Health care repeal vote postponed

Earlier this week, in an odd reaction to the shooting in Tucson last weekend, Speaker John Boehner cancelled all votes scheduled for the entire week.  That action postponed the healthcare repeal vote that had been scheduled this week.  In so doing, the Republicans deferred action on a key element of the platform on which many had been elected or reelected two months ago.  Presumably, the vote will be scheduled in the near future after the Republicans feel comfortable once again working.  

Taking the vote on whether to repeal the healthcare legislation passed last Spring and signed by President Barack Obama – often referred to as “ObamaCare” —  is fine; and it sends an important signal that the GOP majority in the House have not yet forgotten their campaign promises.  However, it will be a symbolic vote, insofar as the Republicans clearly lack a veto-override majority in the House, and do not yet enjoy sufficient numbers in the Senate to bring the matter to a vote. 

At least for the next two years, the real battle over the fundamental constitutional principles overridden by the ObamaCare legislation – including the blatantly unconstitutional provision that the government can force a person to purchase health insurance even if they choose not to – will be fought in the federal courts.  Already, one federal judge in Virginia has ruled the individual mandate provision unconstitutional; and another judge in Florida may do so this Spring.  It is likely that the controversy will reach the nation’s High Court before the 2012 election.  

Given the stakes involved in these court cases – whether there shall be any limits at all on the power of the federal government to force citizens of this country to do its bidding – it will be none too soon to get this question answered by the Supreme Court. 

In the meantime, there are some steps the Congress can take to move us at least with small steps, away from the direction in which ObamaCare is pushing us.  Appropriations bills could include cuts to funding various provisions in the healthcare legislation.  The Senate Judiciary Committee could do a much better job than in the past, of aggressively probing judicial nominees’ views on the absurd reach of the Constitution’s so-called “commerce clause” that has been stretched beyond all recognition to justify government control. And  Members opposed to the law can discuss it regularly and substantively so the problems inherent in the law remain in the forefront of the nation’s public discourse. 

A symbolic vote can be postponed; but the ultimate question presented the people of the United States by ObamaCare cannot.

- by  Bob Barr, The Barr Code

84 comments Add your comment

[...] The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Health Care Repeal Vote Postponed There are some steps the Congress can take to move us at least with small steps, away from the direction in which ObamaCare is pushing us. Appropriations bills could include cuts to funding various provisions in the healthcare legislation. The Senate Judiciary Committee could do a much better job than in the past of aggressively probing judicial nominees’ views on the absurd reach of the Constitution’s so-called “commerce clause.” … And Members opposed to the law can discuss it regularly and substantively (Bob Barr, 1/14). [...]

BS Aplenty

January 14th, 2011
1:38 pm

@Sandra

When someone has an idea that conflicts with you well-established political sentiment you presume they must be arrongant – but you’d be wrong. And that’s a typical Dem response to losing a political argument – start name calling.

There’s nothing in my arguments that’s arrogant other than my confidence that there are solutions to our healthcare issues that are far more sustainable. You should quit thinking about just you for a moment and consider the succeeding generations who have to pay for the government’s OVERSPENDING on our current healthcare system.

Get Real

January 14th, 2011
1:40 pm

John…bottom line, like it or not, one reason for the republican landslide in November was to repeal the bill. Call it symbolic or call it theatre, it is what it is…

I go back and forth whether or not republicans are putting the cart before the horse…repeal before detailed, transparent analysis. In either case, I truly believe (at this point anyway) that we will see transparent hearings in the very near future so everyone can understand the true impact of this bill. My biggest concern is that without the detailed analysis, which never occurred in the public forum before it was passed, will ultimately bury this country in debt and we already in a big enough hole as it is……..

mike

January 14th, 2011
1:49 pm

Its ok folks. There is nothing wrong with taking health care away from people no matter what side of the fence you think you are on. This is the American way. I got mine and forget about everyone else. Now if I can get plenty of extended clips before they are banned.

John

January 14th, 2011
2:12 pm

@Get Real…there were several reasons why Republicans won control of the House and picked up seats in the Senate. Most polls show the majority don’t want it repealed. A good percentage don’t think the law goes far enough.

I’m not saying it shouldn’t be debated…but Republicans are doing what they accused the Democrats of doing. Rushing a bill through quickly, without much debate and no amendments. Instead of looking at the law and fixing it, where needed to produce something better. They know, they cannot repeal it with a Democrat majority in the Senate and a Democrat President. So, why not work together and make it better.

When business discover a flaw in something, they don’t scrap everything and go back to the drawing board. What would happen to the auto industry for instance, instead of recalling vehicles to fix a flaw, they go back to redesign the vehicle and then replace all affected models that are on the road. They don’t start over…they work on fixing the problem. As I’ve stated before, there is common ground in the law…if you read Republican’s Pledge to America.

“I truly believe (at this point anyway) that we will see transparent hearings in the very near future so everyone can understand the true impact of this bill.”

That’s one of the problems I have…there will be no hearings. At least when the Democrats worked on an passed the bill, it was in committee with both Democrats and Republicans working on it. Republicans aren’t going to committee…they aren’t holding any debates. Their reason for this is that it’s already been debated and therefore needs no further debate. It’s going straight to the floor.

“My biggest concern is that without the detailed analysis, which never occurred in the public forum before it was passed, will ultimately bury this country in debt and we already in a big enough hole as it is…….”

That’s a legitimate concern…but what if CBO projections are correct. Are you willing to add to the deficit and bury this country in more debt by quickly repealing it without proper discussion and debate?

Kilgore

January 14th, 2011
2:14 pm

Jay bookman is a troll-coddling loser. He can’t understand how to approach the issue about global warming except to steal material from other writers and coddle his trolls who comment like the stunted and blunted wankers they truly are.

The question about global warming is this: can a planet destroy itself by being a planet in the same way a star can destroy itself just by being a star? How? A planet can create the life that destroys the planet. Look at the way we’re destroying our atmosphere: the hole in the ozone and global warming. Thus a planet might commit suicide simply by being all it can be so that life will evolve and be all it can be and thus destroy the planet, because although it’s groovy to say that we are star stuff, the truth is that we are planet stuff first.

ANd what is a planet? Pluto? Jupiter is mostly gas, is there a way to say that Jupiter destroyed itself in any terms other than the terms of life support?

Dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return, and Bookman can kiss my big fat hairy patoot. The issue is too complex for Bookman or his rocket scientist troll-wipes but they just love to spread their cheeks about it. Rasberry cheers for bookman.

You stink, Jay Bookman!!!

Get Real

January 14th, 2011
3:10 pm

Kilgore….I hate to tell you but you are on the wrong site…

Get Real

January 14th, 2011
3:20 pm

John…I appreciate the civil debate, I truly do. I realize there are folks that thought the bill did not go far enough (public option) but those folks did not vote for republicans. Clearly, the reasons for the republican gains were multifaceted but their approach is going to be repeal before they start the replace part. I suppose the idea is to get everyone on the record again. I am not saying I agree with that but I do believe there will be a detailed review after the repeal vote.

Also, per your point on democratic committee review…yes that did occur but very little if any concerns raised by the republicans were considered…at least in my view. In the end, it was we won, deal with it. And, before you say it seems like we are going down the same road on the other side now.

The biggest difference this time should be the detailed public review and discussion, it is just going to occur after the repeal….cart..horse…it is debatable…

Have a good weekend…over and out..

John

January 14th, 2011
3:37 pm

Get Real…

“Also, per your point on democratic committee review…yes that did occur but very little if any concerns raised by the republicans were considered…at least in my view. ”

I was disagree with that. We hear talk about how is was pushed through but it was worked on for over a year before it was brought up for a vote. Like several other bills, Democrats and Republicans worked on it together and Republicans backed out and would no longer work on it. Democrats wanted the public option, Republicans didn’t. Democrats pulled it out of the bill and replaced it with the mandate for coverage…which is from the Republican plan back in the 90’s during the Clinton administration. It’s the same type of mandate Republican Mitt Romney signed into law in his state. Republicans claim to want pre-existing conditions to be covered…it’s in the law. There is bi-partisan agreement in most of the law. When President Obama called for the meeting in front of C-Span cameras, he wanted to focus on areas of the bill where there was disagreement. If you recall, Republicans publicly stated before the meeting, they want the entire bill scrapped and started over…they refused to look at areas of disagreement and work together to compromise on those areas.

Look at Republican’s Pledge to America and see what they want…you will see most of what they have in their pledge is in the current law.

John

January 14th, 2011
3:48 pm

Get Real…part of the problem, I think is the way both parties handled it. Republicans demonized the bill and at times lied about it (such as the death panel) and were good at creating facts to the point a big part of the population believes it. Democrats, on the other hand, did a very poor job and selling it.

But not that some of the provision have kicked in, how many people that now have their kids under 26 are willing to have the government kick their kids off their insurance? How many do you think want to have their coverage canceled due to pre-existing conditions or have yearly limits brought back?

Jefferson

January 14th, 2011
3:50 pm

There’s a great deal of interest in health care reform, with over 45% in favor. The law can be made better. You folks better start voting in your best interest or you too will be without a paddle…

Get Real

January 14th, 2011
4:13 pm

John…it should be a very interesting 2011….chow

[...] discussing healthcare, they are truly terrified of Democrats offering amendments to …Health care repeal vote postponedAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) all 480 news articles » Comments [...]

ROCKERBABE

January 14th, 2011
4:36 pm

Individual mandates are legal; or is GA laws requiring car insurance when one drives also illegal? No one can ever guarantee that they will not be injured or get sick and thus need medical care. The healthcare industry needs to get paid for the services it performs and unfortunately, way too many people are uninsured for a variety of reasons but still need care nonetheless.

Repealing Obamacae will only allow the private insurers to deny medical insurance to 50+ million without and thereby continue the current unsustainable system we currently have. All those clamoring for repeal are being short-sighted and mean-spirited. So much for the pro-life crowd. Of course MANDATING women carry pregnancies to term that is against their will – well how come that wouldn’t be illegal? Shame on all of your for forgetting about the common good and general welfare of our citizens.

Kilgore

January 14th, 2011
5:10 pm

Get Real

January 14th, 2011
5:19 pm

Rockerbabe…50+ million?? was 30 million before that it was 10 million….I guess next week it will be 100+ million

Car insurance is not the same thing silly girl, that comparison was rebuked along time ago. You do not have to drive, Obamacare requires you buy a commodity just for being a citizen…big difference

Freedom of Expression

January 14th, 2011
6:43 pm

Nice reading, by Mr. Barr and the anti-Obamaists on the blog. I am reading well argued points about the legislation, while posts suggesting a conservative point of view are coming back with the same, old talking points including “healthcare needs reform, but Obama care is not the way to do it.” But do not offer an alternative. I especially love these oft repeated “solutions.”

TORT REFORM,
—A good way to get tort reform would be for Dr’s to stop committing malpractice. Further, the 11th circuit of GA held that a tort reform measure, putting caps on malpractice claims violated the constitution because it limits jury decisions.

COMPETITION ACROSS STATE LINES
—-Seems like this would 1) create a patch-work of varying coverages from state to state, and 2) result in the flow of insurance business to states offering the most favorable regulations to the insurance companies. For example, Delaware and Connecticut offer some of the most liberal laws for incorporating a business, therefore most corporations are created in Delaware and Connecticut. And look at your own insurance. Is your insurance company located in the state where you live? If so, you have a unique policy, Of the 4 largest providers, United Health group, is based in MN; Wellpoint in IN; AETNA in CT; and Humana in KY. So this interstate competition model already exists and has failed for everybody except a few insurance companies.

CARE FOR ALL THAT IS EFFICIENT AND AFFORDABLE.
—-Sounds like a good idea, but is by no means a plan.

AntiBoortz

January 14th, 2011
6:57 pm

Poor Ollie McClung. Health care should be enacted under the Tax and Spend Clause. Ask anyone over 65 how their goverment health care is working for them.

CrBids » News about Funny News issue #1

January 14th, 2011
8:12 pm

Made of Honor

January 14th, 2011
8:26 pm

Get Real said:
“Car insurance is not the same thing silly girl, that comparison was rebuked along time ago. You do not have to drive, Obamacare requires you buy a commodity just for being a citizen…big difference”

You should have stopped at the word before “silly girl.” For one, to “rebuke” something is to speak disapprovingly of it. You have spoken disapprovingly of the comparison, but the comparison has not been disproved or “debunked.” As for not having to drive, it would be nice if that were actually true. But if you live and work in ATL, or any other city for that matter, you know otherwise. However, assuming that one doesn’t have to drive, an option is not available for getting sick or injured. Furthermore, one can choose to drive without liability insurance, or even a license. If they are never caught or never wreck, nobody will ever know the difference. Finally, liability insurance is required for when a driver is in a wreck with another driver. Practically any expense over the deductible pays for the non-fault driver’s medical care.

Insurance is not a “commodity,” it is a “service,” big difference. In considering the insurance mandate, you should evoke founding father Ben Franklin “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” Applying this formula to healthcare: An ounce of insurance is worth a pound of bankruptcy.

Eliminating ignorance an illiteracy would help the matter too.

killerj

January 14th, 2011
8:33 pm

Prez Obama Need,s To Come Out In The Public Street,s To Affirm His Belief All Americans Agree With Him And His Illustrious Followers.

Get Real

January 15th, 2011
12:31 am

Made of Honor @ 8:26 pm

Thanks for the grammar lesson, A$$wipe…My point is still valid, you proved nothing….

[...] WeekTIME (blog)A Time for RepealingLubbockOnline.com (blog)IowaPolitics.com (press release) -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -American Spectatorall 8 news articles » reddit_url = [...]

[...] a vast majority of the US electorate. …Rasmussen: 75 Percent Want Obamacare ChangedNewsMax.comHealth care repeal vote postponedAtlanta Journal Constitution [...]

[...] The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Health Care Repeal Vote Postponed There are some steps the Congress can take to move us at least with small steps, away from the direction in which ObamaCare is pushing us. Appropriations bills could include cuts to funding various provisions in the healthcare legislation. The Senate Judiciary Committee could do a much better job than in the past of aggressively probing judicial nominees’ views on the absurd reach of the Constitution’s so-called “commerce clause.” … And Members opposed to the law can discuss it regularly and substantively (Bob Barr, 1/14). [...]

Kilgore

January 15th, 2011
8:25 am

and furthermore…….

Tracy

January 15th, 2011
10:35 am

The moment the GOP took House majority the Party’s primary focus was figuring out how to avoid doing everything they promised that got them elected. Just like the “pre-stimulus spending levels” promise that’s now clearly history.

Republicans will vote on this one day, but only because it’s a symbolic vote. They know it won’t go further and as we all know, the GOP is all for big government. Just don’t tell their voters that…hush….

[...] Health care repeal vote postponed | The Barr Code. This entry was posted in Opinion, Politics and tagged ajc, Bob Barr, congress, Health care vote, opinion, Politics. Bookmark the permalink. ← A New Husband Reflects On Returning To Afghanistan : NPR [...]

mpercy

January 16th, 2011
12:04 pm

John @9:25 am Another Republican lie…regulations (such as the banking and credit card) will hurt businesses so they want to repeal those as well. Today JPMorgan Chase announced profit jumped 47 percent in 4Q.

Well, first, you can’t be sure without more information what JP Morgan Chase’s revenues came from (maybe it was simply their investments? or maybe because they purged deadbeats from the credit card rolls). But let’s go with what you say, as if it proves your point.

I wasn’t ever concerned about what it might do to the banks–I was certain the banks would make their money–but what it might do to *me* as a consumer of banking and credit services.

My credit score hovers between 795 and 805, I pay all my credit cards off every month, pay all my bills. So far, I’ve had one credit card canceled (because I didn’t use it enough) and every one of them raised the interest rates by 4-5% points.

I’ve had my bank send me 3 separate letters detailing changes they have made because of the new laws. First, I am no longer allowed to access my signature (unsecured) line-of-credit from an ATM. Then I was told I cannot tie my line-of-credit as the overdraft protection for my checking account (as it had been for the last 12 years). Finally, I was told that my line-of-credit, which had been no-cost to me for 12 years, would now carry a $25/yr fee. I also just paid $35 for a wire transfer I used to get for free.

All over the country, formerly free checking accounts are carrying fees, sometimes whoppingly large fees.

While supporters of 2009 Credit CARD (Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure) Act promoted it as good for credit card consumers, actual experience has been different, writes Todd Zywicki in The Wall Street Journal. Limits on how credit card issuers can charge their customers has driven people to payday lenders and pawn shops for credit, the very thing lawmakers wanted to curtail.

Key points of Zywicki’s article include:

* For many Americans the law has meant higher interest rates, increases in fees, and reduced credit limits.
* Unintended consequence number one: If companies can’t raise interest rates on risky borrowers, they raise interest rates on all borrowers, even those with spotless records.
* Unintended consequence number two: If companies can’t price risk efficiently and rationally, they cut off customers, which pushes them to payday lenders, which are really expensive.
* Unintended consequence number three: If companies can’t price risk efficiently and rationally, they will reduce their lending, which means credit card limits are lowered.
* Banks also drop customers altogether: “In his letter to shareholders last spring, Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan Chase reported that, ‘In the future, we no longer will be offering credit cards to approximately 15% of the customers to whom we currently offer them. This is mostly because we deem them too risky in light of new regulations restricting our ability to make adjustments over time as the client’s risk profile changes.’” … “Meet the new payday loan customers,” wrote Zywicki.
* “Nontraditional financial products serve an important role in the marketplace for the millions of consumers who count on them. Even pawn shops and loan sharks are more palatable and less expensive than the bounced checks and utility shut-offs that would result in their absence.”

mpercy

January 16th, 2011
12:07 pm

“When business discover a flaw in something, they don’t scrap everything and go back to the drawing board. ”

Maybe Republicans are trying a Mike Holmes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmes_on_Homes) approach! It was done so poorly originally that the only way to fix it is to gut it and start over.

Dave from GT

January 16th, 2011
12:23 pm

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance the government’s reckless fiscal policies.” – Senator Barack Obama…………… need any more information?

ATF

January 16th, 2011
4:04 pm

I would feel much better about repeal if the Pubs had some idea of what to offer for an alternative. And “tort reform” is not going to address the real problems. Repealing our right to have a jury decide damages in a civil case is not an answer – that is the right we have in the Bill of rights, Amendment VII of the Constitution. Letting the government set limits on jury awards is like letting the government set limits on prices or wages – stupid. Jury systems for justice always have outliers that look and are unjust – but it is better than any other system anyone has come up with.

Don’t believe the guff about the health care bill being a “job killer”, either. The job killer is the high costs of health care born by employers. We need to get provision of health care out of the employers pockets. My former employer just closed three plants a few years ago and sent the jobs to Mexico, accounting got outsourced to Sri Lanka, and computer support is half out of India now.

I think health care is like clean water and roads – something the government should provide – although I realize I am in the minority on this. What is strange is that my libetarian brother agrees with me.

Remember, the Republicans did absolutely nothing to address the problem of double digit health care costs increases in the years they had all the power. After the repeal the current health care law, what do you think will happen? I expect nothing that will deal with the problem and I expect things will only get worse. My biggest hope is things will bog down in Congress and two more years will mean voters will see the Pubs have no answers.

Linda

January 16th, 2011
4:21 pm

Hey GOP and Tea Party Congressional representatives, I suggest you live by example. Give up your free health care ride. Also renounce your Medicare and Social Security. Really get in bed with your pals in the insurance industry.

freethinker

January 20th, 2011
8:55 pm

If you will get the Repubs to repeal the socialist health care programs such as the unfunded mandate Reagan passed to have emergency rooms treat anyone who rolls in the door without payment or citizenship as a requirement and the unfunded Medicare drug benefit George passed to get reelected and allow the government to buy drugs competitively on the open market, we can start a rational conversation