House Majority Leader Eric Cantor: 'Remarks On The Obamacare Repeal Act'

Source:House Majority Leader Eric Cantor- speaking on the House floor about his bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

"Majority Leader Eric Cantor is a results-oriented leader in Congress who supports innovative solutions for free markets, economic growth, job creation and national security." 

From House Majority Leader Eric Cantor

There's a better term for what the House Republicans (led by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor) are doing here, I just can't think of it right now and haven't found it. But to put it simply: it's commonplace for Congress (House and Senate) to take up partisan, political votes, that they know won't either pass in the other chamber, or will be vetoed by the President, or will get blocked in the Senate, if the Senate Minority Leader has enough votes to block whatever the House majority leadership is trying to pass.  

House Republicans led by Speaker John Boehner (Republican, Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Republican, Virginia) know their ObamaCare (also known as the Affordable Care Act) repeal will die in the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Democrat, Nevada) will simply not take the bill up, or will have it voted down with all the Democrats voting against it and trying to use that vote against vulnerable, Senate Republicans, who are up for reelection. 

House Republicans also know that they don't have a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, a bill that they've been campaigning against at least since 2010. So even if their repeal were to pass and they still didn't have an alternative to it, we would go back to the health care system that we had in 2009 that left 45 million Americans without health insurance, or at least affordable health insurance. Which seems to be what the Republican Party Leadership wants anyway. 

PBS NewsHour: Judy Woodruff- House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer & Senator John Cornyn: ACA Ruling

Source:PBS NewsHour- House Minority Whip (Democrat, Maryland) and Senator John Cornyn (Republican, Texas)

"The Supreme Court upheld the individual insurance requirement at the heart of President Barack Obama's historic health care overhaul Thursday. Marcia Coyle parses the ruling with Jeffrey Brown." 

From the PBS NewsHour

Now that the John Roberts, Republican led Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (also known as ObamaCare) Republicans will now has a choice in how they play this out during the rest of the election season, with both the House and Senate up for reelection and Republicans wanting to retake the The White House.

Looks like House Republicans are going to continue to do what they're been doing for the last three years: run on repealing the ACA and then say they'll work to pass a new health care law, even though there is no Republican Party plan to what they would replace the ACA with. 

Senate Republicans are in a different position. They're still in the minority in the Senate, even with 47 seats and to win back the Senate, they might need a real plan, or at least their incumbents and candidates who are up for reelection. 

Republican Party presidential nominee Mitt Romney is in a different position. He passed in Massachusetts as their Governor the very law that became known as ObamaCare back in 2006 and now he's running against his own health care law. So he could say: "I was for it before I was against it." Let's see how that plays in Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. 

American Enterprise Institute: Dean Clancy: 'Three Steps to Patient-Centered Care'

Source:American Enterprise Institute- Dean Clancy talking about health care reform at AEI.

"Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing.

In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset. 

The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials. 

AEI operates independently of any political party and does not take institutional positions on any issues. AEI scholars, fellows, and their guests frequently take positions on policy and other issues. When they do, they speak for themselves and not for AEI or its trustees or other scholars or employees.

More information on AEI research integrity can be found here:American Enterprise Institute." 

From AEI  

Dean Clancy is talking about 3 ways he would reform health care in America, but he didn't really anything on the table. He was really talking about the health care system in America pre-2010 when the Affordable Care Act was passed. 

Mr. Clancy talked about controlling health care costs, without putting anything on the table. 

He talked about expanding individual liberty in the health care market, but without putting anything on the table. 

And then he talked about what he called health care status, which I guess is the right-wing talking point for pre-existing conditions. And said that someone's health status, which could a pre-existing condition that someone was born with, or a woman whose had kids in her life, should be used against them in either denying them health insurance or charging them more for health insurance. 

What Mr. Clancy seems to be talking about but doing it more openly and honestly (unlike the House Republicans and the Tea Party populist wing of the Republican Party) is saying that we should go back to the health care system of 2009 and before that. I would love to see Mitt Romney run for President out in the open on that, as well as House Republicans in swing districts and Senate Republicans in swing states. 

Reagan Foundation: 'Candidacy for Presidency: Ronald Reagans Announcement of Candidacy For President of U.S. 11/13/79'

Source:Reagan Foundation- Governor Ronald W. Reagan (Republican, California) announcing his run for President, in 1979.

"Ronald Reagan's Announcement of Candidacy for President of the United States on 11/13/79.

For more information on the ongoing works of President Reagan's Foundation, visit us at:Reagan Foundation."

Source:Reagan Foundation

You could make a case that when Ronald Reagan announced that he was running for President in November, 1979 that he won the 1980 presidential election and defeated President Jimmy Carter right there. Because of how different the message that he was giving, then what was being delivered from President Carter. 

President Carter constantly told the country how bad the situation was. Reporting on from one disaster from another, especially economically and even telling the country that they were partially at fault for this. Living too well and that was contributing to the economic problems. The country feeling as bad, or if not worse than the President said we were doing. 

To sound really corny: what Ronald Reagan was saying in 1979-80 is that our best days are still ahead of us, if we change course, go in a different direction, get the economy going again. And he had a plan for all of that. We can argue about how successful he was with the all the economic growth and jobs, but in exchange for high deficits, debt, and interest rates. But he was laying his vision for America being the City on a Shining Hill.

The Daily Caller: Nicholas Ballasy- 'Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid- Won't Say if ACA Mandate is a Tax'

Source:The Daily Caller- Nicholas Ballasy is a Washington correspondent for The Daily Caller publication.

"Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wouldn’t say if he agrees with the Supreme Court ruling that the individual mandate in the health care law is constitutional as a tax.

“I’m not here to give everyone my limited knowledge of constitutional law. I am here to say that the law has been upheld,” Reid told The Daily Caller Thursday at the Capitol. “It’s good for the country. It’s good for my people in Nevada.”

“It’s something that now we can look at, I don’t have to worry about a child that’s born with a cleft pallet. I don’t have to worry about a child who shortly after birth develops diabetes or as the kids that came to see me today have cystic fibrosis that develops,” he continued. “I don’t have to worry about them anymore and very, very soon all adults, not just those that are under age of 18 will be entitled to insurance even though they have a pre-existing disability.”

In 2009, President Obama told ABC News that the individual mandate requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance is not a tax. House Minority Leader told The Daily Caller earlier Thursday that the question about whether the individual mandate is a tax is “Washington talk” that doesn’t matter to Americans. (RELATED: Obamacare becomes Obamatax)

“The people can stay on their parents insurance policy, 6 or 7 million of them, are benefiting from this law,” Reid said. “The millions and millions of senior citizens who are having the donut hole filled because of what we did in this health care law. Millions of these senior citizens now can get wellness checks that they could never do before so I’m not about here to give you all a dissertation on constitutional law. The law has been withheld [upheld], and I’m very happy it has been.” 

From The Daily Caller

This just in: Washington politicians lie and career politicians lie a lot. That's a big reason for how they become career politicians and are able to hold onto the same political office for 30 years, as if they have tenure at a college or some place. Of course the individual mandate is a tax and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, (Democrat, Nevada) House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, (Democrat, California) President Barack Obama, (Democrat, Illinois) Vice President Joe Biden, (Democrat, Delaware) all know this. 

But similar to admitting that you are a Socialist, is not popular, (even if you are a Socialist) admitting to a tax increase, even if goes to help fund health insurance for people who can't afford it, is also not popular either. Unless you represent some gerrymandered, left-wing district in the House, or in Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders (Democratic Socialist, Socialist Republic of Vermont) represents Vermont.  

I think the real question here is how much do Republicans, especially hyper-partisan Republicans want to play this. Do they really want to run on ObamaCare repeal by saying that it should be repealed simply because taxes were raised to fund it. Do they think Independent voters, especially if they're currently benefitting from the Affordable Care Act, want to see ObamaCare repealed, simply to get the taxes that were raised to pay for the ACA eliminated. Or would they rather keep their ACA benefits as they stand. This is a political question that Republicans are going to have to answer themselves.

CSPAN: 'Minority Leader Pelosi Reaction to Supreme Court Health Care Ruling'

Source:CSPAN- U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California) talking about the Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act.

"Minority Leader Pelosi (D-CA) reacted to the Supreme Court decision that upheld the the health care law, the Affordable Care Act, saying the decision was a victory for the American people. She answered questions from reporters.." 

From CSPAN

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi laying out the benefits of the Affordable Care Act and the ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court today. 

The ACA was actually saved by Conservative Republican Chief Justice John Roberts. Going in, it looked like Justice Anthony Kennedy looked like the best shot at saving the ACA, because even though he's definitely a Conservative, he's not as right-wing and partisan as Justice Clarence Thomas. (To use as an example) 

But Chief Justice Roberts ruling that this isn't the law he would've written, but that the ACA is constitutional (according to him) because the individual mandate is a tax, even though it's not called a tax in the actual law that Congress passed in 2010. 

Supreme Court Upholds Affordable Care Act: Right Wingers React to the Roberts Court Decision to Uphold The ACA

Am I surprised that the US Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act, of course I am but as I blogged on Monday. I predicted that the Supreme Court would uphold the ACA except for the Individual Mandate, on either a 6-3 or 5-4 decision. And that Chief Justice Roberts was more likely to vote in favor of this then Justice Kennedy. What I'm surprised by is that the whole law gets upheld not only 5-4, I predicted that it wasn't going to get upheld and if it. Would get upheld it would be 6-3 with both Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy voting in favor of it, as it turns out Roberts being more Conservative then Kennedy votes in favor of the ACA. And votes in favor of the Individual Mandate and if you are a Conservative first and a Republican second and you look at things based on what's good for the country and for Conservatism in general. Then you should like this decision especially from the Chief Justice, who by the way wrote the Majority Report lets call it, that he and the four Liberals voted for. He voted for the Supreme Court and the US Constitution, by ruling that its not the job of the Supreme Court to save voters from their own politicians.

The Supreme Court didn't vote in favor of the ACA on policy, just the Constitutionality, Right and Left Wingers asked for the Supreme Court to decide on the Constitutionality. Of the ACA and made their arguments for and against and I believed the Right did a better job of making their case then the Left. Even though I disagreed with the Right and thats what they got from the Supreme Court and if Congress and the President whoever that is next year, doesn't like the ACA. They can vote to overturn it but that its not the role of the Supreme Court but of Congress, because they aren't Legislatures, thats why we have Representatives an\d Senators. So if you are a real Conservative you should like this decision at least based on that, they ruled in favor of the Constitutionality of the ACA and explained why and didn't write new law. Because thats not their job.

If you are just a Right Wing Partisan and of course you are on the Right or Far Right politically. And you feel the main job is to defend the Republican Party at every turn, until it hurts you politically and attack Democrats at every turn and not allow them to have a victory on anything, even when they clearly win. Like today at least on policy, which is basically the State of the Republican Party right now, then of course you hate this decision. The guy who was appointed by President George W. Bush and voted for Citizens United and the Patriot Act and other things, is now a Liberal and a Traitor, no facts to that argument. But why let facts and reason get in the way of an argument.