Obama could be helped politically if healthcare law is overturned in SC.

[DCBob]

from WashPost/The Fix...

As Republicans and Democrats alike commemorate the two-year anniversary of the signing of the health care bill today, a more significant battle awaits in the U.S. Supreme Court next week.

-snip-

Obama, of course, does not want to see his signature initiative overturned by the Supreme Court, which holds oral arguments on the bill next week and should render a decision by late June. And Republicans who have long railed against the bill would certainly be overjoyed to see the bill struck down.

But in an electoral milieu (yes, we just used that word) in which winning is often based more on voting against something rather than voting for it, losing at the Supreme Court may be the best thing that could happen to either side — and particularly Democrats.

“In a perverse way, Obama is helped if it is overturned, because then he can use it to rally his base,” said GOP pollster Glen Bolger. “If it is not overturned, then Republicans have a frying pan to bash over the Democrats’ head...”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/on-health-care-supreme-court-loss-could-be-electoral-win/2012/03/22/gIQAresaUS_blog.html

=======

It would be interesting to see how things would play out if the law was overturned. However, I think its likely it wont be even though the SC leans right 5-4. See this..

Reuters:Why Supreme Court may uphold healthcare law

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. Seems to me that health insurance is definitely interstate commerce

Surely employer-linked health insurance covers someone, and their families, in multiple states? For example, someone employed in Manhattan, but living, with their family, in New Jersey, still gets covered through an employer plan, don't they? Or does the employer have to work with separate plans in each state in which they have an employee?

And aren't there rules about coverage across state boundaries when someone travels? Unless those are "no coverage outside the state this is issued in", then it's interstate commerce.

[TheKentuckian]

2. Everything is if you stretch it enough. I'm not sure why a free people would want

an unlimited government with a the authority to compel commerce and worst dictate individual purchase with employers as the gatekeeper and selecter of a for profit product for the employees?

Particularly when we know there are no cost controls and ever increasing "cost sharing"?

Nothing is bounding this authority, you guys are literally arguing that the state should have the power to compel our after tax income down to the fucking penny, which means you are demanding slavery and certainly calling for what I assume you believe is a friendly form of fascism.

This argument is batshit fucking crazy, why not just declare ourselves serfs, select a king and aristocracy (I assume the wealthy, and be done with the illusions?

This mandate to buy from the company store is well beyond disgusting. Real people laid down their lives and/or suffered real hardship to end this happy horseshit and now we have supposed liberal clamoring for such to not only happen again but to give our largely corporately captured government unlimited power to compel such

I really think a significant chunk of the party is ignorant, dangerously lacking foresight, or plain old crazy. There is nary a hint from some quarters that this could be abused, just happy unicorn talk and a level of faith in the politicians to be responsible that reality in no way supports.

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. Your alternative was no change at all

A national health service, or a single payer system, has never looked like standing a chance of passing in Congress. Even a public option hasn't looked politically possible. This was the best you could manage, after over 40 years. If you want to turn your nose up at it, then you're stuck with, at best, what you had for those 40 years; at worst, the Republicans will force something worse on the country. Or you can accept this, and work to improve it in the future (eg build proper support for a public option), while it saves some lives in the meantime. There is a cap on the profits of the insurance companies in it.

[dionysus]

4. lol, woooooooo

[nobodyspecial]

5. Who cares?

It's about time we solve problems and quit worrying about political advantage. I agree that the measure does not go far enough, but we can start here and continue to make it better. When people see how well it works, I think we can ween people away from being so scared about government-run healthcare.

[DCBob]

6. We should all care because it could have a big impact on the election in November.

Many see "Obamacare" as a ripe issue for the RW to exploit... "politically".

[nobodyspecial]

7. So, you are hoping it gets overturned?

I'm sure the millions of people already benefiting from it wouldn't be too happy. Instead of running from it, stand our ground -- explain how it's helped and how progressives can build on it. Bullies win when you run from the fight.

[DCBob]

8. Not sure. It could work for the President's benefit either way.

I think it probably wont get overturned based on previous rulings. However, it it does there could still be political benefits.

Also, if it is overturned this might be an opportunity to improve it.

[nobodyspecial]

9. How?

It barely squeaked by and Congress is not in our favor. We are NOT going to have universal health care in one fell swoop. It just ain't going to happen. What major changes happened overnight and not in incremental changes?

[DCBob]

12. Congress might change after Nov.

I think it just need some tweaking. Might be able to get enough votes to accomplish that.

[GoCubsGo]

10. IIRC, only the "mandate" portion is being contested, not the whole thing.

Therefore, the whole law will not be overturned if the SC decides to do so, just the purchase mandate portion. I'm willing to bet they let it stand. The mandate is a boon for the insurance companies, and I strongly suspect that some of those corporatist types, like Scalia and Roberts, will look out for the interests of their buddies in the insurance cartels.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

11. The only part that will probably be struck down is the part that requires it.

But the rest of it I doubt will get struck. But nothing surprises me anymore. When we win everything back in the fall, they'll write a whole new bill and it'll pass, get signed and that'll be that. They need to just do single payer and be fucking done with it. I'm sick of the humming and hawing around. It is SICK that we are the only first world country without it. SICK.