Democrats, Fumbling No More

The party’s offensive on the Affordable Care Act continues.

National Journal
Lucia Graves
Dec. 5, 2013, 10:38 a.m.

Pres­id­ent Obama re­cently al­lowed that on sev­er­al oc­ca­sions, he and his ad­min­is­tra­tion had “fumbled” with re­gard to the rol­lout of the Af­ford­able Care Act and sug­ges­ted it wouldn’t hap­pen again. “I am very frus­trated,” Obama said, “but I’m also some­body who, if I fumble the ball, you know, I’m go­ing to wait un­til I get the next play, and then I’m go­ing to try to run as hard as I can and do right by the team.” It ap­pears he’s mak­ing good on his word.

In the past few days, Demo­crats have taken up the of­fens­ive on the health care law, sound­ing off on the con­sequences of re­peal for the GOP as part of a three-week drive to re­fo­cus the pub­lic on the law’s be­ne­fits. Buoyed by im­prove­ments in Health­Care.Gov, the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee is tar­get­ing 60 House Re­pub­lic­ans who have cri­ti­cized the Af­ford­able Care Act, blast­ing out state­ments that tout the be­ne­fits of the le­gis­la­tion and link­ing op­pon­ents’ cri­ti­cism of the law with things like im­mun­iz­a­tions for chil­dren and cov­er­ing those with preex­ist­ing con­di­tions. Law­makers in heated races around the coun­try are get­ting in on the ac­tion as well.

In New Jer­sey’s 2nd Dis­trict, Demo­crat­ic can­did­ate Bill Hughes, who’s run­ning in a hotly con­tested race to re­place Rep. Frank Lo­Bi­ondo, called on the con­gress­man to cease his par­ti­cip­a­tion in Re­pub­lic­an at­tacks on the pres­id­ent’s health care law. “Last month, Con­gress­man Frank Lo­Bi­ondo re­peatedly voted to shut down gov­ern­ment and brought us to verge of de­fault, all to ad­vance an agenda that would take South Jer­sey back to a time when in­sur­ance com­pan­ies could deny his con­stitu­ents cov­er­age for hav­ing preex­ist­ing con­di­tions,” wrote Hughes in an email to Garden State res­id­ents. Re­pub­lic­ans’ mis­sion, Hughes con­ten­ded in his missive, is to put in­sur­ance com­pan­ies back in con­trol so that they can drop South Jer­sey fam­il­ies’ cov­er­age at a mo­ment’s no­tice.

An­oth­er blast, sent out by Pete Aguilar, the top Demo­crat­ic can­did­ate in a race to un­seat Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Gary Miller in Cali­for­nia’s 2nd Dis­trict, soun­ded a sim­il­ar tune. “The rol­lout of the Af­ford­able Care Act has not been without its prob­lems,” wrote Aguilar in a blast to voters Wed­nes­day night. “But, re­peal­ing the law is not an op­tion. We can’t go back to put­ting big in­sur­ance com­pan­ies in charge of our health, where preex­ist­ing con­di­tions would ex­clude you from cov­er­age, or where simply be­ing a wo­man would in­crease costs.”

It all soun­ded un­can­nily like the case Steve Is­rael, chair­man of the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee, made on Hard­ball Wed­nes­day night when he ar­gued that House Speak­er John Boehner and fel­low Re­pub­lic­ans were will­fully mis­lead­ing the Amer­ic­an people on the ACA. In a con­ver­sa­tion with Chris Mat­thews, Is­rael summed up the new cam­paign. “They know that they can­not af­ford as Re­pub­lic­ans, polit­ic­ally, for the Af­ford­able Care Act to suc­ceed. And you know what? We’re go­ing on of­fense now. We’re go­ing to let the Amer­ic­an people know that every single Re­pub­lic­an who talks about re­peal­ing the Af­ford­able Care Act is im­pos­ing, for ex­ample, a $1,200 tax on seni­ors by re­open­ing the donut hole. So when these Re­pub­lic­ans talk about re­peal, what they’re talk­ing about is hit­ting the middle class and seni­ors in their pock­et­books.”

Per­haps the DCCC is mak­ing in­roads already. At least one Re­pub­lic­an, Rep. Scott Ri­gell in Vir­gin­ia, has ad­mit­ted the law is ac­tu­ally help­ing some people and that Re­pub­lic­ans would do bet­ter to fo­cus on mak­ing changes to the law, rather than in­sist­ing on out­right re­peal. “It’s not in dis­pute that many Amer­ic­ans’ lives are be­ing dis­rup­ted in an im­port­ant way by this law,” Ri­gell told The New York Times. “Is it also true that some Amer­ic­ans’ lives have got­ten bet­ter? Yes, and to not ac­know­ledge that is to deny real­ity.”

Be­low is an ex­ample of an email the DCCC sent to res­id­ents in Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick’s dis­trict in Pennsylvania. Sim­il­ar in­form­a­tion about preex­ist­ing con­di­tions will be sent out in five dozen Re­pub­lic­an-held dis­tricts.

#Cost­sO­fRe­peal: Con­gress­man Fitzpatrick Would Deny Cov­er­age for 5,489,162 Pennsylvani­ans With Preex­ist­ing Con­di­tions

 

Be­cause of Con­gress­man Mike Fitzpatrick’s ob­ses­sion with re­peal­ing the Af­ford­able Care Act, 129 mil­lion Amer­ic­ans ““ in­clud­ing 5,489,162 people in Pennsylvania ““ could be denied cov­er­age simply be­cause they have a preex­ist­ing con­di­tion, send­ing us back to the days when in­sur­ance com­pan­ies were free to deny care to people with everything from can­cer to dia­betes to asthma.

 

Data from the De­part­ment of Health and Hu­man Ser­vices re­veals that since 2010, up to 17 mil­lion chil­dren with pre-ex­ist­ing con­di­tions, in­clud­ing 656,877 in Pennsylvania, can no longer be denied care be­cause of their health, and be­gin­ning this Janu­ary, that pro­tec­tion will ex­tend to all adults ““ un­less Con­gress­man Fitzpatrick gets his way, send­ing us back to the old sys­tem where in­sur­ance com­pan­ies were free to deny and drop cov­er­age simply for hav­ing asthma as a child, or even get­ting strep throat.

 

“Liv­ing in a con­stant state of dread wheth­er your in­sur­ance com­pany might drop you be­cause of a preex­ist­ing con­di­tion is simply wrong, but that’s ex­actly what Con­gress­man Fitzpatrick would do to 5,489,162 Pennsylvani­ans. For all those fam­il­ies, that means Con­gress­man Fitzpatrick’s re­peal plan would rob them of their peace of mind and se­cur­ity and in­stead could drive them in­to bank­ruptcy be­cause of their health con­di­tions,” said Emily Bittner of the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee. “While Demo­crats work to im­prove the law to make it work bet­ter for the Amer­ic­an people, Con­gress­man Fitzpatrick is for­ging reck­lessly ahead with his re­peal ob­ses­sion that leaves the 129 mil­lion Amer­ic­ans out in the cold simply be­cause they have preex­ist­ing con­di­tions like asthma or can­cer.”

 

BACK­GROUND

 

Re­peal Could Deny Cov­er­age to 129 Mil­lion Amer­ic­ans with Pre-Ex­ist­ing Con­di­tions, In­clud­ing 17 Mil­lion Chil­dren. “As many as 129 mil­lion non-eld­erly Amer­ic­ans have a pre-ex­ist­ing health con­di­tion that puts them at risk of be­ing denied af­ford­able cov­er­age without health care over­haul, ac­cord­ing to a gov­ern­ment re­port. The es­tim­ate rep­res­ents nearly half of Amer­ic­ans young­er than 65, and 86 per­cent of people 55 to 64 [“¦] The act already pro­hib­its in­surers from lim­it­ing life­time cov­er­age to a fixed dol­lar amount or deny­ing cov­er­age to a child young­er than 19 be­cause of a pre-ex­ist­ing con­di­tion. As many as 17 mil­lion chil­dren young­er than 18 have a pre-ex­ist­ing con­di­tion, ac­cord­ing to the re­port.” [ABC News, 1/18/11]

 

House Re­pub­lic­ans Have Voted 46 Times to Re­peal or Dis­mantle the Af­ford­able Care Act.”Re­pub­lic­an elec­ted of­fi­cials have seen the Af­ford­able Care Act as es­sen­tially un­fix­able — that’s why House Re­pub­lic­ans voted 46 times to re­peal or delay the im­ple­ment­a­tion of the law, in­stead of work­ing with the White House over the past three years to identi­fy and solve prob­lems with­in it of the sort that tend to ac­cu­mu­late in any such massive piece of le­gis­la­tion.” [The At­lantic, 11/27/13]
What We're Following See More »
ANOTHER MEETING WITH PRIEBUS
Trump to Meet with Ryan, Leadership Next Week
6 minutes ago
THE LATEST

A day after saying he could not yet support Donald Trump's presidential bid, House Speaker Paul Ryan has invited the billionaire to a meeting in Washington next week with House leadership. Ryan and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus will also meet separately with Trump. 

Source:
‘EXACTING STANDARDS’
Obama on Trump: ‘This Is a Really Serious Job’
24 minutes ago
THE DETAILS

"President Obama used the White House podium on Friday to dismiss Donald Trump as an unserious candidate to succeed him, and said leading the country isn't a job that's suited to reality show antics." At a briefing with reporters, the president said, "I just want to emphasize the degree to which we are in serious times and this is a really serious job. This is not entertainment. This is not a reality show. This is a contest for the presidency of the United States. And what that means is that every candidate, every nominee needs to be subject to exacting standards and genuine scrutiny."

Source:
MORE EXECUTIVE ORDERS
Panama Papers Spur White House to Crack Down on Evasion
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

In the The White House on Thursday night unveiled a series of executive actions to combat money laundering—"among the most comprehensive response yet to the Panama Papers revelations." The president's orders will tighten transparency rules, close loopholes that allow "foreigners to hide financial activity behind anonymous entities in the U.S., and demand stricter “customer due diligence” rules for banks.

Source:
THE QUESTION
Who’s #NeverTrump Courting as Possible Candidates
2 hours ago
THE ANSWER

The #NeverTrump movement is now mulling the idea of recruiting a candidate to run as an independent or under a third-party banner. But who might it be? The Hill offers a preliminary list.

  • Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)
  • Mitt Romney
  • 2012 (and perhaps 2016) Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson
  • Former Marine Gen. John Kelly
  • Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI)
  • Former Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK)
  • South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley
  • Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
Source:
362,000 JOBS ADDED
‘Mildly Disappointing’ Jobs Report
3 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The U.S. economy added 160,000 jobs in April, a "mildly disappointing" result relative to the 200,000 expected, according to the New York Times' Neil Irwin. On the plus side, hourly earnings were up 2.5% from a year ago. But on the other hand, "the labor force shrank by 362,000 people and the labor force participation rate fell by 0.2 percentage points."

Source:
×