Don't Republicans realize that Obamacare was modeled after what Mitt Romney had in Massachusetts?
Yes, but that isn’t the point.What Romneycare did was take the money that the federal government was already giving to Massachusetts to help pay for the care for people without insurance, and use it instead to help people buy insurance, along with a mandate, and lots of other rules and regulations. It’s similar to Obamacare, but there’s one very important difference.What happened in Massachusetts was a state solution. The people of Massachusetts decided on their goals; they discussed it; they voted on it; and they were largely pretty happy with what they did. It was the people of Massachusetts deciding how they were going to live in Massachusetts.Obamacare was a national solution, and people in different parts of the country have wildly different ideas about how they’d like to live. It’s understandably frustrating for people when Senators and Congressmen from 1,000+ miles away that they can’t vote for or against meet in Washington DC to decide how everyone is going to live. Our Constitution was designed with the intention that the farther away you get from an individual, the less that individual can be affected. The people in your state capital have more impact on your day to day existence than the people in Washington DC.The big divide in America isn’t left / right or Democrat / Republican; it’s always been nationalists / regionalists. The Affordable Care Act was a big power grab by nationalists, whereas Massachusetts was a state decision.
If Mitt Romney were elected and pushed for Romneycare on a national scale, would Republicans hate it as much as they do Obamacare?
As a Republican since the day I could first vote - ABSOLUTELY!The core problem for many republicans is that the national government simply does not have any clearly expressed authority to regulate health insurance. One can interpret and infer (i.e. create out of thin air) authority if one twists the wording of the Constitution into something that requires a law degree to even begin to comprehend - let alone really understand. One of the major divides between Democrats and Republicans is their views of the powers granted to the national government. Republicans generally prefer to read those powers narrowly and in line with how those powers were understood when the Constitution was ratified b/c all power comes from the people. Only the people can give up more of their freedoms to allow the national government to do more things - and the way to show that by amending the national constitution. Democrats generally prefer to read those powers (some of them anyway) broadly and wish to have those powers interpreted in light of current needs and expectations. They tend to believe that it is too hard to amend the Constitution so it should be reinterpreted by the judicial branch as time goes on. Obviously those are very broad generalizations and to get deep into the details would fill (and has) several hundred books. So w/ that basic background - no republican would push for an idea like the ACA - granted the idea of an individual mandate (only a small part of the ACA) was floated at the Heritage Foundation some years back - but the idea was soundly rejected by all elected Republican - except maybe Newt Gingrich - he has a long history of being for, against, for, and against just about every idea he's ever encountered ;-) But the whole comprehensive package was never a Republican idea - nor could it be w/o those supporting it basically rejecting core Republican beliefs in government limited by a written constitution.
Is Trumpcare the replacement to Obamacare?
As of right now (1/5/17), TrumpCare is just a word, I believe coined by President Obama yesterday, to illustrate that if the Republicans dismantle what they themselves branded “ObamaCare,” then they, and by extension Trump, own it.The simple fact is that of all the people who hate ObamaCare, what they seem to hate most is that Obama got it done.That’s not entirely true, but close enough. More true is that they like all of the benefits offered by ObamaCare (pre-existing condition clauses, no more coverage caps, kids on your policy to 26, etc), but they fail to realize there must be negatives or controls put in place to offset those (individual mandate, for one - the big one).The idea that you can’t have one without the other, and the reasons for it, are complex, and few people (especially those outside the industry) care enough to understand them. However, the Republicans, for all their screaming about replacing it with something better, are unlikely to do any better, and because their approach is to tear down what was already done, they WILL sacrifice any support they might get from Democrats in their effort. That’s why the rebranding as “TrumpCare.” But for now, it’s just vaporware, and if Republicans make good on their threat to repeal and delay, it is likely to stay vaporware, and that would be horribly detrimental to the American people and the economy.What Republicans should be doing, if they put country above party, is working to fix some of the many shortcomings of ObamaCare to make it what it could be. Instead, they mire themselves in partisan nonsense that hurts us all.PRE-EMPTIVE RESPONSE: If the Dems had just flat-out done what they wanted back in 2010, we’d have single-payer, nationalized/government coverage. They VERY much tried to get Republican buy-in, but the partisan opposition was staunch. Never forget that the blueprint for ObamaCare came from the very conservative Heritage Foundation’s alternative proposal to “HillaryCare” in the mid-1990s and “RomneyCare” in Massachusetts.
Should Trump change the name from Obamacare to Trumpcare?
I think we still have Obama Care as the alternative was Trump Doesn’t Care.The ultra conservatives bolted when they did not get a repeal without replacement.The moderates bolted when they realized Obamacare was working:The Republican Party Bicameral Majority and two and a half branches of government majority just evaporated before our eyes. We now have a 4 party no majority system: the ultra right, Republicans, Moderate Republicans, and Democrats. Perhaps we can form a coalition government like most other more than two party parliamentary systems.For 7 year the Republicans have been planning this moment, the moment they left us with ACA - the Affordable Care Act, great planning. Way to put effort time planning and sweat into planning legislation, remember how long it took to draft Obama care and build a coalition to pass it. Designing a health care plan is not easy.Oh, and the people covered by Obama Care, the expansion of Medicare under Obama Care or benefiting from insurance rules mandated by Obama Care called a few of their representatives. Further the people objecting to giving the rich a tax break and screwing everyone else also called.So we now have the ACA coverage!Oh, yes we also call that Obama Care. I think we still have Obama Care as the alternative was Trump Doesn’t Care.
Why was Obamacare named for Obama?
Republicans in Congress (and in the conservative media) knew that the Republican base hated Obama.These same Republicans wanted the rank and file to hate the ACA.So, they started calling it Obamacare to make sure the rank and file Republicans knew how to feel about this particular piece of legislation.The GOP was then able to hold up Obamacare as a bet noir for their entire base. A focal point to drive anger and resentment and to get their base to the polls.Hard to inspire that level of outrage over the ACA.But attach the word “Obama” to it and you’ve got a built-in 20% of Americans ready to take up arms.It’s all about branding.Funny that, now that it’s known as “Obamacare” and Republicans can’t get their act together to get rid of it, they’re forced to accept Obamacare as the law of the land.Elevating the name “Obama” as part of his signature law is backfiring as Republicans now find themselves responsible for the preservation of the same law they fought so hard against.
Is Obama upset about his healthcare plan? Was it a failure?
Probably not, since it was a Republican- Mitt Romney product in the first bloody place….. and it's unlikely it can be erased without significant public outcry…..oh, wait, the outcry is already happening. One of the reasons it's being labelled a failure is because Republicans are compelled to badmouth anything Obama did, even if it was their frigging idea. They can get away with this because Republican is nowadays the party of stupid, its wilfully blind adherents will never find out, and will obediently hate anything they're pointed at without checking a single fact. Indefensible stupidity. Elective nincompoopery. In an age of information, ignorance is a choice.Rising premium rates? They were rising like rockets anyway because insurance companies live to gouge. Also, uncertainty about the U.S. healthcare future incited by Republicans freaks out insurance companies, who do not like uncertainties. Further, when the ACA was first written, the stupid (Republican)insistence that there be a State opt-out clause pretty much ensured the plan would be underfunded. The American proclivity to refuse to chip in even if it hurts their neighbor (or especially if it hurts their neighbor) is very creepy and inhuman to this particular Canadian. We have mandated pay-in (under $100/mo) for everybody,& everybody benefits. We don't feel forced or put upon, we feel smart and cared for (&free to work wherever we want). We are much more free than Americans.Perhaps when civilization reaches America, they'll realize what a boon it can be. Perhaps when information reaches America, they'll realize they're looking at Republicans picking on a Republican healthcare plan. And one that would likely work well if they'd just do the tweaks.