Image via Wikipedia

What is the health care end game? Matthew Continetti thinks he knows the answer to that question:

Now, one chamber of Congress has voted for repeal, more than half the states are challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare’s individual health insurance mandate, and the law remains unpopular. Health care spending and premiums continue to rise, and the president’s claim that the law allows you to keep your health plan has been proven false. Can somebody remind us why the law’s supporters continue to think they have the winning hand?

The truth is that if Republicans in the 112th Congress spent the next two years doing nothing but debating the health care law, beginning to dismantle it, and offering alternatives, they would have real momentum heading into the 2012 election.

This is the golden goose tea party conservatives would like stowed in their sack of goodies.  In fact, if this scenario did play out, I cannot imagine them being any happier.

Here’s the problem:  two years of fastidious debate focused solely on health care and its immediate repeal would do nothing to: A) offer any attempts at remedying our economic conditions, and: B) dispel the idea conservatives are not concerned with the ballooning deficit.  Taking into account repealing PPACA would immediately increase the deficit, the latter point is even more cogent.

If Continetti has his way, his party would remain out of touch with the majority of Americans, who did not sweep the GOP into office because of health care–but the conditions of unemployment and slow employment.  This would not be a path conducive to keeping power.

I am a proponent of the health care bill.  Any attempt to insure more Americans by expanding access, is an important and necessary action.  Is it perfect?  By no means, and that is why it would be more prudent to work proactively to fix pieces of the law that are weakest–and re-examine employer-based insurance and the obscene incentives insurance companies reap.

Health care should always be a discussion worth having–especially considering the huge segment of our economy affected by it.  Having the wrong conversation is a waste of time.  Do we really need two more years like we experienced leading up to the midterms?

H/T: Daily Dish

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Here’s change in action.  The first phase of the Affordable Care Act is now being implemented, and it may affect you or someone you know.  Please take the time to watch this video, and visit HealthCare.Gov for an extensive overview of the new law.  It’s good to know some things are getting done in Washington.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

A recent study performed by the Pew Institute, details how the press covered health care reform– the most divisive issue of the last year–and the defining achievement of the Obama administration to date.  Above is a graph detailing the prevailing story lines, and how the media covered them.  Before the health care debate exploded into a fiery, contentous lava pool, it was no more than a blip on the press’s radar screen.  Less than one percent of all media coverage was alotted to health care in the two years preceding Barack Obama’s election.

Yet judging by the graph, much of the focus was on more ancillary issues, such as defining and shaping the “message war” for both parties. The debate was less centered on actual mechanisms of  health care such as the insurance industry, coverages, or premiums.  Below are some points summarized in the study:

Health care coverage was the No. 1 story in the mainstream press from June 2009 through March 2010. There were numerous ebbs and flows to the health care coverage. But in the 10-month period studied, the topic registered at 14% of the news hole, edging out economic coverage (12%) and the conflict in Afghanistan (6%).

The health care debate was tailor-made for ideological talk shows. No media sector devoted as much time to health care as the political and polarizing talk show hosts. Accounting for 31% of the airtime from June 2009 through March 2010, the subject was more than twice as big in the talk show sector as it was in the overall media (14%).

Liberal talk show hosts devoted more airtime to health care than conservative hosts. Left-leaning talk hosts, who broadly supported health care legislation, spent 44% of their time talking about health care issues during the time studied. The right-tilting hosts, who vigorously opposed it, devoted 26% of their time to the subject.

Opponents of health care legislation won the message war. A Nexis search of key terms in the health care debate finds that opponents’ terms appeared almost twice as often (about 18,000 times) as supporters’ top terms (about 11,000). In short, the opponents’ attacks on government-run health care resonated more widely than the supporters’ attacks on the insurance industry.

The debate centered more on politics than the workings of the health care system. Fully 41% of health care coverage focused on the tactics and strategy of the debate while various reform proposals filled another 23%. But only 9% of the coverage focused on a core issue — how our health care system currently functions, what works and what doesn’t.

I added the emphasis to illustrate that the media purposely played up the wild town halls, and the pejorative death panel crap, to reel in more and more confused voters.  Voters who just wanted a simple explanation as to how this plan would or would not help them.  Instead they were treated to a full year of bellicose, partisan drum beating.  Good business for the media elite, but bad business for the public.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Here’s an update to my earlier post about health care legislation– and the upcoming lawsuit being pursued by several state attorney generals.  Watch Georgia attorney general Thurbert Baker give his reasons for not joining the suit below:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Sonny Perdue is the republican governor of the state of Georgia.  Perdue is at the tail end of his second and final term in the statehouse.  His administration is presiding over a fiscal crisis–one with steep prolonged budget cuts– that are destined to cripple the state’s services and economy for the foreseeable future.  But Perdue is now distracted by his newest crusade: Repealing health care reform.  He, along with 13 other governors, have joined together to pursue legal action toward the federal government regarding the implementation of the new health care legislation.

Thurbert Baker is Georgia’s Attorney General.  He’s a democrat, who objects to Perdue’s course of action regarding the health care lawsuit.  Baker is refusing to initiate the lawsuit.

There’s nothing new about governors and attorney generals clashing over a particular issue or law.  In fact, it’s rather common.  Both positions are popularly elected, so one has no autonomy over the other.  In fact, 43 states popularly elect their attorney general– which can set in motion many a conflict on many issues.

So it should come as no surprise that in Georgia, the democratic attorney general Thurbert Baker is clashing with the republican governor over the implementation of the newly signed health care reform bill.  Baker is refusing to move a  lawsuit forward against the federal government because he believes it’s an inappropriate allocation of resources.  Baker confirmed his thoughts in a letter to Governor Perdue:

“I do not believe that Georgia has a viable legal claim against the United States….I cannot justify a decision to initiate expensive and time-consuming litigation that I believe has no legal merit. In short, this litigation is likely to fail and will consume significant amounts of taxpayers’ hard-earned money in the process… I am unaware of any constitutional infirmities and do not think it would be prudent, legally or fiscally, to pursue such litigation. I must therefore respectfully decline your request.”

It should be noted that Baker is a gubernatorial candidate, and his stance– while seemingly principled– may be part political posturing.  It should also be noted that Perdue, who’s in the waning stages of his term, has now decided to sue the federal government himself– hiring a “special attorney general“  to prosecute the case. Perdue- along with other conservatives in the Georgia legislature– have also initiated articles of impeachment against Baker.  Is Perdue posturing as well, or simply holding the republican line on health care?  Is there a difference anymore?

Putting empty political posturing aside, let’s examine how and if a lawsuit would work for the state.  The contention on the part of Governor Perdue regarding this suit is that the government– specifically congress, has never passed a law requiring Americans to purchase a product before– thus making the federal mandate to purchase insurance unconstitutional.  Let’s take this point first. It can be argued that under the 10th amendment, states are protected from being forced to follow federal laws not in the constitution.  So in essence, a federal mandate to buy health insurance would be considered unconstitutional–and therefore not legally binding.  Some constitutional scholars don’t believe that the 10th amendment adequately addresses the unconstitutionality of the legislation.  Robert Langran, a Supreme Court and constitutional law expert, thinks that while the case has merit, it would ultimately fail:

“It might be politically incorrect but not legally incorrect,” says Mr. Langran. “The Supreme Court has held for over a century that the federal government does have the police power to look out for the welfare of their citizens (and it has held since Reconstruction that we are federal citizens and state citizens).”

Langran believes that so long as a first amendment right is not being violated, then usage of the 10th amendment would not hold up.  There are other legal precedents that may cause health care to stand.  During the New Deal, the courts greatly expanded the powers of congress to regulate commerce, so a challenge to the new law such as Governor Perdue’s may ultimately fail.

So is it good politics to challenge such a law, or is it good policy?  The political divide is widening in the state of Georgia, much like the rest of the country.  Governor Perdue believes he is taking a principled stance, and that the suit will prevail.  Baker believes the end results of a challenge to the law would fail, and squander resources in the process.  Who’s on the right path?  Precedent and history say that it is Baker, but those indicators are definitely not absolute. In today’s heated political  environment, one can never underestimate passion and blinding partisanship.  Perdue and Baker seem to fall right in line with divided climate.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Remember this despicable display?

The piece of trash who tossed dollar bills has been identified as Chris Reichert of Victorian Village, Ohio. Per Wonkette:

The now-adult turd, “Chris Reichert of Victorian Village,” bravely wasted many days after the videotaped display of insane rage denying that he had, in fact, heckled and then tossed a few dollar bills at a very sick man who had come out to Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy’s district office in support of health insurance reform. But now, it’s time for the Healing to Begin.

“Let the healing begin.”  Right…

HT: Wonkette

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

Hmmm… are you wrong??  Let’s see if House Minority leader John Boehner thinks you should compare Obamacare to slavery.

John Boehner says…

Whoa E. Pluribus!  You may want to back away from the shitty, demeaning, ignorant comparison there.  Even Boehner thinks you’re going too far.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The winding path that led to health care reform was maddeningly vicious– due mainly to the intense rhetoric and numbingly personal attacks on the product, and the people responsible for it.  The fact that this legislation was even crafted and signed into law at all was miraculous, considering the most polarizing political climate in 50 years.  But there was a clear, determined focus that steadied the reins of the rapidly sinking ship.  Barack Obama has secured his place in history as one of the most resilient, and potentially successful presidents in American history.  This fact is beyond dispute.  And the manner in which it was accomplished is as remarkable as it is American.

Examining the achievement from a distance does not quite allow for the examiner to adequately recognize its significance.  Health care reform has been contemplated for decades, yet it’s always managed to find itself left on the political scrap heap.  The number of special interests and lobbyists to overcome– as well as the sacred cow that is the employer provided system– represented a hellish Gordian Knot, not likely to be untied at any time.  Previous administrations–democrat and republican–have been left gasping for air, drowning in a pool of their own sweat hustling to reform this system.  Obama staked his claim to taming the beast, and did so by daring to think outside the box–imagining what could be, as opposed to what could not.  He dared to restart America’s dynamism.  This quote from James Fallows represents his thinking perfectly:

America has been strong because, despite its flawed system, people built toward the future in the 1840s, and the 1930s, and the 1950s. During just the time when Frederick Law Olmsted designed Central Park, when Theodore Roosevelt set aside land for the National Parks, when Dwight Eisenhower created the Pentagon research agency that ultimately gave rise to the Internet, the American system seemed broken too. They worked within its flaws and limits, which made all the difference. That is the bravest and best choice for us now.

Foresight, and the power to nurture it are testaments to American power and greatness.  We don’t aspire to be incrementalists– we dare to be innovative giants– pushing forward and moving higher in the face of fear and uncertainty.  Obama’s tests were and are many.  He is navigating the waters against a strong tide of opposition.  Today’s republican party is more unified against his policies ( not a single republican voted for the health care bill, even though it is far from a  liberal construct) and most of them freely admit that there will be no cooperation from them on future legislation.  He is governing in an age where partisan-fueled rage grows mightier by the day, urged on by talk radio and grass-roots activists.

Yet in spite of these constraints, President Obama thrives.  Why?  Because democracy is messy, and it sometimes makes for uncomfortable work.  But the work must go on.  We don’t have the luxury of giving in to the uncomfortable, and straying from the fight.  Not if we are to remain exceptional.  Barack Obama,  understands this.  He embraces this.  Andrew Sprung puts it succinctly:

The country passed this test because we have a leader who understands how broken our governmental machinery is and works simultaneously to fix our politics and our policies. We elected a President who appreciates how messy democracy is and understands the manifold constraints as well as the multiple levers of presidential power.  His acknowledged errors notwithstanding, Barack Obama moved this mountain because he knows how to prioritize, strategize, execute and communicate.

And he subscribes to the theory that we must be as bold and dynamic as America herself.  Barack Obama is well on his way.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

A look at the aftermath to history.  Whether you praise it, loathe it, or are indifferent to it– A new thread in the American tapestry has been woven.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.

The bill signing is expected at or around 11:15 this morning. Please join the event below:

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.