oldNslow wrote on 10/07/13 at 08:31:42: Quote: A mix of incentives, subsidies, private insurance companies offering competing plans and an individual mandate represents something a majority would support.
Except that a majority DON'T support what we wound up with. Particularly the individual mandate. Quite the opposite actually. And the reason we wound up with this colossal clusterf**k of a law has very little to do with addressing a need, and everything to do with politics as usual in that insane asylum on the banks of the Potomac.
The old saying goes "figures don't lie but liars can figure"
It's all in how the question is asked, what questions are asked and how you add the numbers up.
Obama was comfortably reelected even though the Republicans tried to make it a referendum on "Obamacare"
For the law in general, 17% oppose it because it did not go far enough. Those 17% - the true lefties this post mentioned, wanted government run cradle to grave health insurance. If those 17% are added to the people that support the law in full, you have a very, very solid majority.
Individual aspects of the law enjoy nearly universal support. In the 80-90% range. Children on parents plan till 25. Preventive services being free. Insurance companies not allowed to exclude or charge more for pre-existing conditions.
People everywhere always want the benefits and not the cost. So yes, 90% if the public thinks the bastard insurance companies shouldn't be able to charge them more or exclude them for preexisting conditions, while 60% oppose the individual mandate. The deal is simple. You cannot have a law that says insurance companies cannot charge more or exclude those with preexisting without some mechanism in place that has nearly everyone covered. Why? Because otherwise, people would ONLY purchase insurance when the were sick. Diagnosed with cancer? Buy a policy. $100,000 worth of treatment later - drop the policy.
It's the law. It's not going to delayed, it's not going to be eliminated. It can be modified and made better in the years going forward. The majority of Republicans in the House know this but the party is now so dysfunctional it can no longer even police itself. The tea party representing the most conservative members have managed to put some fear into moderate, business minded elected representatives with primary challenges. So the party - against it's long term best interests and the wishes of it's leaders pick fights they cannot win, negotiate for things they don't even want and double down on "core conservative values" that are out of step with the mainstream views.
I don't count myself as a Republican though I have voted for many over the years. I'm not glad to see this happening. America's form of representative democracy relies on a two party system with the minority party offering clear but democratic and civil alternatives. Shutting down the government. taking us to the point we won't even pay the bills we have run up, hysteria and demonizing those that disagree with you is little different than what the Fascists did in Germany in the 1930's. If we can't govern, we will just ball things up so bad nothing gets done. The Dems learned long ago (McGovern anyone?) to tell the loony left to sit down and shut the crappity smack up. Who else would they vote for anyway? Until the Republicans learn to do the same with the loony right, national elections are going to be disappointing for the GOP.
Pages: 
