The thought that Obamacare might succeed terrifies Republicans


Jon Favreau NAILS IT:

[I]f Republicans are so confident Obamacare will end badly, why not just shut up about it? It’s not like they have the votes to repeal the law—a math problem they still haven’t solved after 37 different tries. Their appeal to the Supreme Court ended in defeat at the hands of a conservative chief justice. And now the bulk of the plan will begin to take effect in just a few months.

At this point, why not sit back and wait for this crazy experiment to self-destruct? Why not let President Obama and the Democrats reckon with the millions of angry Americans who will undoubtedly hate their new insurance or their new insurance protections?

Because Republicans are terrified that Obamacare could actually work. Already, the law has provided 54 million Americans free access to preventive services like check-ups and mammograms. More than six million seniors have saved more than six billion dollars on their prescriptions. Nearly 13 million consumers have received more than one billion dollars in rebates from insurance companies that had overcharged them. There are more than three million happy young adults who have been allowed to stay on their parents’ health insurance until they turn 26. And in California, a state that represents one-fifth of the U.S. economy, we’ve learned that premiums for the law’s new insurance options have come in lower­ than expected.

As these successes build, Republicans are naturally coping with their fear the only way they know how: by scaring the hell out of everyone else. The Koch brothers, not content with the millions they flushed down the toilet on Karl Rove’s 2012 electoral strategy, are spending millions more on ads that tell the same previously debunked lies about the health-care law. Mitch McConnell, still pursuing his top legislative priority of defeating a president who can no longer be defeated, actually threatened the NFL for even considering the administration’s request to help educate uninsured Americans about the fact that they can now receive affordable coverage under the law.



  1. expdoc

    The “successes” aren’t going to build.

    They were intentionally front loaded in the roll out for purely political reasons.

    The difficult parts are what are left to implement and given recently announced delays and repeated granting of exemptions I am worried that they are even going to go worse than anticipated.

    Of course the cynics in health care would say that failure was the goal all along.

  2. Craig Knauss

    Where were all the “successes” in the old health care system? It wasn’t too bad for the wealthy who could buy quality care. It wasn’t too bad for those of us who had decent health insurance so long as we died before we used up our “maximum lifetime benefit”. But how good was it for the elderly, the poor, the unemployed, etc.?

    My wife worked for a public hospital for 25 years. She saw daily how it was for the people in that last group. So did her co-workers, some of whom were there longer than she was. While most of the private practice doctors were opposed to healthcare reform, most of the other healthcare workers, including the residents (hospitalists), wanted to see some changes. And those of us who were paying higher premiums and taxes to provide health care for people who didn’t have insurance wanted to see some changes.

    Will Obamacare work as planned? I don’t know. But it’s obvious that for millions of Americans the previous system wasn’t working either. It was time to try something new.

  3. expdoc

    It was definitely time to try something new.

    We need to control health care costs and provide coverage for all people, supplementing them when necessary. Is the ACA the solution to either of those problems?

    I don’t know either. Actually nobody does. But I am confident that costs for most Americans will go up and that we will not provide adequate care to all of our citizens.

    Coverage is more than “I have insurance” it also means that you have facilities and people who can provide the care you need. When you need it. With quality.

  4. Craig Knauss


    And I am confident that coverage costs will not increase significantly, if at all. As you have admitted in the past, something like 42% of your procedures went unpaid. So, I assume that you do what other health care practitioners do, distribute much of the shortfall. That means higher bills for those who can pay. And higher insurance costs for the companies paying the bills. And therefore, higher premiums for those who have insurance. At public hospitals, like where my wife worked, that also means higher taxes for the residents in the hospital district. So if more people are required to have some coverage, I would think the health care facilities’ shortfall would be reduced by a considerable amount. Hopefully, the savings would trickle down to the premium and tax payers.

  5. expdoc

    Hope springs eternal.

    Of course there are massive extra costs incurred by facilities to even stay in the game of providing care under the ACA.

    Some of those, such as the EMR mandate, are partially covered by government subsidy. Others, not so much.

    The days of the independent solo practitioner are already gone (that may be good or bad). The days of corporate medicine are here now and in not too many more years we will end up on some sort of single payer/government run system.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *