in order to assert federal control over every aspect of our lives — and to do so while (perversely) claiming a Constitutional basis for doing so.
If it fails, we shouldn’t rejoice so much as begin asking how we ever got this close to living under soft tyranny in a country built on a foundation meant to protect us from what has become — and will remain — a predatory federal authority always looking for ways to expand.
And it seems that’s the case regardless of which Party establishment holds office.
The battle to retake the US is only beginning. And the truth is, it may already be lost.
Ace is showing a couple of projectons that show that in governorships and senate seats the mother of all landslides may be brewing. The Republican Ultramajority may be forming.
At which point,
Oh, and expect an immediate blitzkreig from the left citing entire oceans of superficial, conditional, and co-mingled negatives that may occur in a post-OBarryCare era.
As in, free markets can’t possibly work because the capitalism leftism ruined doesn’t work. And benefits will stop in a country that’s lost nearly all of it’s jobs-producing production to bad central policy. QED.
The retreat will not be pretty.
Terrific. Right when the GOP should be going the way of the Whigs, the Democrats are dead-set on getting there first.
Hey, turns out the Republicans are losing more slowly!
As usual, our leftists are out of step with their brethren who have already tried and failed with the Socialist experiment. Canada is returning to private healthcare. The UK is increasingly up in arms about the lousy quality of the NHS. People want their guns back and to keep more of their paychecks. Those with a paying job are sick and tired of paying for lazy yobs who spend their time brawling and breeding.
We live in interesting times.
That’s because that silly outdated Constitution stopped America’s proglodytes from going that way when it was in fashion Across the Pond. And because proglodytes lack the intellect to learn from other people’s mistakes as well as their own.
Then again, they don’t show much aptitude for learning from their own mistakes either.
…lazy yobs who spend their time brawling and breeding.
That’s boozing, brawling, and breeding, thangyuverrmush.
And because proglodytes lack the intellect to learn from other people’s mistakes as well as their own.
You only say that because you lack the creativity, insight and optimism of your superiors on the Left. They’re just positive that they’ll get everything right this time!
this battle was never over health care. That was but the facade. This was an attempt to fundamentally redefine the relationship between citizen and government.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
The utopian impulse behind the Left has always been to turn humanity into an ant colony. After all, how can we create paradise on earth if people are free to do what they want? We need a Plan. People must not be free. They must be managed and rationalized into an exquisite organism of harmoniously linked parts, all under perfect control.
If that ends up looking like Pol Pot’s Cambodia, no one said paradise would be easy.
proglodytes
I am so stealing that.
In the “then what?” accounting, are we to expect a tote-up of the sums expended and now found to be — practically speaking — wasted on the ongoing implementation of this stupid law? That is, the vast sweep of human labor and compensation thrown into the abyss for the sake of a giant nothing-burger of a law? And if an accounting is made, will a commensurate political responsibility be demanded? Ha. That’s a laugh.
In reference to the title of the post: “What will Republicans do if the Supreme Court kills Obamacare?”
I would say that much depends on the nature of the Republicans in office next year. More Ryans would be nice.
I would say that much depends on the nature of the Republicans in office next year. More Ryans would be nice.
Let’s hope we don’t get Republicans who understand and approve of socialized medicine, when it’s imposed by state governments, because that is totally, like, constitutional.
Oh, wait…
I’m not sure I follow, George. If Congress passed a law saying that the States could do whatever they damn well pleased about health care (or anything else, for that matter), I figure their reaction would be, “Well, thanks for legislating the Tenth Amendment, guys, but we already had all those power.”
I think my point is we don’t need a federal government headed by either party that will push states to impose socialized medicine on their citizens, to the extent that they can do so. Socialized medicine is a bad idea, whether it comes from DC or from my detested Sacramento.
Some would prefer the British Colonialism, damn you. Let’s you and they fight.
Indeed: No one said paradise would be easy.
Answer: Party like it is 2010 again?
OT: Today’s safety tip—Never argue that Pursuit of Political Power and Pursuit of Truth are mutually exclusive with an engineer.
Only this time, it’ll be the Khmer Vert.
You only say that because you lack the creativity, insight and optimism of your superiors on the Left. They’re just positive that they’ll get everything right this time!
They just didn’t have enough of the right people to administer it properly. That’s all.
Well, of course!
@Dicentra
Just FYI, don’t waste your breath arguing with engineers. They’re always right and they know it. Yes, I was married to one and I’m still bitter.
No you’re not leigh, by my calculation.
I posited two mutually exclusive sets, and he said it wasn’t logical to insist on its veracity, because look, you COULD have a benevolent despot who forced people to do the right thing.
Like Jesus.
SEMANTICS FAIL.
Having power (especially if you inherit it) is not the same as pursuing power.
Forcing people to do the right thing isn’t the same as the pursuit of truth.
He wasn’t right; I was. I’ve just started working here; give me time.
BTW, Hewitt is awfully good with the play-by-play on the SCOTUS arguments, even though he’s got Chemerinsky on (who is outdoing himself on the sophistry front). Just don’t listen to HH on the primaries.
are you a bitter clinger?
Not possible. Can’t steal what’s in public domain.
Hopefully di looks better in a dress than a max clinger.
Hopefully di looks better in a dress than a max clinger.
Don’t bet the farm.
Let’s hope they don’t do this: “But Yuval Levin notes that some moderate House Republicans might vote for an alternative budget that envisions spending $1.6 trillion to implement Obamacare”
Will Moderate Republicans Vote to Protect Obamacare?
I’m not going to be happy until the LaTourette’s of Congress are relegated to a tiny sliver of the caucus, and “moderate Republican” comes to mean a Congressman who wants to cut “only 5% per year” in real spending.
Gimme a 60-seat majority, and guys like LaTourette can propose and sponsor and debate and vote on as much “bipartisan” crap as their little hearts desire.
Why, we can elect Mitt Romney in good conscience!
–Mittbot.
mittbot kudlow
Romney’s in a Sweet Spot If the Supremes Overthrow the Mandate
Well, speaking strictly for myself, “Piss on it’s grave.”
NR, I too think SCOTUS helps Romney a bit if they go nuclear on ObamaCare.
Reid and Carville are claiming an overturn would help Obama, but while it takes ObamaCare off the table to use against the Teleprompter, it also takes it off the table to hold against the Etch-A-Sketch. Those of us who don’t trust him to push hard for repeal if elected, have one less reason to refuse to accept him.
Won’t stop us all from refusing, since he is after all the creator of ObamaCare Lite — but still…
“What will Republicans do if the Supreme Court kills Obamacare?”
I was hoping for drive a stake through its heart, wrap it in bacon and bury it at sea.
Good lord, man, don’t waste that bacon!
Wrap it in Korans.
Then bury the ashes at sea.
[…] abortion into something that doesn’t suck with an unholy vacuum is not the task of the SCOTUS.Protein Wisdom sounds an ominous note here:Again, to the left — the ideological ruling class left, as opposed to […]
[…] office. The battle to retake the US is only beginning. And the truth is, it may already be lost. https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=38706 As usual, our leftists are out of step with their brethren who have already tried and failed with […]
Heh. It’s nice to see Obama and his core cadre of LeftLibProgg neo-Marxists get this remedial lesson in Constitutional Law, given by SCOTUS, with more likely coming.
Pay attention, BHO; this time your grades will be highly visible to public view. Such a high visibility horsewhipping as ObamaCare’s gotten so far can’t be hidden away, even by your reeling in-pocket MSM mouthpieces.
The two are mutually exclusive ?