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
stands for decibels
June 20th, 2012
8:53 am
to say nothing of what “Now if we could use that information to determine who should be permitted to vote and procreate, we’d really have something” says about you.
stands for decibels
June 20th, 2012
8:54 am
I really do feel a bit sorry for Kyle, that he can’t attract a better class of conservatives, but this is pretty much par for the newspaper-comments-page course, wherever one might lurk.
stands for decibels
June 20th, 2012
8:56 am
(and by “better class of conservatives,” I’m not deriding all the right-of-center folks who post here. There’s some interesting insight to be gleaned if one can separate the wheat from the chaff.
(Which is another way of saying “howdy, HD! Miss ya, but I understand, I think.”)
@@
June 20th, 2012
9:00 am
No Charges for Father in Beating Death
As it should be.
The attack happened on the family’s ranch off a quiet, two-lane county road between the farming towns of Shiner and Yoakum. A statement released by the district attorney said a witness who saw Flores “forcibly carrying” the girl into a secluded area scrambled to find the father. Running toward his daughter’s screams, the father pulled Flores off his child and “inflicted several blows to the man’s head and neck area,” investigators said.
Emergency crews responding to the father’s 911 call found Flores’ pants and underwear pulled down on his lifeless body. The girl was examined at a hospital, and Lavaca County District Attorney Heather McMinn said forensic evidence and witness accounts corroborated the father’s story that his daughter was being sexually molested.
@@
June 20th, 2012
9:11 am
Are the columnists sleeping in at the AJC? Big staff meeting? Bomb scare?
WHAT?
Peadawg
June 20th, 2012
9:12 am
“No Charges for Father in Beating Death”
Nobody in their right mind was going to indict this man for protecting his 5 yr old daughter.
Don't Tread
June 20th, 2012
9:32 am
“No Charges for Father in Beating Death”
Had this happened in the UK, the father would be facing charges, as he would be violating the “reasonable force” statute (use no more force than is absolutely necessary).
But he lives in Texas (where right is right and left is wrong) and they came to the correct conclusion. New York or California – who knows.
Dusty
June 20th, 2012
9:33 am
Well, I read all the comments on “the constitution and healthcare”. Strangely enough, I never found one who could say “healthcare” was in the Constitution. It is not there. Someone’s welfare can be interpreted in many ways.
If you want the government to take care of you like a baby, then “welfare” means furnish everything from birth to death.. If you believe in independence, then you take the synonyms of welfare such as “prosperity, success,happiness & weal(wealth)”, or the ability to attain them yourself. Independence!! Freedom! Initiative! Our constitution keeps you free to attain that which you are able to obtain. It says nothing else.
MarkV—if you live in Atlanta and get sick and don’t have a penny to your name, you will still be admitted to Grady Hospital and receive the best of care. That is why it is there, to care for those who have litttle or no money and for emergency care
Do you also know that hospitals figure into their budgets, the amount of money which they will NOT receive for their services? They hope patients can pay for services because healthcare is very expensive no matter what measures you take.
Now if you care about the “welfare” of your country you will not increase a huge debt for a plan deemed by many to be flawed and expensive. The welfare of our country is also important to every citizen.
md
June 20th, 2012
9:40 am
“that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
Yes, life as in others aren’t allowed to kill us….liberty, as in we are free to make our own choices……and the last one is very clearly defined by the word “pursuit”, which is where many on the left go astray………that pursuit usually depends on the preceding right of liberty, which means one’s own freedom to choose determines their path in life.
md
June 20th, 2012
9:46 am
yuze…..I think the difference between fed control and state control is the ability to make minor adjustments to arrive at a better product……think steering many little boats or one giant football field length tanker…..which one is more flexible to change??
I don’t operate off the premise that the entire system needs to be scrapped and replaced with another system that will more than likely have just as many problems….if not more. I like the method of baby steps to change what we have…..and allowing the States to make those changes makes much more sense than trying to turn the tanker……….
MarkV
June 20th, 2012
9:54 am
Dusty @ 9:33 am
Dusty,
This is not the first time you have mentioned something like getting care at Grady without paying for it, or hospitals figuring in their budgets care for those who do not pay. All I can say that I am totally amazed by the shallowness of this argument. Who do you think really pays for that care?
So for you it is ok when you and I and others who have insurance are forced to pay for the health care of those who could have paid for their insurance and did not? That is what you consider right and fair? Why don’t we all stop paying for insurance, Grady and emergency rooms will take care of us, right? Is that not the ultimate “free lunch?”
1961_Xer
June 20th, 2012
9:56 am
Obamacare is a giant entitlement program that will wreck havoc on the country if allowed to stand…..that is all one needs to know.
This is the crux. We were sold that this was needed to lower the cost of medical care in the U.S. It was passed based on accounting tricks used under the best economic scenario possible. We now know (already) that it will cost nearly twice as much as predicted. Liberals claim that this is okay, and will gladly spend us to a Greece-like state of emergency.
The real problem with healthcare now and under Obamacare is that a small number of patients account for the vast majority of spending. In particular, care of morbidly obese patients uses about 70% of the healthcare dollars in this country. Unless this can be significantly reduced, Obamacare is a fiscal cliff. Go to any heart failure unit of any hospital, and note the number of indigent morbidly obese people yo-yoing in and out of care, using hundreds of thousands of dollars of care (EACH) every year. Until we find a better way of treating these people (or just say “No”), Obamacare WILL bankrupt us.
iggy
June 20th, 2012
10:02 am
ObamaCare will not lower the cost of anything. Barry states “everyone must particpate, opt out and pay a fine”, however, the IRS, charged with collecting this fine has zero guidelines and is also instructed not to collect.
Yes…instruct them to do so but provide zero guidelines and zero enforcement…Ah yes, the democratic way…
iggy
June 20th, 2012
10:04 am
House/Harry Reid strikes down proposal to limit/curtail food stamp benefits. The fat and lazy keep getting fatter and lazier.
Dekalb comments
June 20th, 2012
10:31 am
Iggy @ 10:04
I don’t dispute there is abuse in the food stamp program just as there is abuse in the private insurance business. So let’s not make this about a public program.
The average MONTHLY benefit, per person on food stamps is $130.00. Do you know or have you met anyone that is receiving food stamps? I have. These individuals are people who, for all kinds of reasons, fell on hard times. Food stamps enabled them to put food on the table for their families. They weren’t fat, nor were they lazy. They were working hard to find new employment and did within a couple of months.
Interestingly enough the reason they had no savings to fall back on was because they had incurred significant expense to provide medical care for a sick child. Both parents worked but neither employer provided or even offered a health care program. The child was born with this condition and therefore was uninsurable.
Further, poverty in this country is deplorable. 46 million people are now living in poverty, the highest level in the 52 years statistics have been kept.
So you would reduce food stamps that hardly provides for buying steaks and champagne at a time when we have so many people in poverty?
I’ll bet you consider yourself a Christian but seem to never have read or understood anything he did or said.
Dusty
June 20th, 2012
10:32 am
MarkV
Shallow? You are trying to swim on the beach sand!
Of course taxpayers pay for Grady. But you said there was no place to go when you got sick and did not have money. So I answered your wrong assessment.
Whom do you think will pay for Obamacare? Santa Claus? As the country’s finances plummet into the sunset, you want to approve an expensive untried quickly assembled mostly unread healthcare agenda that will add to the indebtedness of our country and most likely prove ineffective. .
How many generations will it take to make a dent in THE DEBT ? Or do you even beleive we have a debt? Probably not. You have figured a way to forget it.
Yes, that is my opinion. I thought you were presenting yours. NO?
yuzeyurbrane
June 20th, 2012
10:39 am
1961-Xer- your facts are off. It is the elderly who use a disproportionate share of our health care resources. Why? Because old people get sicker more frequently and often in more costly ways. But they are on Medicare. So I fail to see where your argument about Obamacare being connected to this phenomenon has much relevance. As to the rest of the population, many of those 50 million uninsured, who are the heaviest users of ER facilities, would now have insurance coverage to schedule a doctor’s appointment to treat their illnesses rather than flood into our expensive ER’s. How is that breaking the bank? The only less expensive remedy I see is to shut these 50 million out of access to both ER’s and doctors’ appointments. In other words, they should just hurry up and die prematurely as they surely would if we went down that path. Can you handle public health trucks driving by to pick up dead bodies from the streets every morning like so much human garbage as they presently do in places like Haiti?
MarkV
June 20th, 2012
10:48 am
Dusty @10:32 am
“But you said there was no place to go when you got sick and did not have money.“
Please show where I said that. Quote me. I am getting rather tired of your misquoting me.
“Whom [sic] do you think will pay for Obamacare?”
You are writing as if Obamacare were something like a space program. Don’t you realize the simple facts: People get sick, They need health care. The healthcare is provided by private practitioners. They have to be paid. Since no one knows when or how he/she will get sick or injured, the idea of health insurance has developed a long time ago. Those who do not pay for insurance and get sick or injured either die or suffer, or those who have paid, pay their bills. Obamacare is to rectify that, both the freeloading of those who could have paid and did not, and taking care of those who genuinely cannot pay. As I said, it is in my opinion not a perfect program, but better than what we had before.
Dusty
June 20th, 2012
10:54 am
Dekalb comments, 10:31
Do you know there are food banks all over Atlanta that furnish food FREE to those who need it? Do you know records have to be kept to keep repeaters at all food banks from going to every food bank available to get all they can? That records are kept to distribute food equally? Have you ever heard of the Salvation Army, The Mission, Red Cross and many others in Atlanta that offer not only supplies but meals and emergency aid? That some churches run their own food banks? Do you know that receivers of food stamps sometimes offer their stamps for sale?(I know ’cause I was offered some in a grocery store.) Do you know that Grady has a branch hospital just for children?
I am all for helping people in distress but I will not go along with the idea that NOTHING is available and people are dying and starving in the streets. Americans are the most generous people in the world to worthy causes. If we are not perfect, we certainly try.
Strangly enough, people around the world try to get here any way they can. Do you really think it is because nobody gets any help here? I wonder why you know so little about our city and our country.
MarkV
June 20th, 2012
10:58 am
Dusty @10:32 am
“Or do you even beleive we have a debt? Probably not. You have figured a way to forget it.”
We are back to your “bee in the bonnet,” the national debt. I wonder who you compare me with, when you asked if I believed we had a debt. You suffer from senior moments? It was only a day or two ago when I, at your request, posted the numbers.
I do not know if there is any point debating this issue with you. Not once have you answered any of my questions regarding the national debt. All you do is shouting: “15 TRILLION!!!!!!!” I wish you explained, why that number is your obsession. But I have an easy solution for that. Just think of the national debt as 0.015 quadrillion. See how small it is?
stands for decibels
June 20th, 2012
11:00 am
Yes…instruct them to do so but provide zero guidelines and zero enforcement…Ah yes, the democratic way…
Is that the talking point this year? I can remember back in 2010 it was, as Rain Man might say, 16,000. Definitely 16,000 IRS agents to shove Obamacare down your throat.
Dusty
June 20th, 2012
11:20 am
MarkV
I grew up with a doctor, my father. My lifework has been in laboratory medicine. That does not make me an expert but certainly exposed to many aspects of healthcare..
There is hardly a place in the USA that you cannot get health care in some form. Even illegal immigrants know that. Some of it is not paid for by the patients but the taxpayers and underpaid doctors. Some of it is not paid by anyone.
Yes, doctors are among the hardest working people in the world and they do it with great care. They are also among the best educated. They do a lot of work for which they are not paid. Why do you want to indict doctors because they practice the great work of medicine?
I suggest you secure information about DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS since you seem to think doctors are only rich and greedy. Volunteer medicine around the world.
You also seem to be ignorant about anything but the idea that government should pay for everything. Yes, everything, for the WELFARE of all. Now that is the real “dream act” done by the ignorant innocents of this world. As ’tis said:”Good intentions pave the road to hell.”, notably by the uninformed.
Dusty
June 20th, 2012
11:24 am
MarkV
Why don’t you answer one question? How can you belittle the national debt like it was small change?
I have to leave. So long…l
md
June 20th, 2012
11:30 am
“Further, poverty in this country is deplorable. 46 million people are now living in poverty, the highest level in the 52 years statistics have been kept.
So you would reduce food stamps that hardly provides for buying steaks and champagne at a time when we have so many people in poverty? ”
Yes, poverty is deplorable….wonder why so many choose to live that way?
Too many in this country must not be aware that many folks actually choose to live like that…..and it starts with education…….and the individual choice…..there’s that word again……to utilize the opportunity that our tax dollars provide.
yuzeyurbrane
June 20th, 2012
12:15 pm
Dusty, you are probably too young to remember the classic TV documentary by Edward R. Murrow, “Harvest of Shame’ which was a moving force leading to the Food Stamp program. You are also are probably too young to remember the Surplus Commodities program which it replaced. I witnessed both. The Commodities program involved county welfare offices distributing surplus foods stored in warehouses under a USDA program. Many counties participated; many did not. They operated a lot like a food bank but the choices were slim. A 10# hunk of lard, a 5# container of peanut butter, 20# bags of insect infested flour and cornmeal; large containers of powdered milk were the staples. Hardly nutritious and dependent on really resourceful moms to cook in a palatable way. Unwanted hunger and malnutrition was rife in America in the midst of plenty for most people. Some of the hungriest people were the farmworkers who harvested the bounty for the well-fed majority. Food stamps were a creative solution to our moral dilemma and the program has been quite successful in significantly reducing hunger in America. And you would have us go backwards to something like the old system? Shame on you.
MarkV
June 20th, 2012
2:08 pm
Dusty @ 11:20 am
Dusty,
I am at a loss how to interpret your wrtiting. The only two alternatives I can think of are incomprehension or dishonesty. What do you prefer?
More later.
MarkV
June 20th, 2012
6:49 pm
Dusty @11:20 am
As I wrote in my previous post, I am at a loss what to think about your writing. Is it incomprehension, or just plain dishonesty? I would almost prefer dishonesty. That would put you together with many on your side who post on this blog, and for whom truth and facts are irrelevant. I have contempt for them, and seldom bother to respond. The alternative is that you have comprehension of written word not exceeding elementary school.
If it is a case of dishonesty, you tactic is transparent. You take something I had written, twist it into something different, and that attack your false version. That is, indeed, intellectual dishonesty.
Case in point: “Why do you want to indict doctors because they practice the great work of medicine?”
I would simply ask you where did I ever say that I wanted to indict doctors. You question is based on a lie. Anybody else I would ask: Are you nuts?
Another example: “You also seem to be ignorant about anything but the idea that government should pay for everything. Yes, everything, for the WELFARE of all.”
Apart from mangled language, a lie only softened by the word “seem.”
And one more: Dusty @10:32 am: “But you said there was no place to go when you got sick and did not have money.“
I have asked you already (@10:48 am): “Please show where I said that. Quote me. I am getting rather tired of your misquoting me.” Naturally, no answer. And YOU dare to accuse me of not answering questions?
MarkV
June 20th, 2012
6:59 pm
Dusty @11:24 am: “Why don’t you answer one question?
What question? Just repeat it. Do you mean “How many generations will it take to make a dent in
THE DEBT ?” Do you expect me to answer such supremely silly question?
“How can you belittle the national debt like it was small change?”
Where did I belittle the national debt? I have written before, that our national debt is large and a matter of concern. At your request i posted the numbers. However, you keep bringing up the subject, but all you ever do is yell “15 TRILLION!!!.” I am very sure that this is actually the extent of your knowledge about the national debt.Prove me wrong. You have never answered a single question I asked you about it.
RC--apoi
June 20th, 2012
10:28 pm
Well, I wish Sister Dusty would pick one argument and stick to it. A few years ago she was telling us she didn’t want Obamacare because she didn’t want to have long lines in the waiting room when she went to see a doctor. Now she’s saying all kind of stuff, like we don’t need it, we can’t afford it, it won’t work, etc. She’s harder to figure out than a drunk woman on meth. Have a good night everybody.
paul
June 21st, 2012
1:49 am
This is what is going to happen the court is gonna rule in favor of Obama screwed up care and then China will take us over cause we owe them so much money we will have no choice to fall to the knees of china cause Obama is spending way to much money of r tax dollars i still think we need to do a uprise to this country..
In Arizona case, court doesn’t betray its alleged ideological gap | Kyle Wingfield
June 25th, 2012
2:01 pm
[...] President Barack Obama. Unexplained is exactly how and why this discrediting will occur, given that majorities of the public across partisan lines deem the law’s individual mandate [...]