WHAT’S THE FUTURE OF SOCIALIZED MEDICINE IN AMERICA?
Like … a lot. So naturally we view public statements from Senate leaders as to how they might handle the socialized medicine monstrosity as highly suspect. But with polls showing the “Republican” party in a position to win a majority of votes in the U.S. Senate – we have to pay attention to what’s said.
Especially when the comments are made in closed door meetings …
According to a story written by Robert Romano of Americans for Limited Government (ALG), a recent closed-door meeting with aides to Senate “Republican” leader Mitch McConnell revealed a strategy which could – if employed successfully – starve the law of the resources it needs to be implemented.
“Aides acknowledged the only way to get any type of repeal or even major changes to the law would be reconciliation,” Romano’s report noted, citing ALG public policy vice president Rick Manning, who was in the meeting.
For those of you unfamiliar with that process, “reconciliation” is a way of amending legislation that deals with tax and spending issues using only a majority of Senators (i.e. fifty-one members) as opposed to a “super-majority” of sixty (which would be required for a technical “repeal” of the law).
“If Republicans are fortunate enough to take back the majority we’ll owe it to the American people to try through votes on full repeal, the bill’s most onerous provisions, and reconciliation,” McConnell spokesman Brian McGuire said.
Which provisions? Well, Obamacare’s insidious individual mandate and its employer mandate, for starters.
Previously, McConnell has stated publicly that “no one thinks” a GOP-controlled Senate could repeal Obamacare – remarks which landed him in hot water with the limited government wing of the party.
Why does this matter?
Romano explains …
“Putting (a repeal) on Obama’s desk, and forcing him to veto it, clearly makes the presidency the obstacle to getting rid of the health care law,” he wrote. “This would set up the 2016 presidential election as a clear referendum on whether or not to keep the law.”
In addition to the legislative battle over Obamacare, the law also has another date with destiny in the judicial branch … where a pending case challenges its ability to raise taxes and disburse subsidies in thirty-six states.
FITS weighed in extensively with regard to that case, arguing in support of striking down the taxes and subsidies.
“Obamacare was written with the expressed purpose of bribing states into participating,” we wrote. “The only problem? Thirty-six states refused the bribe.”
However it happens … Obamacare needs to be shredded. It’s done nothing but hurt the economy and raise people’s health care costs – precisely the opposite of what its architects promised. One way or the other, it needs to die.