The principal legislative accomplishment of the Obama presidency and the most controversial has been the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). It was enacted in 2010 at a time when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress without a single Republican vote.
The principal legislative accomplishment of the Obama presidency and the most controversial has been the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). It was enacted in 2010 at a time when the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress without a single Republican vote. Polls have never shown it as favored by a majority of Americans.
Universal health care is an appealing idea to many and President Obama is a convincing campaigner. Until this year, Obamacare was largely a future concept whose impact had not yet occurred. And some of its terms such as the employer mandate had even been postponed. But beginning in October, the scheduled enrollment for authorized plans for individuals began. And numerous issues appeared. The enrollment program was and continues to be defective. Over five million of individual policy holders were canceled from plans withdrawn by their insurers principally because their terms did not conform to the law’s requirements. Debate about the program escalated.
It is apparent that the president and other administration officials made several factual misstatements when promoting the enactment of the law and later in defending it in claims that plans and doctors could be kept and as to plan costs. These misrepresentations were doubtless necessary to achieve its passage.
Criticism became bolder. One opponent, Texas Senator Cornyn, stated that the administration had taken lying to a new level. Whether Mr. Obama’s statements were lies depends on when and whether he knew they were false, facts which have artfully been withheld. However, misinformation consists of both false statements and the less obvious but equally insidious failure to tell the truth in a timely manner. Three illustrations of the latter:
When the law was being enacted and the regulations that eviscerated “grandfathering” existing plans were adopted, the government knew or should have known that many health plans did not conform to the requirements of the law. As noted to date, over five million policies have been canceled principally for this reason and it is inevitable that next year a great many more group policies will be. But the government failed at that time to tell us the truth about these circumstances.
At the time the rollout of Obamacare for individuals in October of this year, the government knew or should have known that the program to present the Obamacare alternatives was defective and that crucial delays would result. But the government failed at that time to tell us about these circumstances.
For rollout procedures to be effective the program must contain three elements — an ability to provide access, a display of adequate information about the alternatives, and the ability to make and consummate an election. At this time it appears that the first two elements are reasonably met, but the third is incomplete. But the government failed at that time to tell us about these circumstances.
In the private sector in a similar situation the false statements made and the failures to inform would be considered fraudulent and any arrangement made arising from such misinformation would be cancelable. In the governmental sector it is not that simple. The government is not expected to act in a manner that deceives the public. It may well be that the only opportunity to change or eliminate Obamacare despite its generally conceded fraudulent inception will be at the ballot box.
In the larger sense, the fate of Obamacare will probably depend on the resolution of the underlying issue as to whether Americans favor a federal government with broad powers and extensive social programs or a more limited one with greater fiscal responsibility. Our citizens should thoughtfully consider these alternatives as the choice will determine the future of our country. Although in other respects his reliability may be open to question, Mr. Obama appears irrevocably bound to the former governance view to the point where he has stated that he will veto any legislation adversely affecting Obamacare even if it is adopted by Congress and has prevailing public support. We can admire his dedication to his beliefs even if we question the validity of his position.
At this time, many critical elements about Obamacare are not known. Proponents and opponents can speculate about the extent of change in employer plans that will occur, the availability of doctors and hospitals, what cost changes will be and other matters but, while trends to date are distinctly unattractive, adequate data is not yet available. However, as time passes, empirical evidence will emerge and can be weighed. And it is to be expected that it will be.
It thus appears at this juncture that the federal elections in 2014 for the House and Senate will be to a very major extent a plebiscite on the philosophy of government that the voters of our country support and their acceptance of the provisions and implementation of the Obamacare law.
Walter Lewis write a regular column for The Garden Island.
