Two Years On: Obamacare

Ragu, we could debate the particulars of the economics of this particular plan all day long. I could find you 10 studies that show that the lives saved and improved by the ACA is worth the money. You could then find me 10 more that show otherwise.

I just want to make sure that people understand, in general, why a mandate is such an important component of an efficient insurance market.

 

I try very hard to not be a Supreme Court cynic, and I defend the Supreme Court a lot against charges that it is, at all times, just a political entity.

If they overturn the mandate by a 5-4 vote, I will lose a lot of the faith I have put into the Court to rise above politics, ever.

 

In 2008 Obama believed that a mandate was wrong but he caved to the insurance companies.

 

Imagine all of the medical advances and innovation we could have had if Teddy had gotten that deal done.

Instead, medical care has stagnated. No new drugs have come on the market. No new surgical devices or techniques have been developed. And, very little money has gone into medical research.

 

Obama should have called it a tax from Day 1 and he probably wouldn't be in this mess, but didn't because taxes are political kryptonite. So he tried to finesse it.

 

There is no way, having spent several years where he spent several years as a teacher, that he thinks that a mandate is wrong.

 

Correct. Obama's plan did not contain a mandate, but he usually answered questions about it saying that it wasn't a bad idea, but his primary concern was people without insurance who wanted it.

But Obama's white paper didn't pass as it was, and there was an awful lot of stuff to deal with.

The mandate was a part of Clinton's plan, and Edwards', as well, so this idea that Obama lifted it from Gingrich and the Heritage Foundation is fairly silly.

Yes, it originated with Republicans. That doesn't mean it's a bad idea. And the simple field trials in the states show those with a mandate faring much better than those without.

 

The one thing Mitt Romney did right as governor of Mass. was to promote the hell out of the mandate, and make the penalties stiff enough to coerce compliance. Stories about kids calling the exchanges and saying things like, "Um, my mom says I have to sign up or I'll get in trouble."

 

Oh, they work. They just don't work the way many (most? all?) would like.

 

Seems like everyone is ready to accuse the "conservatives" on the Court of playing politics.

But, the Conservatives appear to be the only ones with an open mind on this law and its Constitutionality. Folks are speculating mostly about how Kennedy will vote, but most analysts also think Scalia and Roberts might also uphold the law.

No one thinks that even a single liberal will even consider striking down any provision in the law, let alone throw out the entire thing.

So, which side is playing politics?

 

Zeke,

Serious question.

Assuming this gets struck down and Obama gets re-elected (at this point both seem likely), do you think he takes another shot at it, or does he walk away from it?