GOP: Well of Course We Must Pass ObamaCare Subsidies!
To those worried by the prospect that the Supreme Court could rule against Obama in Halbig, I said in February:
[B]e of good cheer. Winning or losing that case won’t matter, it now appears — because, as Orrin Hatch recently made clear, Republicans are going to cave immediately if we win the case:
Hatch said that while Obamacare has hurt millions of people and needs to be ultimately repealed and replaced, Congress should do something in the meantime to mitigate the effects if the high court decides to invalidate that financial aid.
“I don’t think we can stand by and simply let the shortcomings of the law hurt people more,” he said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.
“In the coming days, I will release details of a short-term solution for Americans who may be affected,” Hatch said. “That solution will address immediate concerns and set the stage for a permanent solution in the future.”
Of course. You can’t take the goodies away, so you have to give people “short-term, temporary” subsidies until such time as you develop the political courage to . . . make those subsidies long-term and permanent.
Did anyone really expect anything different?
Confirmed: Senate GOP Leaders Endorse Bill To Extend Obamacare Subsidies To 2017:
The Senate’s top five Republican leaders have cosponsored legislation to extend until 2017 the Obamacare insurance subsidies that may be struck down by the Supreme Court this summer.
The legislation, offered by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), one of the most politically vulnerable Senate incumbents in 2016, would maintain the federal HealthCare.gov tax credits at stake in King v. Burwell through the end of August 2017.
Of course, it’s wrong to say the subsidies might be “struck down” by the Court, or to say that the GOP has a plan to “restore” them. If the Supreme Court rules against Obama, it will be a recognition that Congress never provided for these subsidies to begin with.
But look: you can’t expect Republicans to make a principled stand on this. They have to extend the subsidies that ObamaCare never provided in the first place, to keep voters happy who are used to being on the ObamaCare dole. Republicans will do this only until they no longer have an election coming up that they want to win. Which is . . . never. So of course they have to accept the progressive, pro-statist solution in perpetuity. Because the alternative is standing up and saying this is wrong, and only Ted Cruz is willing to do that and it’s Unpopular and so we can’t do it right now. Or anytime soon. Or ever.
If you’re keeping score, those who say Republicans are little different from Democrats just won another round. They win a lot of those rounds lately, huh?
That Ron Paul guy wouldn’t have supported something like this. But he was CRAZY!!!!1!!
Thank God we have sensible people in charge. We cannot rock the statist boat, people. Not now. Later (never), but not NOW.
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 9:53 pmSometimes you are depressing, you know that?
JWB (6cba10) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:04 pmGOP. Naw, more like this.
Republicans.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:06 pmHere: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms_WY0s_1XM
JWB (6cba10) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:12 pmJust what would we have to lose with an Article V convention?
Ed from SFV (3400a5) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:18 pmSen. Ron Johnson also voted today to support Loretta Lynch.
Dana (86e864) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:18 pmDemocrats. Republicans.
Ag80 (eb6ffa) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:29 pmMaybe not much, maybe everything we still cling to. I dunno.
There’s a line?
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:29 pmSo, what was Cruz’ brilliant alternative plan? To allow millions of voters to get hit with demands for payment of two years’ worth of subsidies – in an election year?
Because your vaunted “principles” are worth handing over the Senate and electing Hillary or Lizzie Warren? And what would be their first official action? Giving those people the money back or cancelling the debts.
But you could hold your head high and tell yourself what a high-minded loser you are. Great plan.
Estragon (ada867) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:29 pmThey have to extend the subsidies that ObamaCare never provided in the first place, to keep voters happy who are used to being on the ObamaCare dole.
Patterico, this upsets me.
There are quite a few working people who had insurance, had it taken away by force, and replaced by crappy Obamacare at higher prices. Some of them get tax credits as a result. To call these tax credits “dole” is unfair, any more than calling the mortgage interest deduction “dole” would be.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:34 pmThe whole point of Halbig is to have a hostage to force meaningful changes to Obamacare. Given that the GOP has both houses of Congress, this should be a slam dunk. If they just roll over, they are begging for Tea Party challengers next year. And next time it won’t just be a handful.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:37 pmSo, what was Cruz’ brilliant alternative plan?
Yeah, only two choices: cave, or your strawman. Right.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:38 pmReally? President Obama violates the law and *Republicans* get blamed?
If we’re going to be held responsible for our opponents lies, it might be time to pick up a rifle.
JWB (6cba10) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:39 pmIsn’t “keeping voters happy” a motivation very very deliberately built into our system of representative government? It’s hard to see how it can be effectively used as a slur.
Leviticus (8d1427) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:40 pmWho represents me?
Who is keeping me happy?
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:45 pmI mean, unless you want to criticize some fundamental structural issues with our system of representative. I’m fine with that.
Leviticus (8d1427) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:46 pm(I know you’re there with me to a large degree. Do you agree with my conclusion? If democracy is an awful system, let’s limit its scope as narrowly as humanly possible.)
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:46 pmAnd we cross-posted! Good question. That would be one of those “fundamental structural issues” I’m always nagging about.
Leviticus (8d1427) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:47 pmI do, as I think you know. The answer is not necessarily to throw it overboard because I don’t know what replaces it. the answer is to show how horrible it is, so that we give this wretched government the absolute minimum power possible.
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:47 pmWe’ve been winning rounds since 1913. Unfortunately, there ain’t enough of “we”.
J.P. (cc46f4) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:49 pmI actually do basically agree with that conclusion. I’m not sure which of us would carry it further, at this point – not that it matters much.
Leviticus (8d1427) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:49 pmI’m not sure either.
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:52 pmDo you believe in enforcing criminal laws and a military big enough to defend our country from invasion? And a very basic court system to enforce contracts and resolve basic disputes?
If no, then you would carry it further than I would.
If yes, then I would have to ask if you believe in more than that: regulatory this that and the other. If so, I would carry it further.
To me, government is there to defend us from internal and external enemies, and to maintain basic order — period, end of story. Maybe you didn’t consent to it but any other system leads to warlords and misery,
Patterico (9c670f) — 4/23/2015 @ 10:54 pmPatterico–
It’s more basic. A government of laws, not of men. Let’s just get back to that before we start squabbling over what those laws should be.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/23/2015 @ 11:02 pmI belong to the dwindling minorities that doesn’t believe I’ve signed any suicide pacts.
Steve57 (cd6f9a) — 4/23/2015 @ 11:25 pmTeam R’s had a six-year leadership vacuum
all you’ve had to safeguard and promote any of your party’s “principles” (lol) is sleazy whores like boehner and mcconnell and priebus and meghan’s coward daddy
this is where that sidewalk ends
happyfeet (831175) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:48 amo.t.-
mg (31009b) — 4/24/2015 @ 3:07 amCoach Bill wore a Armenian flag pin in honor of the slaughter of thousands of intellectuals, and T.B. 12 never showed at the dogs house. Patriots- hell yes.
Johnson’s bill would only extend subsidies for people already receiving them:
“(4) LIMITATION FOR INDIVIDUALS NOT PREVIOUSLY ENROLLED.—The premium assistance credit amount shall be zero with respect to any qualified health plan unless such plan covers an individual described in paragraph (2)(A) who was enrolled in a qualified health plan through an Exchange established under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act before the date of the enactment of this paragraph.”
Normal attrition rates would probably cut the number of individuals receiving subsidies down to at most a couple million by Aug 17, 2017. I assume Johnson believes cmplete repeal should manageable by then. Of course, his bill is DOA for that very reason.
Ken Kelly (2463b8) — 4/24/2015 @ 3:10 amEisenhower conserved the New Deal, Nixon conserved the New Frontier, Reagan conserved the malaise (the Department of Education, after promising to abolish it), Bush conserved the stain of the Clinton administration, and next Republican president will conserve Obamunism.
The USA doesn’t need conservatives.
ErisGuy (76f8a7) — 4/24/2015 @ 3:25 amDemocracy doesn’t give us “good” government, necessarily. It does, however, give us the government the electorate deserves.
In my own state, Washington, we elect a legislature that does things we don’t like, or fails to do things we do like. So we pass initiatives to go around them. Then the legislature passes laws to go around the initiatives, at which point we reelect the legislature and the cycle of crap is closed.
As I get older I am convinced that democracy is like trying to quit smoking by hiding cigarettes from yourself, and that’s why I think public officials should be chosen by lot, like jury duty. We’d probably have an entirely new set of problems, but we would not have an entrenched political class that exists to pander to voters to get elected.
Gabriel Hanna (c17820) — 4/24/2015 @ 4:29 amThere actually is a difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. The Democrat establishment consists of people deeply committed to the idea that the Common Man needs to be guided by their wonderful selves. The Democrat Grass Roots is a thousand little special cause activist nutcase groups, many of whom loathe each-other. The Republican Establishment is made up of men so accustomed to losing to the Democrats that they are uncomfortable doing anything else, and will arrange to lose if it looks like they might win. The Republican Grass Roots is divided into a small handful of factions, fairly compatible, who mostly want the government to leave them the hell alone.
Therefore there is no hope for reforming the Democrats and some hope of reforming the Republicans.
C. S. P. Schofield (a196fd) — 4/24/2015 @ 4:42 am“Who mostly want the government to leave them alone”
This is a just fiction. From grazing subsidies to rural electrification to etc. red states are some of the biggest users of government services. Blue states send more money to the Feds than they receive; red states…not so much.
Jack Webb (8bf9a6) — 4/24/2015 @ 5:08 amred states are some of the biggest users of government services.
Because most military installations are in red states and military retirees live there, as well. This is a leftist myth,
Mike K (90dfdc) — 4/24/2015 @ 5:36 amJack Webb,
It’s more complicated than that. Read this.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 6:02 amJack Webb – that was a precious little bit of sophistry there.
JD (3b5483) — 4/24/2015 @ 6:02 amhttp://www.amazon.com/dp/080507774X/?tag=mh0b-20&hvadid=4962728835&hvqmt=e&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&ref=pd_sl_1s0wc202kg_e
What’s the matter with Kansas, eh, Jack?
Steve57 (cd6f9a) — 4/24/2015 @ 6:23 amI am amused by the argument that, if only we were just a bit more honest, we’d all be openly pro-theft. Like Jack.
Steve57 (cd6f9a) — 4/24/2015 @ 6:31 amobamacare subsidies, they fill my heart with sadness
i hope they go away someday
please let them go away someday
happyfeet (a037ad) — 4/24/2015 @ 6:34 am“Patterico, this upsets me.”
Kevin M – I’m with you on this along with the line:
It hearkens back to Patterico’s unfair claims about Rand Paul in his post about the Doc Fix. Saying only Ted Cruz is willing to do something because it is unpopular is a bunch of hooey. Rand Paul backed Ted Cruz’ government shutdown filibuster and was also one of 18 senators voting against ending the government shutdown. Rand Paul also gets higher scores than Ted Cruz from the Club for Growth to the extent anybody takes them seriously. Cruz and Paul get down dinged by the group for much the same votes.
Paul expressed more realism in the Fall of 2013 than Cruz about the ability to wean taxpayers off subsidies once they went into effect. Cruz was focused on total repeal.
I think a fundamental mistake Patterico makes in these posts is confusing the assertions of Ted Cruz for actions. How many of his claims have actually been put to the test of a vote?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/24/2015 @ 6:58 amThis is exactly why the repubs make me sick. The dems always move the country left and the repubs run as opposed to that, but, if/when they win they never take us to the right. The next time the dems win they move us further left and then the repubs win and leave us there. Happens time after time. Eventually we will be communists because the repubs don’t have any balls.
It will be the same thing with all obama’s executive orders. They won’t do anything abou them.
Ted Cruz, Scott Walker or Ben Carson, otherwise I sit out the next election. It just doesn’t matter.
Jim (84e66d) — 4/24/2015 @ 7:00 amHey, Jack Webb… just the facts, ma’am.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 4/24/2015 @ 7:05 amMan, Jim, did you hit the nail on the head. Every time the Dems have power they use it and they move us toward their leftist ideal: communism. Then when the Repubs occasionally convince enough voters we’re being screwed, or when the Dems can’t fix the vote or stuff the ballot box enough the Repubs win and in stead of reversing or eliminating the leftist crap the Dems installed, they let it stand. Why do we still have a Dept. of Ed? An IRS? HHS? Obamacare? The Dems should be shot for treason but the Repubs should be hanged for incompetence.
Hoagie (58a3ec) — 4/24/2015 @ 7:40 amHas Cruz made a statement on ending/reducing/limiting food stamps? Because they are the mirror image in the farm bills of the farmer and crop subsidies that we we all want to get rid of.
elissa (ead9c9) — 4/24/2015 @ 8:28 amMcConnell whipped his caucus for Lynch, and John Cornyn continues to disappoint.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 8:36 amelissa,
When he voted against the Senate version of the Farm Bill (or, as he called it, the “Food Stamp bill with some farm provisions”), Ted Cruz said he wants to expand jobs instead of food stamps and try to end the cycle of dependence.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 8:53 amI’ll second that motion.
“The Dems should be shot for treason but the Repubs should be hanged for incompetence.”
Jim (84e66d) — 4/24/2015 @ 8:57 am“When he voted against the Senate version of the Farm Bill (or, as he called it, the “Food Stamp bill with some farm provisions”), Ted Cruz said he wants to expand jobs instead of food stamps and try to end the cycle of dependence.”
DRJ – The Roll Call vote for the Farm Bill passed in February 2014 was 68-32, with 23 Republican senators voting against, including Cruz, Paul and Rubio.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/24/2015 @ 9:16 amThanks, daleyrocks. I think that vote is consistent with the positions Paul and Cruz have always taken. I’m not sure about Rubio. Do you know?
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 9:22 amCruz has missed a lot of votes and committee meetings. I imagine he’s busy with campaigns and fundraisers.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 9:29 amOf course, it appears the votes he missed weren’t close. Most of his efforts come at procedural votes when it might actually derail bills he opposes. That’s why people like McCain dislike him so much. He isn’t there just for show.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 9:33 am“I’m not sure about Rubio. Do you know?”
DRJ – I do not know about Rubio. I’m just providing more evidence against Patterico’s assertion that Rand Paul is in favor of fiscal conservatism only when it’s convenient. The Club for Growth write ups on Cruz and Paul certainly do not indicate that is the case and Paul has two more years of actual experience in the Senate than Cruz to evaluate rather than just public statements.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/24/2015 @ 9:54 amDRJ and daleyrocks–I think that the proof is still to come on this for Cruz, Rubio and Paul–and Walker. Actively campaigning as a presidential contender promising to eliminate or reduce various subsidies/food stamps, etc. is a whole lot different than voting with a pack of senators against the last farm bill which the average voter pays no attention to. Will he (or any of them) do it? Call me a cynic, but I highly doubt it.
elissa (ead9c9) — 4/24/2015 @ 9:59 amdaleyrocks,
I haven’t watched every vote but I agree Paul seems to be true to his principles, and is a fiscal conservative. I disagree with his foreign policy views but I wish we had 60 more like him when it comes to domestic issues.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 10:06 amthought @52 continued—-which leaves us then with “well, even if he/they don’t actually campaign on subsidies, we believe he/they are different than all other politicians ever because based on what they’ve said in the past we think we can trust him/them to do it anyway after they are elected.”
elissa (ead9c9) — 4/24/2015 @ 10:06 amThat’s the risk voters take in every election, elissa. We each decide who we trust at different times in the process. I think those of us who have already seen Cruz in Texas are less cynical about him than others.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 10:13 amI agree with that, DRJ. But don’t you agree there are a few landmines to cross in between Texans (and others) liking and trusting Ted Cruz, and Ted Cruz selling himself and his bold ideas to sufficient numbers of American voters in order to become President? What I am trying to get at is: will he actively campaign on those bold ideas–those ideas I think you expect and hope he will do once in the White House–or will be be coy about them so as not to scare the horses ?
elissa (ead9c9) — 4/24/2015 @ 10:28 amI think Cruz stands for Constitutional principles and always has, so I don’t think he will change or surprise me. But I think he will surprise people who don’t understand those principles. For example, people who confuse caving in with standing up for what you believe.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 10:54 amThe New York Times reports Cruz shaded his opposition to SSM at the reception. Cruz said the opposite. I wasn’t there and don’t know what he said, but I haven’t seen anyone saying Cruz is saying the opposite behind closed doors the way they say Rubio is doing with immigration.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 11:05 amDRJ–This thread is specifically about limiting subsidies–an important piece part of reverting to broad Constitutional principles and returning to fiscal sanity. I think you are carefully avoiding answering my specific concern about whether you think Cruz (or any other conservative candidate) will actually have the balls to aggressively campaign on a plan to pull subsidies of all kinds way back and to explain why that’s necessary to the American voter–not just to conservatives. Of course it’s OK if you don’t wish to answer, but I wish you would.
I liked this quote from the article about the gay moguls you linked @57:
elissa (ead9c9) — 4/24/2015 @ 11:20 am“I haven’t watched every vote but I agree Paul seems to be true to his principles, and is a fiscal conservative. I disagree with his foreign policy views but I wish we had 60 more like him when it comes to domestic issues.”
DRJ – I like Cruz and agree with your assessment of Paul. I just do not trust him on foreign policy. I thought it was unfair of Patterico to cherry pick Paul’s vote on the Doc Fix to impugn his credentials.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/24/2015 @ 12:38 pmI wasn’t “carefully avoiding” anything. I answered the best I could when I said I think Cruz will try to do what’s constitutional. In some cases, that will require him to stand up and oppose things like ObamaCare, which (no matter what Roberts says) is a mandate that forces people to buy a product and is unconstitutional. In other cases, I think Cruz will state his position but agree that it’s a decision for the voters in each State — I see that happening on things like pot laws and SSM. I’m not sure how he would handle food stamp issues, other than the vote on the farm bill and quote I provided that Cruz wants to promote jobs, not food stamps. It would be a good debate question.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 12:45 pmI think Paul voted on the Doc Fix as a doctor. I get why doctors are concerned about that issue, because we are near the point where our charity/welfare medical care could collapse if there aren’t enough doctors willing to help. I still think Cruz had the better position, but I understand what might have motivated Paul’s vote.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 12:51 pmelissa, I think Cruz was the only candidate to oppose ethanol subsidies while campaigning in Iowa. That counts for something.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 1:10 pmI oppose these ObamaCare subsidies in theory, but support them in practice for two reasons:
1). I think ObamaCare is terrible but it’s the law, and it is fair to continue the subsidies for a couple of years until we can sort this mess out.
2). I think Congress is lobbying the Supreme Court, because the Halbig Justices expressed so much concern about what would happen to people who bought insurance relying on the subsidies. This is Congress telling the Court that it won’t let people suffer if the Court rules for the Halbig plaintiffs.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 1:19 pmhttp://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2015/03/08/ethanol-loses-its-potency-iowa-caucuses/pQd9R9I7znL5v1E65fqp4J/story.html?event=event25
Jindal and Rubio favor phasing out the RFS and although Paul as of the beginning of March had not taken a specific stand, did not favor the government telling consumers what fuels to put in their cars.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 4/24/2015 @ 1:31 pmdaley,
The problem with Rand on foreign policy is that he would have unitary authority to do things I’d hate on Jan 20th. The things I like about Rand, he would need to get Congress and the Courts to agree on, which might never happen.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/24/2015 @ 1:34 pmelissa, I think Cruz was the only candidate to oppose ethanol subsidies while campaigning in Iowa. That counts for something.
So did McCain in 2008, so it doesn’t count for much.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/24/2015 @ 1:36 pmHeh. Good point about McCain. (Also, I didn’t realize Pataki is a candidate. I need a scorecard.)
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:17 pmthe problem with Maverick, is he managed to tick off every other party pressure group, pro lifers, gun rights activists, everything except defense related figures,
narciso (ee1f88) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:21 pmI had forgotten about Pataki.
kishnevi (91d5c6) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:28 pmhttp://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-03-30/george-pataki-says-bet-on-him-to-run-for-president
DRJ, we probably need a spreadsheet at this point, not a scorecard.
kishnevi (adea75) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:29 pmGood idea, and more high tech.
DRJ (e80d46) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:30 pmbut the question, is why Pataki, what does he bring to the table,
narciso (ee1f88) — 4/24/2015 @ 2:34 pm