Even though this is the first time the full Congress has actually passed an ObamaCare repeal and sent it to the president for his signature (which, of course, it will not get), we've heard this media narrative many times before following repeal votes in the House: Those ridiculous Republicans keep wasting time on meaningless ObamaCare repeal votes when they could be doing the business of the American people, etc.
The narrative is always the same. Since everyone knows Obama won't sign the repeal, the Republicans are stupid, reckless and irresponsible for even bothering to vote on the bills. But consider the logic you have to accept in order to embrace this narrative. First, how is ObamaCare working out for the country? If you judge it solely on the question of whether more people are "covered" than before, hey, it's a smashing success. If you judge it on how it's affected premiums, on whether people who wanted to keep their health plans were able to do so, on how it's affecting availability of care, on the fiscal viability of the exchanges or on its budget impact, ObamaCare is an utter disaster.
And I didn't even mention ObamaCare's popularity (or considerable lack thereof) among the public, which has remained decidedly against the law since it was passed in 2010.
ObamaCare's only real triumphs have been political - its own passage using reconciliation to beat the filibuster, and then the two bizarre decisions of Chief Justice John Roberts to protect it from being thrown out at the Supreme Court level. And, of course, the electorate's horrendous mistake of re-electing Obama in 2012 - thus protecting it from repeal for another four years.
But ObamaCare has suffered a lot of political defeats, too, especially the Republican wave elections of 2010 and 2014 - both of which resulted from campaigns centered on ObamaCare, and in which the voters affirmed the poll results by punishing the Democrats for continuing to cling to it.
So that leads us to this question: Why, isn't it Obama who's being reckless, stupid and irresponsible by repealing the bill? The Republican majority campaigned on ObamaCare repeal, and by sending the repeal to Obama's desk, kept that promise to the greatest extent it can. The public agrees with the Republicans that ObamaCare is a problem, and by passing the repeal, they eliminate the problem. When Obama vetoes the bill and refuses to get rid of the problem, why is he not the terrible, horrible, stubborn, pig-headed, rotten, awful one?
The truth is: He is. He protects this law out of personal pride and ideological vanity, not because it's good for the country. The media respects political skill rather than commitment to the public good, so they treat the Republicans as evil-doers for keeping a promise that the public elected them to keep.
I argued the other day that if they really wanted to go to the wall with Obama on this, they could have attached it to a bill he had to sign - although we all know that doesn't necessarily mean they win the showdown. But looking at it that way treats Obama as the virtuous player here simply because of his obstinance. That makes no sense.
Yes, I know the repeal bill is not going to change anything. But that's because of Obama, not because of the people who voted for it. They're doing their jobs in presenting the president with a change in the law that the country badly needs. He's failing to do this by vetoing it. He's the one who should catch hell over this. He won't. But he should.
Even though this is the first time the full Congress has actually passed an ObamaCare repeal and sent it to the president for his signature (which, of course, it will not get), we've heard this media narrative many times before following repeal votes in the House: Those ridiculous Republicans keep wasting time on meaningless ObamaCare repeal votes when they could be doing the business of the American people, etc.
The narrative is always the same. Since everyone knows Obama won't sign the repeal, the Republicans are stupid, reckless and irresponsible for even bothering to vote on the bills. But consider the logic you have to accept in order to embrace this narrative. First, how is ObamaCare working out for the country? If you judge it solely on the question of whether more people are "covered" than before, hey, it's a smashing success. If you judge it on how it's affected premiums, on whether people who wanted to keep their health plans were able to do so, on how it's affecting availability of care, on the fiscal viability of the exchanges or on its budget impact, ObamaCare is an utter disaster.
