sincere question about the ACA and Republicans' obsession with repealing it

[steve2470]

I don't read or watch Fox News or RW sites. So, this is a sincere question.

Do they desperately want to repeal it because:

A- it was enacted by a Democrat and bears his name ("Obamacare" ) ?
B- that President was a black man ?
C- the RW thinks the ACA is, supposedly, a "government takeover" of healthcare ?
D- the ACA limits income and future income to some ?
E- All of the above ?

It just amazes me how vehemently they want to repeal what, to me, is a good law. Yes, it's not Medicare-for-all, but it is a good step forward. Thanks in advance.

ETA: In Option D, I mean some doctors, hospitals, medical device manufacturers and insurance companies.

[Le Roi de Pot]

1. They dont want Government as a moderating force

They want corporations to have free access to our collective asses.


This isnt just about healthcare .. They want the rich and powerful not to have to answer anyone

[SharonClark]

2. Not following what you mean in D.

[steve2470]

3. if ACA is repealed, some doctors and hospitals and medical device manufacturers....

can and will make more money. Hope that helps.

ETA: also insurance companies, forgot them

[Mariana]

6. It limits the profits insurance companies can make. nt.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

4. I would say all of the above,

but in particular, they don't want the government to restrict the ability of any private industry to make money.

[steve2470]

5. so much comes back to money nt

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. Follow the money, and especially when the GOP is involved.

[Hugin]

13. Yeah, that's pretty much it. All about money.

Their dream is to have you pay them every month for no particular reason without actually getting any tangible benefit.

Sort of like how automobile insurance has turned out.

Every month premiums are paid, but, get in an accident and they don't seem to know who you are.

The rest is merely window dressing to get their utterly predictable unthinking lackeys in line.

[exboyfil]

7. The taxes on high income earners (D)

https://www.cbpp.org/research/health/aca-repeal-lawsuit-would-cut-taxes-for-top-01-percent-by-an-average-of-198000#:~:text=The%20ACA%20also%20imposed%20a,(%24200%2C000%20for%20single%20filers).



It would also eliminate the law’s revenue measures. The largest of these provisions are two taxes that apply exclusively to high-income households:

Medicare tax on high earners. The ACA imposed a 0.9 percent tax on earnings over $250,000 for couples ($200,000 for single filers), with the proceeds going to the Medicare Trust Fund.
Medicare Net Investment Income Tax. The ACA also imposed a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income (such as capital gains, dividends, taxable interest, and royalties) for couples with incomes over $250,000 ($200,000 for single filers).
The Tax Policy Center estimates also take into account the repeal of additional ACA revenue measures, including a $2.8 billion annual fee on pharmaceutical corporations, limits on contributions to medical Flexible Spending Accounts, and the ACA employer mandate (a penalty that applies to certain employers not offering adequate health coverage).

Lawsuit Would Transfer Resources From Low- and Moderate-Income People to High-Income People and Would Widen Racial Gaps
The ACA used the revenue raised from taxes on high-income people and pharmaceutical corporations to help pay for Medicaid expansion to low-income adults, premium tax credits that make individual market coverage affordable for moderate-income people, and other coverage improvements. (Premium tax credits are available to people with incomes between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty line, or about $25,000 to $100,000 for a family of four.)

Striking down the ACA would thus transfer billions of dollars each year from low- and moderate-income people (who would lose subsidized health coverage) to high-income households and corporations (which would receive large tax cuts). Tax cuts for households with incomes above $200,000 alone would cost the federal government about $30 billion in 2020.[6] That’s more than a third of the federal cost of the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, meaning that it would pay for providing health coverage to more than 4 million people.[7]

[CrispyQ]

15. Wow, thank you for posting!

I wasn't aware of all this.

[chriscan64]

21. Bingo.

They never put this stuff in the ads or talking points, but it is the core reason for opposing this law specifically and Democrats in general. You might see idiots take to the streets to oppose taxing the wealthy, but it won't be the reason they give if you ask them.

[subterranean]

8. Same reason they don't like Social Security and Medicare.

They are against any government program that helps ordinary people (other than the very rich) and is successful. It undercuts their message that the private sector and "free market" do everything better and more efficiently.

[abqtommy]

18. I totally agree! Well said!

[RazzleCat]

10. money

I honestly believe that they have received so much money from insurance companies, etc that it's all about the money.

The second reason is part of the first. Control of employees via health care. You can continue to "abuse" your employee if they can't afford to quit due to a medical condition, so say you work at company X, but company Y want's to hire you for more money, problem, pre existing condition clause in insurance, you can't take that better job, your spouse, child or self is pre existing. You can also stifle competition in the market place, many can't afford to leave and start their own business due to health care costs.

Last is hate, some people just hate, and can only feel better about themselves by hurting others.

The items you listed are just ways to accomplish the task of removal.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

11. B and part of A.

They hate that a Black man was President and got the ACA passed. They pinned the name Obamacare on it in an attempt to demonize it, which partly worked.

Perhaps the most important reason, which you didn't have, is that they simply don't believe all people should have at least basic health care. They think when people get sick, have an accident, need surgery, it's all their own fault and they are clearly not deserving of having those needs taken care of.

[Laelth]

12. Mostly C (or that's what the smart ones are saying).

The ACA is almost certainly unconstitutional because it legislates for the general welfare. Our Federal Congress isn’t supposed to do that. That is supposed to be the domain of the states. Chief Justice Roberts gave us a clever work-around (and preserved the ACA) by declaring that the ACA is a tax. So long as it was a tax, it was constitutional. When the individual mandate was struck down, the ACA was no longer a tax, and, thus, the whole law became unconstitutional.

And it probably is unconstitutional according to the SCOTUS as it is now configured.

-Laelth

[gibraltar72]

14. They have always had a plan

from day 1 of talks on ACA. The plan they call it, competition. What does that mean? Companies will be allowed to sell across state lines. That means companies who are in states with weakest laws will be able to sell anywhere. That is bad because your insurance commissioner won't be able to help you. The plans will also not be adequate. They know that most people have no concept of what a good plan is. They will sell plans with no uniform standards with a low price. The insurance companies will again be totally in charge. I made my living in insurance and I know exactly what they have always been about regards replacing ACA.

[Voltaire2]

16. B.

Also A, but primarily B.
They shifted to an implicit white nationalist strategy in 2008, abandoning Bush’s attempt at inclusive conservatism.
That became the explicit white nationalist strategy of first the tea party faction in 2010, and then the Trump campaign of 2016.

The fact that the ACA is pretty much Bob Dole’s healthcare plan is irrelevant. They use the fact that it was implemented by Obama to dogwhistle the Nazis.

[procon]

17. It comes down to those undesirable, unworthy

people that Republicans have always disparaged. Forget about all the other speculations, this is basically racism. They cannot abide the thought of some poor family, POC and whites, or some single black mom, or the disabled Hispanic vet, would get 'something for nothing', not another govt freebie.

Be it food or healthcare, Republicans would rather see these people die than cough up a nickel in govt aid. Cull the herd. The govt is there to provide corporate welfare and generous benefits to the wealthy, not uplift regular people and improve their lives, especially if they are not white.

Republicans are a cruel lot, mean to their very core, and they do not believe that healthcare is as much a human rights issue as is food and shelter. As a bonus, if they are successful in destroying the ACA, they look to reap generous donations in appreciation of their efforts from the giant corporations who want to reinstall a for profit healthcare system that will effectively prevent all those people Republicans hate from getting healthcare.

[OnDoutside]

19. B, it was their Romney plan. And they nicknamed it Obamacare in a derogatory way...so much

so that many Republican voters HATED Obamacare but lover their ACA.

[Statistical]

20. Honest I think it is mostly A & B.

C is just a talking point. Medicare is far more a "govt takeover" of healthcare. Obamacare is the most private business friendly option as it goes for a universal healthcare solution. As for D it also means increased taxes on the ultra wealthy.

Still I would say it is largely A & B together they go hand in hand.