The LA Times is reporting that the Supreme Court may issue its verdict on ObamaCare today.
Many conservatives across the country have longed for a decision that would get rid of the law entirely; others may be satisfied with the individual mandate severed from the total package. Few conservatives want the law to stand.
But in many respects, the election cycle in 2012 will become much harder if the Supreme Court rules favorably for conservatives — and Republicans in general.
If ObamaCare is thrown out in toto, this will create a huge policy gap in domestic affairs. For all its faults, ObamaCare was a response to a demand among the American People to “do something” about the rising costs of health care. (ObamaCare did not address the costs of care — only the costs of insurance — but that is not really the point.) Without ObamaCare in place, we are back to fighting over ways to control costs in the medical industry in general.
President Obama and the Democrats, ironically, would have an easier time filling this gap. Many of them, including the president, have campaigned on implementing a single-payer system, which is, by most arguments interestingly, not unconstitutional.
With the general population having been exposed to a comprehensive overhaul — as bad as it is — they will not be willing this election cycle to rest easy and be patient if Obama’s signature legislation is overturned.
Make no mistake, the Democrats have their backup plan in place, with poll-tested phrases, sophisticated marketing strategies, and coordinated attacks on opposition ready to be deployed on command. This plan is a single-payer system, and I fear a fatigued population will rather accept what is federally detrimental than revel in a constitutional victory and wait for another solution.
Republicans must have their own plan in place if ObamaCare is overturned. And it cannot just be a plan. It must be palatable to the public. They cannot effectively win this debate by attacking the single-payer system. In health, people generally want to vote for something, not against something. They must have a plan that is easily comprehendible, easily articulated, and easily defended.
Even if the individual mandate is severed from the rest of the bill, Republicans have a dilemma. Do they campaign on repealing the rest of the law — since without the mandate it is absolutely unaffordable — or do they campaign on how to pay for the remaining policies, many of which the public are in favor of? Attacking the rest of the law and advocating total repeal again requires a new plan to fill the gap, but figuring out how to pay for the rest of the law requires an additional revenue plan. In either case, Democrats have the advantage when they may easily just repeat their decades-long sing-song of “tax the rich, health care for all.”
If the mandate is held as Constitutional and the law is upheld, Republicans will have an advantage in November. Nearly 2/3 of the public find ObamaCare unattractive — much of this opposition is from the individual mandate and the burden it places on small businesses.
None of this is to say I hope the Affordable Care Act is upheld as Constitutional, because it gives Republicans in general a better chance at attacking Obama and the Democrats’ compulsory commerce philosophy. I hope it is overturned in toto today. But I also hope Republicans have not been expending all their energy in attacking this abhorrent legislation without devising their own comprehensive plan, complete with a marketing strategy.
