The battle over the nation’s health care system now shifts to Congress. The Republican-controlled U.S. House, as expected, promises to continue to try to repeal the 2010 reform that the U.S. Supreme Court has now largely upheld.
But the present U.S. Senate, with a Democratic majority, is most unlikely to agree on repeal.
Party leaders promptly laid down their positions. Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid said that the matter is settled and both parties should now turn to job creation and securing the economy.
Republican leader Sen. Mitch McConnell said the decision “makes one thing clear: Congress must act to repeal this misguided law.”
With Congress divided on the issue, the outcome may depend on the November election. If Mitt Romney wins the presidency and Republicans control both houses, they will most likely attempt to repeal Obamacare, as the new law is often called. But it could hinge on whether Republicans are able to prevent a filibuster, which is very unlikely.
When Romney learned of the decision, he said: “If we want to get rid of Obamacare, we are going to have to replace President Obama.” But the Republicans then would have to come up with something to take its place.
If Obama wins re-election and the Democrats keep or extend their control of the Senate, they will carry out the current and future terms of the law and may refine some of its provisions. A win for the Democrats might even lead to converting the system into a single-payer plan, which would cover all Americans instead of leaving out a substantial number. It would be something like extending Medicaid from the elderly and disabled to all Americans.
But that vision, held by Public Citizen and other liberal groups, would depend largely on the state of public sentiment. Polls show that the American people are close to evenly divided on the Affordable Care Act.
That sharp division may continue despite the Supreme Court’s upholding of its central provisions. Public opposition has been shaped by the spending of more than $200 million by conservative groups. That total includes $27 million by the United States Chamber of Commerce, $18 million by Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS and $9 million by the American Action Network, founded by Fred V. Malek, a figure in the 1970s Nixon Administration’s Watergate scandal and now a prominent Republican fundraiser.
In a strange turn-about, the mandate that most Americans must buy health insurance, so opposed now by conservatives, originated in 1989 in a brief by the conservative Heritage Foundation. It was intended to counter an employer mandate, a provision of President Bill Clinton’s ill-fated single-player health plan.
The individual mandate was a provision of a Republican health plan sponsored by Sen. John Chafee, R-R.I., and co-sponsored by 18 Republicans, including Orrin Hatch of Utah and Bob Dole, then the minority leader.
Hatch, the Heritage Foundation, and many other supporters of the mandate have since said they were mistaken.
Opposition to the Obama health plan is so firmly set in stone that, no matter how the election turns out, repeal efforts will be fiercely fought and any efforts to strengthen the plan will meet tough resistance.



I don’t get it, Why work on an appeal when it has no chance to passing in the senate, its a waste of time. They want to balance the budget yet waste a lot of tax payer dollars on repealing a law that has no chance of passing in the senate. Its just like the senate passing stuff they know that will get shot down in the house. Why do it?
Because it forces politicians to take a stand, cast a vote, and establish a voting record that can be used for or against them in the next campaign.
More likely because they don’t want to fix the budget or teh economy and this gives them an out to say they were working on reversing this.
Then that is very selfish of them. I hate when they do this. There time could be better spend else where.
Because they are delusional TeaRadicals who exist to worship at the feet of their corrupt corporate masters, and they want to gin up their delusional radical voter base. In short, they are corrupt radical corporatists.
While some people of good conscience may disagree with parts of the Affordable Health Care Act, any politician or pundit who calls for complete repeal of this law is admitting they will put partisan politics above the best interests of the American people.
The best way to stop the lying about this law is to force those who oppose it to answer line item by line item if they support what the bill opposes. “Congressman, do you support the denial of coverage for all pre-existing conditions? Do you support forcing young people under 25 off of their parents’ coverage? Do you support the insurance company practice of taking money from customers and then, when they get sick, terminating their coverage on technicalities? etc
Very ironic for you to hang your hopes on the filibuster, you know that tactic that Reid and the Dems now decry?
read my post. The author is wrong.
“But it could hinge on whether Republicans are able to prevent a filibuster, which is very unlikely” ~~~~ BDN
This is not true!! If there is a Romney victory and there are at least 50 Republican Senators and control of the House is maintained Obamacare is dead.
This is why. Obamacare was passed as part of a budget reconciliation process which allowed it to pass without filibuster from Republicans. All Republicans have to do is kill that part of legislation through the same process. There is no filibuster allowed in these circumstances just as it wasn’t allowed when it passed.
Justice Roberts left that open to the American people to decide on election day.
It passed the Senate with 60 votes and then was reconciled and passed with fewer voters. The no filibuster theory is just a claim made by Karl Rove. It hasn’t been done before.
And no, what Justice Roberts decided was that the law was constitutional. The SJC doesn’t take away our election days one way or another.
The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub.L. 111-152, 124 Stat. 1029) is a law that was enacted by the 111th United States Congress, by means of the reconciliation process, in order to amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Pub.L. 111-148). It was signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 30, 2010.[1]
This option became available when the SCOTUS decided its constitutionality based on the taxing authority of Congress not the commerce clause.
The Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 was passed by the House of Representatives on March 21, 2010, by a vote of 220–211, and on March 25, after having two minor provisions stricken under the Byrd Rule, passed the Senate by a vote of 56-43. A few hours later, the amended bill was passed by the House 220-207.
A lawyers blog? Sure, that sounds credible.
sure it was a link provided on the Scotusblog and you still can’t count.
You edited your comment after I posted mine, which is plainly obvious by the timestamp. And by the lack of your previous citation “a lawyers blog”.
Normally people edit their comments to correct grammatical errors, not to change the content entirely in order to get a slam in.
Zero credibility.
yep I changed it for a more credible source about the budget bill.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/could-republicans-really-repeal-obamacare-091546012.html
Blah, blah, blah. Have you NO ability to accept defeat with grace? The first step is to get over yourself.
No need. It is not over. It will only be over IF the circumstances I described above are met. In the meantime it is a rallying cry for conservatives to defeat Democrats in the fall.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/could-republicans-really-repeal-obamacare-091546012.html
Yahoo is the best news source on the planet. LOL.
Romney will lose, and here in Maine your TeaRadical corporatist delusional party is going to get SMASHED hard in November. People are sick and tired of LeBuffoon and the TeaRadicals.
Passing a signature piece of legislation by budget reconciliation isn’t normally done either. That doesn’t mean it can’t happen.
The bulk of it was passed with 60 votes and then it was amended and reconciled with the House version. Quit being dishonest.
Yes that’s right. It is called budget reconciliation. The final version did not have 60 votes with the election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts. It necessitated the Budget bill in order to become law where there could be no filibuster. You have a poor memory or are ….. well lets just call you dishonest.
Correct
The signature piece was passed with 60 votes. The amended version passed with less. The amendment is less than 5o pages long and the actual bill is quite a bit longer, nearly 1000. You want to claim the amendment is the signature piece? You’re spinning wildly.
Yes but it did not become law until the House version and the Senate version were reconciled in the budget negotiations between the two. Only then did it become law because the Democrats no longer had a filibuster proof majority. You are wrong about how it became law.
It can be reversed the same way.
The amendment received fewer votes, not the heath care act itself. The reconciliation didn’t nullify the previous votes, it reconciled the differences between the Senate and House versions. The bill didn’t only pass because reconciliation. It could have passed without it. The House chose to make changes, so those differences were reconciled. Keep trying to turn that into something dirty and evil, but it remains far from reality. The reconciled amendments were not hugely significant aspects of the law.
I know how it became law. You’re just splitting hairs and distorting, trying to turn this into a positive for radical conservatives. The law was duly passed and it even passed through the Supreme Court as well. Sorry you’re so upset about that.
You are funny.
I was trying to show how the author was wrong. Thanks for the help.
“Passing a signature piece of legislation by budget reconciliation isn’t normally done either.”
I don’t see you pointing to the signature elements of the amendment.
You haven’t yet proven that repealing a reconciled law only requires 51 votes either. You just keep distorting facts and have only cited one source to support your 51 vote repeal claim — a “lawyers blog”. I haven’t helped you show anything.
I do notice how you resort to condescension when you have a weak or no point at all. That’s funny.
Your posts are littered with condescension. You need to accept one going your way once in awhile.
You can accept it or not its up to you. You only need 50 (+1) Senate voted to pass a budget reconciliation item, which was what the Senate did to make the House versions and Senate versions identical in order to pass to the President for signing. They only did it this way because the death of Senator Kennedy and the election of Scott Brown meant the Democrats did not have enough votes to kill a filibuster. They only needed that 51 votes in order to make the law identical. You could kill Obamacare using the same tactics as the Democrats used to pass it.
You haven’t proven the 51 votes theory. The way in which Congress repeals laws is by passing a new law that nullifies the previous one. That process doesn’t relate to the manner in which the law itself was passed. What you’re claiming hasn’t been done before. It’s a theory hatched by Karl Rove and whatever lawyers blog you referred to earlier.
The lawyers blog I mentioned came from Scotusblog. I don’t know anything about Rove said.
As for the 51 vote fact … it is what it is and is part of the normal reconciliation process. Go look it up. The normal filibuster rules do not apply which is the reason healthcare passed.
To be honest I don’t care if you believe it or not. I made my point. You could not disprove it. That’s enough.
I know how reconciliation passage works. You haven’t proved your point that a repeal (a new law) for a reconciled law only needs 51 votes and can’t be filibustered.
I’ve disproven you in two ways. Stating that you 51 vote repeal theory hasn’t been done before and by pointing out that Congress doesn’t vote to repeal laws. They vote on new laws that nullify previous laws.
No you don’t know what you are talking about. Here is a story just released talking about the same thing I was. You don’t have the first idea.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/could-republicans-really-repeal-obamacare-091546012.html
You’re changing what what you’re arguing now. A repeal of the mandate isn’t a repeal of the law.
There was no change except that you have added words I did not use. Like mandate for one.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/could-republicans-really-repeal-obamacare-091546012.html
A repeal of the mandate isn’t a repeal of the law. You’ve changed what you’re arguing for because you don’t have proof of what you’ve initially said. And not to mention modifying your comments after the fact in order to be seem correct. Just a note, you should edit all of them, because not all of them say “kill that part of the legislation”, down below you refer to the entire law being killed.
I am not a lawyer nor do I claim to be but I don’t believe the language of the original bill or the reconciled bill claimed the mandate was a tax. Just because Chief Justice Roberts claimed it was constitutional as a tax does not mean it is classified as a tax.
I think that is why a filibuster proof vote would be needed to repeal the law. I may be wrong and it wouldn’t be the first time :)
Here is the only reasonable response to my initial post. Thank you.
Actually the Solicitor General made the argument to the Supremes that it was a tax as his back up plan after initially claiming the right under the commerce clause.
It is classified as a tax only because it is collected in the normal course of the duties of the IRS.
Reconciliations only need a 50 +1 Senate votes to become law. So it was made law, So can it be repealed.
Like I said initially, that would be up to the voters. The Republicans need to capture the Senate and the White House for that scenario to take place.
“If there is a Romney victory and there are at least 50 Republican Senators and control of the House is maintained Obamacare is dead. ”
You are dreaming!!! That just is not going to happen.
You don’t understand what a political motivator this is for lots of conservatives and independents. Independents have always favored repeal. They will now as well.
Try to spray perfume on your pig all you want, but face it, you LOST. REPUBLICAN appointee Chief Justice Roberts even disagrees with you, and I think he knows the law just a bit better than the average TeaRadical. Man up, deal with it, and ween off of the Rush Limpmind show and FAKE-News and enter reality. The extremist delusional TeaRadicals LOST. Your own corporatist FLIP FLOPPER RoMONEY now has to run against HIS OWN LAW, the popular and effective Massachusetts version, ROMNEYCARE, which he touted as a “national model” and on which the Affordable Care Act is largely based. The individual mandate was originally a REPUBLICAN idea, and many other planks are REPUBLICAN ideas as well, so once again they are being pure hypocrites. Of course what the Republicans really want to do now is anything they can to help insurance company CEO’s buy more mansions while denying healthcare to millions of Americans. What is the Republican alternative? Kill Medicare, deny or throw people off healthcare whenever you want, have as many people be uninsured as possible, and kiss the toes of the insurance company CEO’s. That’s about it. As to the corporate toadie Republicans winning in November, AINT GONNA HAPPEN. Especially here in Maine where they are going to get POUNDED into the ground at the voting booth. Folks have had enough of their delusional radical TeaFoolish nonsense.
And “Decide” we will!
Osama Bin Laden is Dead,–General Motors is Alive—-We all have Access to Health Care!
Obama 2012
Full Dem Ticket
Send the Tea Party a pack’n!
“Hatch, the Heritage Foundation, and many other supporters of the mandate have since said they were mistaken.”
Isn’t it bizarre that the same people who hatched the plan for the individual mandate are the same ones screeching that Obama is a Marxist, socialist, tyrant, etc. for implementing their very idea?
Not really when you consider that they disagree with whatever Obama says or does. Obama coudl mess with their heads by agreeing with Conservatives on everything.
It would be hilarious to watch them back pedal from everyone of their opinions.
Yup. Total right wing HYPOCRITES and LIARS who now must think that GW Bush appointee and Chief Justice, John Roberts, is also a “Socialist.”
Brilliant aren’t they!
Pure Evil has advantages!
Single payer universal health care is hopefully on the horizon.
Now it’s up to Congress? …
they’re kidding, the Republican clan of do nothings are now going to do something? Leave it to these clowns to rattle their sabers vs. doing something for the people they supposedly represent. It must be grueling to be an R these days when your only objective is making Obama a one term President. Single Payer is coming soon, and then you will see the obstructionists cry.
Romney, McConnell, Boehner—–
Reincarnation of the Three Stooges!
If the GOP sponsored a health plan with a mandate, why didn’t the Dems support it?
The mandate/tax is not really the worst part about this plan. As with Romneycare, the worst part is when the socialists expand the idea of “basic coverage” to make things like gym memberships, organic vegetables, massages and condoms free for half of the population and illegal/amnestied immigrants, while raising the taxes and costs for those of us with a job.
There is about a 0.0000001% chance this law could be repealed. The mere fact that Romney is running around saying he will end the law on his first day in office should be a hint to your smarties on the right out there, that he is a hopeless panderer who will say anything even if it not true or possible.
The president cannot nullify an act of congress because he wants to. He is in fact obligated to enforce that law. Even an undergrad poly sci student knows that you can’t nullify an act of congress by executive order or by praying it away.
Sorry Mitt and GOP, you will have to learn to live with this law. You put up a strong defensive to stop it and lost.
Now we will watch and see what happens when people learn the truth about what this law is and isn’t. I predict growing support and by November, a large majority will be in favor of this law based on the facts.
In the presence of reality and fact, the GOP arguments all crumble. They built a mirage and now there is something real and tangible to look at. Public support is about to skyrocket. The entire right wing attack on this has been based on lies and fear mongering. And now we will have…. reality.
It’s been up to Congress for at least a couple of decades and all it has succeeded in doing, when it comes to health insurance, is to make us look like a developing nation. Developed countries have developed health insurance systems that ensure level costs for all citizens and, at a minimum, basic levels of care. They achieve this with private sector or public sector solutions, or combinations of the two. It isn’t rocket science but it does require good faith negotiations, not ideological orthodoxy.