If Obama Wants To Cave To Conservatives, That's His Choice, But When It Harms The Country, That's Another Matter

I bet Obama wishes he could campaign on the health care reform bill, ACA. But does anyone feel great about it? Even the most determined Obamabots can barely muster a less than rousing, "it's better than nothing." I agree... it is better than nothing, but the damage it is doing may well be worse than nothing. It certainly appears that we would have been better off with a less grotesquely conflicted-- and more skillful-- Democratic team putting this together. I don't doubt that Obama-- and even Emanuel-- thought they were doing something vaguely good... but they sure made a horrific hash of it. Over the weekend, after news got out that a couple of conservative appellate judges in Georgia said the individual mandate is unconstitutional, Robert Reich looked at where the Obama Administration went wrong and what Democrats should have learned by now.

The whole idea of the law is to pool heath risks. Only if everyone buys insurance can insurers afford to cover people with preexisting conditions, or pay the costs of catastrophic diseases.



The issue is now headed for the Supreme Court (another appellate court has upheld the law’s constitutionality) where the prognosis isn’t good. The Court’s Republican-appointed majority has not exactly distinguished itself by its progressive views.  



Chalk up another one for the GOP, outwitting and outflanking the President and the Democrats.



Remember the health-care debate? Congressional Republicans refused to consider a single-payer system that would automatically pool risks. They wouldn’t even consider giving people the option of buying into it.



The President and the Democrats caved, as they have on almost everything. They came up with a compromise that kept health care in the hands of private insurance companies.



The only way to spread the risk in such a system is to require everyone buy insurance.



Which is exactly what the two appellate judges in Atlanta object to. The Constitution, in their view, doesn’t allow the federal government to compel citizens to buy something. “Congress may regulate commercial actors,” they write. “But what Congress cannot do under the Commerce Clause is mandate that individuals enter into contracts with private insurance companies for the purchase of an expensive product from the time they are born until the time they die.”



Most Americans seem to agree. According to polls, 60 percent of the public opposes the individual mandate. Many on the right believe it a threat to individual liberty. Many on the left object to being required to buy something from a private company.



Had the President and the Democrats stuck to their guns during the health-care debate and insisted on Medicare for all, or at least a public option, they wouldn’t now be facing the possible unraveling of the new health care law.



After all, Social Security and Medicare-- the nation’s two most popular safety nets-- require every working American to “buy” them. The purchase happens automatically in the form of a deduction from everyone’s paychecks. 



But because Social Security and Medicare are government programs they don’t feel like mandatory purchases. They’re more like tax payments, which is what they are-- payroll taxes.

There’s no question payroll taxes are constitutional, because there’s no doubt that the federal government can tax people in order to finance particular public benefits.



Americans don’t mind mandates in the form of payroll taxes for Social Security or Medicare. In fact, both programs are so popular even conservative Republicans were heard to shout “don’t take away my Medicare!” at rallies opposed to the new health care law.



Requiring citizens to buy something from a private company is entirely different. If Congress can require citizens to buy health insurance from the private sector, reasoned the two appellate judges in Atlanta, what’s to stop it from requiring citizens to buy anything else? If the law were to stand, “a future Congress similarly would be able to articulate a unique problem … compelling Americans to purchase a certain product from a private company.”



Other federal judges in district courts — one in Virginia and another in Florida-- have struck down the law on similar grounds. They said the federal government has no more constitutional authority requiring citizens to buy insurance than requiring them to buy broccoli or asparagus. (The Florida judge referred to broccoli; the Virginia judge to asparagus.)



Social Security and Medicare aren’t broccoli or asparagus. They’re as American as hot dogs and apple pie.



The Republican strategy should now be clear: Privatize anything that might otherwise be a public program financed by tax dollars. Then argue in the courts that any mandatory purchase of it is unconstitutional because it exceeds the government’s authority. And rally the public against the requirement. 



Remember this next time you hear Republican candidates touting Paul Ryan’s plan for turning Medicare into vouchers for seniors to buy private health insurance.



So what do Obama and the Democrats do if the individual mandate in the new health care law gets struck down by the Supreme Court?



Immediately propose what they should have proposed right from the start-- universal health care based on Medicare for all, financed by payroll taxes. The public will be behind them, as will the courts.

Do Central Florida Voters Know What Sandy Adams Gave Them When She Rubber Stamped Paul Ryan's Budget?

The congressional election in central Florida's 24th congressional district could be one of the most interesting to watch in the country. So far the race pits a right-wing zombie and notorious healthcare hypocrite, freshman teabagger Sandy Adams, against one of the Democrats' most cutting edge progressives, publisher and educator Nick Ruiz. The district will be subject to considerable redrawing and is likely to shed many of its Orlando suburban areas in Orange and Seminole counties-- including the Adams family home-- and consolidate in Brevard and Volusia counties along the Atlantic coast. The district was originally drawn by state legislator Tom Feeney for his own congressional race, which he won.

In 2008 Feeney's sleaze finally caught up with him and washed out his political career. Unfortunately worthless quasi-Democrat Suzanne Kosmas grabbed the seat, winning all 4 counties. She proceeded to vote with the Republicans on key issues-- like healthcare-- and distinguished herself in the Financial Services Committee with her lack of participation, spending committee meetings out on the town with lobbyists. And she did outraise her opponent 3-1. But it didn't help. This time she lost all 4 counties, Democrats and left-leaning independents simply staying away from the polls in droves, unable to distinguish between two anti-family conservatives, Republican Sandy Adams and Democrat Suzanne Kosmas. Steve Israel would like to see Kosmas run again. I'm sure Sandy Adams would as well. But she's been on a serious bender since her defeat and isn't likely to run again. Nick Ruiz is the first candidate for Congress Blue America endorsed this cycle.

Nick has been successfully presenting Florida voters a tapestry of Republican ideas-- a tapestry another Nick, this one in the NY Times Saturday, showed to point to the U.S. turning into Pakistan. And key to Nick Ruiz' thesis is the Republican attitude-- and specifically Sandy Adams' attitude-- towards health care. Short version, they're against it for anyone who isn't wealthy. Adams voted to repeal healthcare reform and she voted to turn Medicare into an inadequate voucher program that would be a virtual death sentence for hundreds of thousands of Florida seniors. Nick has a very different way of looking at it, a perspective that presumes healthcare is a right of every American citizen, something antithetical to the Ayn Rand/Law of the Jungle approach of the GOP. Nick:

We must decide, once and for all, what sort of society defines America. We have already decided that law enforcement (i.e. the police department) is a guaranteed service for all, regardless of social or economic status. We have also decided that the fire department is a guaranteed service. Our society, rightfully so, honors both of these public features. They are freely available to all, regardless of the size of one's wallet.

Why should healthcare be any different?

Social justice in a lawful commonwealth of society demands that when a person is attacked or threatened by crime or fire, the public will come to his or her aid. And when a person is attacked or threatened by disease, should the public not do the same?

We already employ an integral non-profit, for profit and single payer scaffolding to provide healthcare services. There is no reason to believe that all of these systems may not continue to work side by side in a free society. However, it is difficult to imagine that we can continue to allow profiteering to masquerade as uncontrollable healthcare costs that must consume such a large piece of our national income. Costs will have to be controlled through regulation. What is most important now is to take that final step and declare universal access to comprehensive healthcare as a standard public service, in the same way that fire and police services are a social norm everywhere. When will America realize that it is her ethical, logical, common sense and spiritual duty to provide universal healthcare services to her people?

America must no longer accept the false narrative of scarcity and withholding when it comes to healthcare. Social justice demands that all of our people receive universal access to all of these vital basic services. It is no great nation that denies these basic human services to people. In fact, anything less is uncivilized.

Adams, like most of the zombie Republicans have tried to claim that they didn't vote to kill Medicare, just to fix it. This morning, Paul Krugman examined that lie in the NY Times and concludes that Republicans "don’t want to make Medicare sustainable, they want to destroy it under the guise of saving it... in voting for the House budget plan, Republicans voted to end Medicare."

Last week Democrats on the House Committee on Energy and Commerce put out a report that shows very specifically what the impact of Sandy Adam's vote to kill Medicare would be on the residents of Volusia, Orange, Brevard and Seminole counties that are part of FL-24. It's a chilling picture and it shows what happens when a mindless partisan like Adams just follows along with the herd. She believed Paul Ryan's and John Boehner's lies about how their budget would be "good" for Medicare. But the Ryan budget "raises costs for seniors and individuals with disabilities enrolled in Medicare, reduces their benefits, and puts private insurance companies in charge of the program. For current beneficiaries, important benefits – such as closing the hole in Medicare’s drug coverage – would be immediately eliminated. For individuals age 54 and under, Medicare’s guarantee of comprehensive coverage would be replaced with a “voucher” or “premium support” to buy private health insurance. By design, this federal contribution does not keep pace with medical costs, shifting thousands of dollars in costs onto the individual." This is what Sandy Adams decided to do to her own constituents. This is what she voted for on April 15th; her idea of what's "good" for Medicare would

• Increase prescription drug costs for 8,800 Medicare beneficiaries in the district who enter the Part D donut hole, forcing them to pay an extra $87 million for drugs over the next decade.

• Eliminate new preventive care benefits for 122,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district.

The Republican proposal would have even greater impacts on individuals in the district age 54 and younger who are not currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Deny 570,000 individuals age 54 and younger in the district access to Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.

• Increase the out-of-pocket costs of health coverage by over $6,000 per year in 2022 and by almost $12,000 per year in 2032 for the 127,000 individuals in the district who are between the ages of 44 and 54.

• Require the 127,000 individuals in the district between the ages of 44 and 54 to save an additional $29.7 billion for their retirement-- an average of $182,000 to $287,000 per individual – to pay for the increased cost of health coverage over their lifetimes. Younger residents of the district will have to save even higher amounts to cover their additional medical costs.

• Raise the Medicare eligibility age by at least one year to age 66 or more for 72,000 individuals in the district who are age 44 to 49 and by two years to age 67 for 438,000 individuals in the district who are age 43 or younger.

No one knows for sure what the new 24th CD will look like. Rumors are flying that Republican powers in Tallahassee want Adams out and that hey plan to create a district she won't rake in a GOP primary. Replacing her with another Republican rubber stamp isn't the answer though. Replacing her with a tough, savvy progressive, Nick Ruiz, is exactly the answer. If you can, please consider contributing to his campaign at the Blue America page. Below is the ad Blue America has been running in the district: