General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: President Obama Should Take the Deal [View all]markpkessinger
(8,918 posts)If a faction of one political party, in one house of Congress, is permitted to successfully extort concessions for a policy agenda for which it has been unable to be successful at the ballot box, we will have set a precedent that undermines the very foundation of democratic governance. At stake in this fight is no less than the integrity of the Constitutionally-provided process by which laws are made. Central to the proper operation of that process is the understanding that legislation, having been duly passed and signed into law (and in this particular case, having been declared constitutional after being challenged in the Supreme Court), will be implemented according to the terms of that legislation.
As for the notion that Republicans merely want to 'delay' the individual mandate for a year, that is merely the ostensible objective, not the real one. The real objective is to buy still more time to try to gin up -- by use of lies, fear-mongering and any other tactic the GOP thinks may have a shot at being successful -- popular opposition to the legislation. The fact is the penalty provided under the individual mandate for those who do not purchase insurance is very small for the first year. And when the penalty is fully in effect, it represents an amount that is substantially smaller than a person is likely to have to pay for insurance. So there is no good substantive argument for delaying it.