2012 Tuesday: After the Obamacare ruling
The Supreme Court is due to rule on the constitutionality of the individual mandate in Obamacare before the end of the month. If the mandate stands, the rest of the law will, too. If it falls, however, there will also be the question of how much of the rest of the law must go with it — and, of course, what to do next.
Along the way, the issue will have an impact on the re-election chances of the man for whom the law was nicknamed. But what kind of impact, and how much?
Up to a point, I think the results have been baked into existing opinion about President Obama and Mitt Romney. The law’s supporters are largely on Obama’s side, and most of its critics are on Romney’s side. There may be some crossover voting for Obama by independents who dislike the law, and vice versa, but if so they’ll be making their decisions for reasons beyond Obamacare — which means the court’s ruling is unlikely to sway them. There may be some change in enthusiasm, but I wouldn’t expect it to be very great. And, given the many possible outcomes, it’s best to wait until we have a ruling to hash out how it might affect voters’ moods.
I said only “up to a point,” however, because I think there’s potential for significant movement depending on how the candidates and their campaigns react to the news.
I think it would be foolish (not to mention churlish) for the Obama campaign to try to blame and paint the Supreme Court as yet another external force arrayed against it. First, rulings issued by the court as recently as yesterday proved that there is no hard ideological schism among the justices. The three 5-4 rulings unveiled Monday included majorities of 1) Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Elena Kagan and Anthony Kennedy; 2) Kennedy, Thomas, Samuel Alito, John Roberts and Stephen Breyer; and 3) Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. In a fourth case that broke 8-1, only Sotomayor dissented. All nine justices found themselves in a majority at least once in these four cases, while only Kennedy and Thomas were in the majority all four times. That’s hardly the picture of a rigidly divided bench.
Second, public opinion falls sharply on the side of believing the mandate is unconstitutional. In a poll taken in February, a month before the court heard oral arguments in the Obamacare case, Gallup found 72 percent of all respondents thought the mandate violated the Constitution, including majorities of both Democrats (56 percent) and those who think the law is “a good thing” (54 percent). More recently, a CBS News/New York Times poll found two-thirds of respondents wanted the court to throw out at least the mandate, including a plurality of Democrats (48 percent).
So, trying to curry favor with voters by castigating the court would be a strategy that ignores public sentiment — not to mention striking yet another blow to Obama’s self-proclaimed desire to be a unifying figure.
As for Romney, he should expect a great deal of media attention to focus on congressional Republicans’ response. No prizes for guessing whether the press will portray the House GOP or Senate Democrats as the main obstacle to a legislative solution should all or part of the law be overturned.
Rather than trying to herd congressional cats as a mere candidate, however, Romney would be well-advised to keep his focus on what he can control — namely, what he would do to remedy the situation if voters give him that opportunity.
This is one way in which his choice of a running mate could materially affect his election prospects, and it’s one of the reasons I think Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal should be at the top of his short list. Before being elected governor, Jindal served as both the head of Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals — with responsibility for the state’s Medicaid program — and, federally, as a top adviser to the secretary for Health and Human Services. If any potential running mate has the experience and knowledge to help a President Romney devise a sensible solution for health policy, it’s Jindal. (He’d also be a tremendous asset to the campaign when it comes to energy policy and could speak first-hand about how the Obama administration botched the response to the BP oil spill.)
Expect any post-ruling bounce for Obama or Romney to be short-lived until voters have a chance to assess what each man would do going forward. Then, the ruling could have a significant effect on the election.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
231 comments Add your comment
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
1:51 pm
“Heathcare is a basic human need/right and should not be treated as a privelege.”
Really, Peter Currie?
Please explain how something can be a “right” when it requires the active participation of another person; i.e. the health care provider, whether they agree to provide the service or not.
md
June 19th, 2012
1:52 pm
“He still has the power to veto if he was so strongly against something. ”
Seriously?? It takes a smarter man to know when the deck is stacked against him…..there have been many many instances where vetoes may be in order but never happen as basic math dictates the course.
It happens in Congress all the time……they know when they have the numbers before they ever bring a bill to the floor…….it’s about the numbers silly.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
1:54 pm
Righty Whities can’t stand a Muslim from Kenya, but you think they are going to accept a Catholic from India, second in line to a Mormon?
Kyle Wingfield
June 19th, 2012
1:56 pm
Finn: They already do. You’ve been too busy shouting about race to notice.
Kyle Wingfield
June 19th, 2012
1:57 pm
In your mind alone, Debbie.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
1:59 pm
Please explain how something can be a “right” when it requires the active participation of another person; i.e. the health care provider, whether they agree to provide the service or not
So, national defense is not a right that we get for being tax-paying, law abiding citizens? It does rely on another person, ie, the soldier, whether they agree to provide the service or not
firefighters, police, postal carriers, teachers?
If we don’t get any protections or schooling, what exactly are we paying taxes for? Why are we all in this together? Why are we acting like a “society”?
md
June 19th, 2012
1:59 pm
“Hard choices have to be made BEFORE a law is passed because it is impossible to make them after a law is passed.’
Hence the primary reason the dems crammed the aca through……it was all about getting something on the books while they had the ability to do so, didn’t really matter what it was as long as it was on the books.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:03 pm
I agree it’s not a “right” but it is something that the better off countries set in place for their citizens as a “quality of life” amenity.
And no, their countries aren’t all collapsing: Finland, Germany, Japan, France, Singapore, Austria, Norway, Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, UAE, Saudi Arabia…
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:05 pm
….Canada, Australia, Denmark,
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
June 19th, 2012
2:07 pm
Kyle – I had said that not all people participate in polls and some polls had McCain over Obama. You agreed. Where’s the problem?
===============
Hence the primary reason the dems crammed the aca through……
Wow!! Another instance of “Why republicans Can’t remember basic history”.
Crammed huh? I guess those MONTHS of debate, televised on CNN, that US House channel, AND followed in every newspaper AND on Faux news, just wasn’t enough huh? The mandates were fought over, changed, re-arranged, republican initiatives added, (and then the republicans promptly pretended that they didn’t actually MEAN what they said), the thing rewritten at least a dozen times over the course of MONTHS, yet, it was “crammed” through.
A-Freaking-Mazing!
ragnar danneskjold
June 19th, 2012
2:08 pm
My guess is that ObamaCare has roughly the same public approval as Kelo (the eminent domain case where the leftists carried the day (with the moderate, Justice Kennedy, of course). Kelo is one of those cases that has damaged the reputation of the court; the ObamaCare ruling will have a similar effect, positive for the court if the law is stricken, and negative for the court if the law is upheld.
md
June 19th, 2012
2:08 pm
As for the WWJD argument…….I’m pretty sure the fellow would also have told the masses that it is their responsibility to take advantage of a free education vs choosing to drop out and become a burden on society……you think??
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
June 19th, 2012
2:09 pm
Seriously?? It takes a smarter man to know when the deck is stacked against him…..
Excuses,excuses, excuses………………..
Kyle Wingfield
June 19th, 2012
2:10 pm
Debbie: The fact that he led in the polls for a short time, almost two months before the election, proves … what point? It certainly says nothing about whether “not all people participate in polls,” which is obviously true but also irrelevant.
DawgDad
June 19th, 2012
2:10 pm
Kyle, this ruling is FAR more consequential than any single Presidential election. Forefathers have fought and died for less.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:11 pm
In those countries, people don’t go bankrupt from their medical bills.
All it takes is one accident: you, your spouse, your parent, your child could be in a car wreck tomorrow and completely wipe you out. Oh, you have a good job? Ever hear of wage garnishment?
Only in America!
md
June 19th, 2012
2:13 pm
“And no, their countries aren’t all collapsing”
Finn……and the operative word may be “yet”……..many on your list have a debt to gdp ratio over 85% with japan sitting at 208%…………..just because they have it doesn’t equate to being able to afford it..
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
2:15 pm
Finn, in case you missed it, a national defense; i.e. public safety, is specifically stated in the U.S. Constitution.
Health care is not.
md
June 19th, 2012
2:16 pm
“Wow!! Another instance of “Why republicans Can’t remember basic history”.”
Ummm, yes Deb,,,,,,crammed. Perhaps your history is a bit foggy about them having to use reconciliation to finish the process. Go ask Ms Snowe from Maine as to why she felt betrayed, as she was the one that gave the vote to get the bill out of committee……..and “betrayed” were her words.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
2:16 pm
Debbie, crammed is an appropriate term for what happened, as the public was, and remains solidly against this plan, yet Congress and the President still went through with it despite that nationwide opposition.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:16 pm
Oh, where do I stand on Obamacare? I hope they rule against it. We need single payer, not insurance company subsidies.
md
June 19th, 2012
2:18 pm
“Excuses,excuses, excuses………………..”
Obama must be having an effect on me……….
Road Scholar
June 19th, 2012
2:19 pm
Whether or not it is constitutional, the repubs have said if they win the election they will scuttle the whole law. Then they will begin to pass pieces; which pieces is your guess, although many pieces originated from Repub ideas to begin with. If they pass it piece by piece, your children may see something by the time they die! Molasses in January at the north pole moves faster than Congress, esp a repub congress, unless there are tax cuts for the rich involved!
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:20 pm
health care is not a public safety? LOL
Ever heard of influenza? plague? Ebola? Bird flu, typhoid fever? Yellow fever?
When the poorer kids get sick but still go to school because mom and dad don’t have paid vacation days or sick days, and, in turn, get your kids sick, how do you like that? How is that not a public threat?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:23 pm
Republicans aren’t going to fix anything. The last move they made on healthcare was the prescription plan debacle that added how much to the public debt?
Smooth move! The really thought that one through…
md
June 19th, 2012
2:24 pm
“When the poorer kids get sick but still go to school because mom and dad don’t have paid vacation days or sick days, and, in turn, get your kids sick, how do you like that?”
Uh oh……I see a “give everybody vacation and sick days” bill on the horizon……must be the next logical step after banning too big soda’s and whatever else is bad for society craze……
DawgDad
June 19th, 2012
2:24 pm
“When the poorer kids get sick but still go to school because mom and dad don’t have paid vacation days or sick days, and, in turn, get your kids sick, how do you like that? How is that not a public threat?”
Oh, the horror! Have to ask, just HOW IS IT we are even here?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:28 pm
What you get when Republicans meddle in healthcare? The Prescription Drug plan! Woohoo.
Let’s look at this gem:
Former Congressman Billy Tauzin, R-La., who steered the bill through the House, retired soon after and took a $2 million a year job as president of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the main industry lobbying group. Medicare boss Thomas Scully, who threatened to fire Medicare Chief Actuary Richard Foster if he reported how much the bill would actually cost, was negotiating for a new job as a pharmaceutical lobbyist as the bill was working through Congress.[28][29] A total of 14 congressional aides quit their jobs to work for the drug and medical lobbies immediately after the bill’s passage.
wikipedia.com
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
June 19th, 2012
2:29 pm
md: Ummm, yes Deb,,,,,,crammed. Perhaps your history is a bit foggy about them having to use reconciliation to finish the process. Go ask Ms Snowe from Maine as to why she felt betrayed, as she was the one that gave the vote to get the bill out of committee……..and “betrayed” were her words.
I don’t know or don’t care why she feels that way. She still VOTED for it. If she was so morally opopsed, she would’ve voted AGAINST it. Period.
tiberius: Debbie, crammed is an appropriate term for what happened, as the public was, and remains solidly against this plan, yet Congress and the President still went through with it despite that nationwide opposition
Congress and then President Bush, STILL went through with the Iraq war although public opinon was decidedly AGAINST it. You’ll have give me a better analogy than that.
md: Obama must be having an effect on me……….
Too funny!!
Peter Currie
June 19th, 2012
2:30 pm
So, free food for everybody??
Well, md, as I’ll call you because you and the rest of the “experts” on this blog of hate mongering wussies won’t even reveal their identities (nameless, hiding behind aliases), yes. If people are starving because they don’t have food, feed them. If people are sick, help make them better. I wish I was as well read as you probably are in Christian dogma, but I believe this is exactly what Jesus taught. Somewhere along the line, anger and fear has replaced what we used to call humanity. Remember that word?
md, I’d hide my identity, too, if I were you. Shame on you, Christian.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:30 pm
Medicare Part D! Love it!
By the design of the program, the federal government is not permitted to negotiate prices of drugs with the drug companies, as federal agencies do in other programs.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
2:32 pm
“health care is not a public safety?”
No, it is not.
GFY
June 19th, 2012
2:35 pm
Good thing someone is making Deb’s point because she certainly is not……..somewhat confused on her point to begin with but who am I but a knuckle dragging male without the ability to “evolve” on certain issues.
fair and balanced
June 19th, 2012
2:35 pm
If Obamacare is thrown out by by the Court, will Republicans push to repeal EMTALA which is pure socialized medicine passed by Reagan which is driving health care costs up? Will they also repeal the free Medicare drug give away that Bush passed?
Will insurers be able to hold onto those rebates of millions of dollars in excess profits they are getting ready to disburse?
Where does Romney stand on these issues?
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
June 19th, 2012
2:35 pm
Republicans aren’t going to fix anything. The last move they made on healthcare was the prescription plan debacle that added how much to the public debt?
And I’m wondering……..how long did the “public” have to weigh in on this bill before it was CRAMMED DOWN OUR THROATS? Oh wait, repubs don’t cram, only dems…………
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
2:35 pm
Debbie, while I disagree with the Iraq war completely, and have since the very beginning, it is not even remotely similar.
There were actually opposition votes to go into Iraq – not so on health care reform.
Crammed. You may not like it, but you can’t argue against it, which shows since you used a deflection to try to make your point.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
June 19th, 2012
2:38 pm
but who am I but a knuckle dragging male without the ability to “evolve” on certain issues
OMG too funny!! I read that and damn near fell on the floor laughing!! don’t know if you resemble your description of yourself, but if you do, at least you have a sense of HUMOR about it!!!
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:38 pm
Republicans don’t cram, Debbie, they drug you first with the witless Faux News and then slide it down while you are distracted.
Middle of the Road
June 19th, 2012
2:40 pm
Well, I generally agree that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. That said, it saddens me to think of how many Americans wither away without reasonable and affordable health care. Visits to a hospital emergency room is only a stop-gag measure at best. If we want to save American lives I can think of better ways to spend our precious tax dollars than on our brave yet bloated and oversized military.
And as for giving Romney a pass on Romneycare… sure there was no real point in vetoing the bill as it surely would have been overturned by the Democratic supermajority. But he helped to write the bill and afterwards was quite proud of the bill. In fact, the USA Today posted an op-ed of his (July 30 2009) pleading with the President to adopt the tenets of his own state’s program. He did criticize the public option; but otherwise in every significant way he supported what would eventually be called Obamacare. So IMHO this shouldn’t be a campaign issue for either party.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 19th, 2012
2:40 pm
Peter, assuming that is your real name, you are putting Government in Jesus’ place. Jesus said “render to Caesar” not turn government into a monument to my teachings. Government, is by nature, not religious. It represents atheist as well. Jesus was telling you, if you believe in him, to do these things voluntarily for your fellow man. He gave no commands for government to do these things.
And lastly, he said judge not, lest ye be so judged. So, get out there and do as you believe, and leave government to do the things it was designed to do, by the Constitution.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 19th, 2012
2:41 pm
Thousands of people were involved in the writing of that bill and it took months to get it all together. Congress had no right to defer so they could listen to the same old objections over and over again. Congress acted, it passed.
Learn to deal.
My team lost! They cheated! They crammed it down! They didn’t call the plays legibly (ie, they didn’t even read it!)
independent thinker
June 19th, 2012
2:43 pm
Tiberius:
“”"”Please explain how something can be a “right” when it requires the active participation of another person; i.e. the health care provider, whether they agree to provide the service or not.”"”
I assume Mr. Tiberius has no right to fire services, police services and emergency room services because those other persons know what a malcontent he is and
just like Bookman have the right to deny him the time of day.
Rafe Hollister, suffering through Oblamer's ineptocracy
June 19th, 2012
2:47 pm
fair and balanced
I have no problem with throwing out those two programs you mentioned. W and the GOP often get off track trying to play the bipartisan game and in trying to gain favor with the MSM. The Medicare Part D, plan which Dems love and was expanded by Oblamer, is a stain on W’s already poor record of accomplishment, IMO. We can not afford either of these programs and certainly can not afford Oblamercare.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
2:49 pm
independent “thinker” (there’s a laugh), I have the right to all of the above services (except emergency room services – I disagree with that) because they are defined in the Constitution and through the courts as “public safety” functions, and of course I pay for them through my taxes.
Healthcare as an all-encompassing program enjoys no such right in the Constitution, nor are they paid for with taxes in this bill.
sirwinston
June 19th, 2012
2:54 pm
In the last 8 or14 years little was said about all living here in the US get or have some type of medical-care insurance. Same should apply with burial or death insurance because in most cases; the burden falls on the county or other to make disposal of the deceased. Health insurance for those that look for others to cover have indeed met with negative results…but most medical facilities won’t turn the really sick or emergency patients away. We hav witness a lot of comments about the President Health Insurance but when it happen to you or a family member…that insurance comes in very handi. No insurance make’s things a little complicated because with all of the risk and possible law suits upon doctors…they are less likely to want to serve that particular medical condition; but do it anyway with a degree that nothing would come back to haunt him or her. Medical insurance is necessary but should not be forced upon anyone and those that don’t have or get it take a big risk. It is not about big government; pushing, or demanding anything upon anyone or anybody….however, you and your family along with everyone else needs some medical insurance. It is easy to take sick, be in accidents and when any of that happen; you would want to be treated. I am not blaming anyone for making their opinions but only to say that living in this world is not easy; hand outs are hard to come by and people are not giving as much to chairties as they use too! Can we all look deep to see why we must do our part in acquiring some medical insurance that will one day save our lives and the lives of our family members.
Peter Currie
June 19th, 2012
2:55 pm
Peter, assuming that is your real name, you are putting Government in Jesus’ place.
Rafe, assuming that is YOUR real name, I am not putting gov’t in Jesus’ place. I was simply trying to inject a sense of humanity in an otherwise hateful discourse. I thought appealing to the “Moral Majority’s” sense of morals, and specifically their leader’s teachings in this venture, Jesus, I might remind them of their spiritual committment to brotherhood, compassion, and empathy. Didn’t mean to evoke literality, which should never stand in comparison to spirituality.
Peter Currie
June 19th, 2012
2:58 pm
By the way, Rafe, loved your singing on the Andy Griffith show.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
June 19th, 2012
2:58 pm
Tiberius: There were actually opposition votes to go into Iraq – not so on health care reform.
I thought every last republican voted AGAINST it as well as a few dems………….. — [republicans + history = come on are you fraking kidding me?!?]
Crammed. You may not like it, but you can’t argue against it, which shows since you used a deflection to try to make your point.
I was trying to make a correlation not a deflection AND it was NOT crammed.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
3:01 pm
Do you actually READ the comments posted, Debbie, or do you just post indiscriminately to be heard?
I suggest you re-read the posts about “opposition votes” again.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 19th, 2012
3:03 pm
sir winston and Peter Currie, if government was supposed to be “moral”, we wouldn’t have the 1st Amendment keeping government from establishing a national religion.