House theatrics: another repeal vote

JoeTheJuggler

Penultimate Amazing
JoeTheJuggler
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
27,766
I hadn't realized this will be the 33rd time Republicans have tried to repeal--in total or in part--the ACA since it was passed into law.

Given that some 3/4 of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing right now, do they really think this nonsense will achieve anything?

I mean Congress has some very serious work ahead of them, and at least a couple of looming deadlines. Do they really think screwing around with "repeal" bills is good for the country?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/11/politics/health-care-fatigue/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
 
Didja hear Romney was booed during his speach to NAACP when he mentioned repealing "Obamacare"? It won't take much more of this juvenile grandstanding until the entire electorate is completely disgusted with the topic.

We are paying these blowhards good money to waste our money and annoy us at the same time. This is unsustainable.
 
I saw the video of that. He responded by citing a poll of members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (now there's a demographic that the NAACP will be persuaded by!) saying that a majority of them claim that "Obamacare" will prevent them from creating new jobs.
:rolleyes:

Because they were adding jobs so furiously before the ACA passed!
 
I'm not sure the GOP is correct in their math on this one. AIU, People actually like much that is in the ACA and the popularity for it overall is growing.
 
I realize that both parties do these bitchy little publicity votes all the time and it just infuriates me.


I wish ACA had been struck down and Obama said, "well we tried the republican plan but that unconstitutional so it time for UHC!"

I saw a poll today on CNN that showed 47% of the country now supports ACA which coincidentally tied a poll that showed the country was split 47% apiece to each of the candidates.
 
Biscuit said:
I realize that both parties do these bitchy little publicity votes all the time and it just infuriates me.


I wish ACA had been struck down and Obama said, "well we tried the republican plan but that unconstitutional so it time for UHC!"

I saw a poll today on CNN that showed 47% of the country now supports ACA which coincidentally tied a poll that showed the country was split 47% apiece to each of the candidates.
Click to expand...


Thus the importance of the swing vote
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
I saw the video of that. He responded by citing a poll of members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (now there's a demographic that the NAACP will be persuaded by!) saying that a majority of them claim that "Obamacare" will prevent them from creating new jobs.
:rolleyes:

Because they were adding jobs so furiously before the ACA passed!
Click to expand...
That'd be the private, conservative lobby organisation?
 
CNN said:
Prior to the final vote, the House rejected a Democratic motion that would have required any legislator supporting the repeal measure to give up government-provided health care.
Click to expand...

Now why wouldn't they agree to such a condition? They know full well it won't pass into law.
 
CNN said:
"It is not a game to be played," declared House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Virginia, before the voting started.
<snip>
"Those of us who want patient-centered health care have had two years to repeal it," Hensarling said. "I think it's kind of unreasonable to think we're going to go away."
Click to expand...

Of course it's a game. They are aware that they can't get it through the Senate, and that even if they did (but that can't), they certainly know there's no way Obama would sign it, and they most absolutely definitely can't override a veto.

All they're doing is political theater so that they can incorporate these votes into campaign ads. It's a waste of time, especially when they've got very serious work to do.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Now why wouldn't they agree to such a condition? They know full well it won't pass into law.
Click to expand...

For political ads mostly. Republican candidates can now say that the Democrat that they are trying to unseat deserve to be kicked out for voting for a large tax increase (now that the SC has ruled it as such). Before there was some wriggle room in calling the mandate "Not a tax so I didn't vote for a tax" but now they can't say that anymore (without it being pointed out as false anyway). Anyone who didn't see this vote coming just wasn't paying attention. So yeah, it is political theater but it does have a purpose this time. If it will work out as expected is yet to be seen however.
 
Sam.I.Am said:
For political ads mostly. Republican candidates can now say that the Democrat that they are trying to unseat deserve to be kicked out for voting for a large tax increase (now that the SC has ruled it as such). Before there was some wriggle room in calling the mandate "Not a tax so I didn't vote for a tax" but now they can't say that anymore (without it being pointed out as false anyway). Anyone who didn't see this vote coming just wasn't paying attention. So yeah, it is political theater but it does have a purpose this time. If it will work out as expected is yet to be seen however.
Click to expand...

I think you missed what I was talking about specifically in that post. House GOP (and a few Dems) voted against a Democratic proposal to add a rider to the "repeal" bill that says anyone in Congress who votes to repeal the ACA must give up their primo taxpayer-funded health plans.

This is obviously something the Democrats did for their ads (showing the GOP to be hypocritical about the issue). My question is, why did the GOP take the bait? They could have allowed the rider to be added since they know 100% for sure that the bill will never pass into law, and there is zero chance that they will have to give up their primo taxpayer-funded health plans.

ETA: Even on the tax issue (and the Supreme Court certainly didn't say it was a "large" tax increase--in fact, part of their reasoning was that it was too small to be considered purely a penalty), the GOP voting to protect their own primo taxpayer funded health plans, they have effectively passed up a chance to cut taxes (or apply that savings elsewhere in the budget or just for deficit reduction).
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
I'm not sure the GOP is correct in their math on this one. AIU, People actually like much that is in the ACA and the popularity for it overall is growing.
Click to expand...
Obama needs to spend time on this issue.

The Republicans have managed to demonize the word 'obamacare', much like they did liberal, progressive, intellectual etc. Not ironically, the intellectually lazy will allow themselves to swayed by the demonization.

Obama needs to have some educational ads which show what we know. List out the individual parts of the ACA and show their popularity and even better, show how the 'average joe', benefits.
 
For another example on that last point: if they repealed the ACA we would all lose the requirement that health insurance be guaranteed issue (they can't refuse coverage because you are high risk for claims because you have a pre-existing condition)--but Congress would still have that exact protection for themselves as they did before the ACA was passed.

It's definitely fodder for attack ads. Congressperson so-and-so wants to take this away from you, but refused to give it up for himself!
 
DavidJames said:
Obama needs to have some educational ads which show what we know. List out the individual parts of the ACA and show their popularity and even better, show how the 'average joe', benefits.
Click to expand...

Definitely. And I suspect his campaign was waiting for the constitutionality challenge to be resolved before hitching its wagon to the ACA horse. But now is the time for Obama to sell Obamacare. It really should be an easy sell a this point. Mostly debunking a lot of misinformation.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Definitely. And I suspect his campaign was waiting for the constitutionality challenge to be resolved before hitching its wagon to the ACA horse. But now is the time for Obama to sell Obamacare. It really should be an easy sell a this point. Mostly debunking a lot of misinformation.
Click to expand...
That Kaiser poll would be a good one to analyse and use to show the misconceptions. As an added bonus they should postulate as to why the people have the misconceptions.
 
Wangler said:
I just don't see it, from these Kaiser tracking numbers:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_235364ffe36ac0cbff.jpg
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Since people like what is in the law, it's time to sell them on the law.

Think Progress said:
source So while Americans oppose a law called the Affordable Care Act, they support its provisions — the individual requirement and a private system of insurance (expressed in the ACA through state-based exchanges that will offer private coverage.) These elements remain popular despite two years of daily attacks and misrepresentations, which seemed to have only heightened the public’s frustration with the political process that created the ACA, while shielding the actual substance from too much disapproval.
Click to expand...
 
Wangler said:
I just don't see it, from these Kaiser tracking numbers:
Click to expand...

Yep, opinion is pretty split. Certainly not what the GOP is claiming.

And there is good data to show that a majority is in favor of most of the major provisions of the law (even many of those who answer that they are in favor of repeal). So the Obama campaign definitely has an "opportunity".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom