Is delaying the business mandate but not the personal mandate, a liability for dems [View all]

[cali]

going into next year's elections?

INDIVIDUAL MANDATE? WHAT INDIVIDUAL MANDATE? – The early stages of the massive campaign to sign millions up for Obamacare coverage have been light on one particular element: the individual mandate. The unpopular requirement was necessary, the law’s supporters argued, to make sure enough people signed up for coverage to make possible the parts of the law that people like, such as the ban on discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions and eliminating benefit caps. But the marketing has focused on highlighting the value of insurance, as opposed to the requirement to have it. Supporters say the approach makes sense for a few reasons: Just a small slice of the population is expected to face the mandate penalty, and it’s better to handle discussion of the mandate with an in-person touch. But the major Obamacare marketing effort is ramping up as Republican lawmakers are launching a renewed assault on the individual mandate. The POLITICO story: http://politi.co/1dxZGMO

HOUSE KEEPS FOCUS ON ACA MANDATES – The House votes Wednesday on separate bills to delay the employer and individual mandates, forcing Democrats into an awkward position. Will they support a delay for business but not individuals? That’s the message Republicans have been playing up since the administration announced the employer mandate delay two weeks ago.

--There’ll also be two House hearings on the delayed mandate this week. The Ways and Means health subcommittee holds its second hearing on the mandate on Wednesday. And the Energy and Commerce oversight subcommittee goes on Thursday:

<snip>

http://www.politico.com/politicopulse/0713/politicopulse11147.html