Obamacare is upon us

  • Updated: April 27, 2013 - 7:49 AM

It’s almost universally acknowledged that this is not going to go smoothly.

  • 34
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
pumiceApr. 26, 13 7:37 PM

Re: "The law’s biggest defenders will then become insurance companies and health care corporations." Not at all surprising, David Brooks, since Big Insurance, Big Pharma, and Big Healthcare Corporations had Big Influence in writing ACA and protecting their stakes in what you characterize as "an economic unit roughly the size of France". According to Larry M. Bartels in his 2005 research on "Economic Inequality and Political Representation", Big Money has gotten whatever Big Money wants from the US Senate since the late 1980s and early 1990s. Bartels found that "Senators in [the late 1980s and early 1990s] were vastly more responsive to the views of affluent constituents than to constituents of modest means.... The views of constituents in the upper third of the income distribution received about 50% more weight than those in the middle third (with even larger disparities on specific salient roll call votes), while the views of constituents in the bottom third of the income distribution received no weight at all in the voting decisions of their Senators.... Bartels concludes that "the economic order of the contemporary United States poses a clear and profound obstacle to realizing the democratic value of political equality."

pumiceApr. 26, 13 7:51 PM

From the article: "There’s a good chance Republicans will be able to use unhappiness with what is already an unpopular law to win back the Senate in 2014." If that's the case, David Brooks, Big Insurance and Big Pharma and Big Healthcare Corporations will have clear sailing. Larry M. Bartels found that Republicans gave over twice as much weight to "views of constituents in the upper third of the income distribution" as Democrats. Republicans gave well over twice as much weight to "From the article: "There’s a good chance Republicans will be able to use unhappiness with what is already an unpopular law to win back the Senate in 2014." If that's the case, David Brooks, Big Insurance and Big Pharma and Big Healthcare Corporations will have clear sailing. Bartels found that Republican Senators gave considerably more weight to views of upper-third-of-the-income-distribution constituents than they gave to constituents in the middle third of the income distribution.

dschachenmeyerApr. 26, 13 8:31 PM

Anyone surprised Congress is moving to exempt themselves from ObamaCare? Mom always told me to wary of the chef who won't eat his or her own cooking.

hawkeye56379Apr. 26, 13 8:59 PM

No, actually they are NOT moving to exempt themselves from coverage. They are covered by the law, and planning to stay that way.

theruntApr. 26, 13 9:47 PM

We are going to be single payer eventually, so let's cut to the chase: Medicare for all.

hermajestyApr. 26, 1310:25 PM

ObamaCare is nothing more than RomneyCare applied to the whole country. If Bush had proposed it, the conservatives on this board would be praising it to the skies. I'm too left for most Democrats, and guess what, I don't like the ACA either. It's the result of Obama trying to please the Republicans instead of doing what needs to be done, a single-payer system that covers at least basic care for all citizens and legal residents. Do you right-wingers know that Obama refused to meet with advocates of single-payer health care and met in closed-door sessions with the insurance companies to craft a bill that they would approve of? Republican opposition was all theater.

squeezemeApr. 27, 13 2:17 AM

Every Republican in the House and Senate voted AGAINST Obamacare (the official and misleading name of the law is the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act"). The only bi-partisan support for this law was in OPPOSITION. In the Senate, every Republican voted against it and every Democrat voted for it. In the House of Representatives, every Republican voted against it and 34 Democrats crossed party lines to vote against it. There is a REASON the implementation of Obamacare was delayed until AFTER Obama had stood for re-election: Because nobody could hold him accountable for the negative effects, rising costs to consumers, even more massive budget deficits than the $1.274 trillion average he ran during his first 4 years, etc. Max Baucus (D-MT), the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance who steered Obamacare through the Senate and bribed his own party members to vote for it, recently described the law as a "TRAIN WRECK". That's right, the Democrat who helped push Obamacare through called it a "train wreck". Those Democrats really inspire confidence, don't they? Too bad Baucus did not have the intelligence to see beforehand that it would be a "train wreck" as EVERY Republican and 34 Democrats did. Oh, and let's not forget this little nugget of truth: Minnesota Senators Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken voted for Obamacare's medical equipment industry revenue taxes, admitted BEFORE they voted for the tax that it would destroy jobs, and waited until AFTER the November 2012 elections to launch an uphill battle to get the revenue tax repealed. Why wait until after the election? Because drawing attention to the job-destroying taxes Amy Klobuchar voted for would not help her chances of getting re-elected.

unionbossmanApr. 27, 13 7:24 AM

This will be the most delicious political "I told you so" in quite some time. Next election strategy will be to marry the term obamacare with everyone who voted for it. As the pain and chaos is realized over the next few years its a surefire winning strategy.

Truckman182Apr. 27, 13 7:36 AM

Guess we should have read the bill before we passed it right Nancy Pelosi?

herro002Apr. 27, 13 7:46 AM

It would go more smoothly if so many states didn't act like spoiled children. Adequate federal staffing instead of furloughs and wage freezes might be helpful to this rollout.


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters