Repeal or "Fix"
The debate over Obamacare narrows.
10:35 AM, Oct 5, 2010 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
In other words, the “public option” would return, and government-run health care would result. Thus, as Levin concludes, “The nature of the new law means that it must be undone — not trimmed at the edges.”
It’s hard to imagine that you could fix something that would increase federal spending by over $2 trillion in its real first decade and, in return for that extraordinary investment, would raise health costs and lower the quality of care. And you couldn’t. Rather, the strategy of Obamacare supporters is to try to keep the legislation alive long enough to expand it into a true “single-payer” system, a true government monopoly — and to get themselves reelected in the process. But, for voters, there is a way out.
Imagine if you had only barely started construction on a house that you knew you couldn’t afford, wouldn’t like, hadn’t designed, and (once built) would be stuck living in for the rest of your life. And imagine that the house wouldn’t even keep standing on its own unless you continually rebuilt it in ways that would make you like it even less. Then imagine that, at this early date, you still had a choice: You could either scrap the project and walk away, free and clear, or else tell the same architect who designed the house so poorly in the first place to go ahead and build it while making a few tweaks along the way to try to improve things. That’s essentially the choice Americans face with Obamacare.
The only way to fix Obamacare is to repeal Obamacare.
Recent Blog Posts