Is the GOP Losing Its Anti-Obamacare Zeal?

The latest opening to keep fighting the health care law turned into a total snoozefest.

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 11: U.S. Senate Minority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (R) reacts as Senate Minority Whip Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) (L) looks on as they speak to members of the media after a Republican Policy Luncheon June 11, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. Senator McConnell spoke on various topics including immigration reform. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
National Journal
Sam Baker
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Sam Baker
June 4, 2014, 4:09 p.m.

This is the way the Obama­care war ends — not with a bang, but a whim­per.

Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans are es­sen­tially passing on what was once sup­posed to be the Next Big Obama­care Fight — the con­firm­a­tion of a new Health and Hu­man Ser­vices sec­ret­ary. Four­teen Re­pub­lic­ans sided with Demo­crats on a pro­ced­ur­al vote Wed­nes­day, clear­ing the way for Sylvia Math­ews Bur­well to win con­firm­a­tion quickly, eas­ily, and with bi­par­tis­an sup­port.

There are prac­tic­al reas­ons not to pick a big fight over Bur­well: She was already con­firmed 96-0 for a dif­fer­ent job, and she’s well re­garded as a skilled man­ager.

“I think there’s just a fa­tigue amongst elec­ted Re­pub­lic­ans on Obama­care.”

But her nom­in­a­tion was a pretty ob­vi­ous hill on which Re­pub­lic­ans could stage an­oth­er battle in their years-long war against Obama­care. They chose not to. And after this, there simply aren’t that many hills left on which to fight.

It’s not just Bur­well: Anti-Obama­care bills in the House have got­ten tamer lately — some of them look an aw­ful lot like fix­ing ob­vi­ous prob­lems with the law, something con­ser­vat­ives once swore they’d nev­er do. There are few­er big-tick­et hear­ings, and even those are of­ten poorly at­ten­ded. Any­one who’s been around Cap­it­ol Hill and health care for the past four years can see it — the anti-Obama­care fire just isn’t burn­ing as hot as it used to.

“I think there’s just a fa­tigue amongst elec­ted Re­pub­lic­ans on Obama­care,” said Dan Holler, com­mu­nic­a­tions dir­ect­or for Her­it­age Ac­tion, in an in­ter­view con­duc­ted last month. “There seems to be this hes­it­ancy to talk about Obama­care much.”

In part, any fire dies down over five years. But the tem­per­at­ure on the right also got a lot lower after 8 mil­lion people signed up for cov­er­age through the health care law’s ex­changes.

Her­it­age Ac­tion and some of its closest al­lies — Sens. Mike Lee and Ted Cruz — tried to stoke the flames once Bur­well’s nom­in­a­tion passed (with bi­par­tis­an sup­port) out of com­mit­tee and came to the Sen­ate floor. But they only went so far, de­mand­ing an­swers to a series of ques­tions about the health care law.

“Un­til the Pres­id­ent agrees to of­fer mean­ing­ful re­lief to the mil­lions of people hurt by Obama­care, we should not con­firm this nom­in­ee,” Cruz said in a state­ment fol­low­ing Wed­nes­day’s pro­ced­ur­al vote.

Even that, however, is sig­ni­fic­antly dialed back from Cruz’s rhet­or­ic ahead of last year’s gov­ern­ment shut­down, when he taunted his fel­low Re­pub­lic­ans by ar­guing that a vote to keep the gov­ern­ment open was “a vote to fund Obama­care.”

It wasn’t — al­most all of Obama­care’s fund­ing was sep­ar­ate from the bill Cruz blocked. But pre­cisely be­cause of the traits that make Bur­well hard to op­pose — her tal­ent for man­age­ment, and her ap­pet­ite for policy — a vote for Bur­well prob­ably is a vote that will help the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion more ef­fect­ively im­ple­ment the Af­ford­able Care Act.

Yet Cruz hasn’t tried ser­i­ously to put his party on the spot. When asked last month wheth­er Re­pub­lic­ans should force a broad­er con­front­a­tion over the Bur­well nom­in­a­tion, Cruz re­spon­ded with a well-worn line about us­ing every op­por­tun­ity to show­case Obama­care’s fail­ings.

None of this is to say that Re­pub­lic­ans now sup­port Obama­care, which they very much do not, or that it won’t be a prob­lem for Demo­crats in this year’s midterms, which it will.

The law is un­pop­u­lar, and its crit­ics feel more strongly than its sup­port­ers. But with pub­lic opin­ion locked in place for months, “Obama­care” has be­come al­most a party-ID ques­tion or a buzzword, rather than a dy­nam­ic is­sue.

The Obama­care war has been a con­stant in polit­ics since 2009, with peaks and val­leys of in­tens­ity. The peaks have al­most al­ways been tied to some ex­tern­al de­vel­op­ment — from the law’s pas­sage, to the Su­preme Court de­cision up­hold­ing it, to delays in the em­ploy­er man­date, to the blun­der­ing launch of Health­, to a wave of can­cel­la­tion no­tices.

If past is pro­logue, don’t bet against more delays and policy flubs by the ad­min­is­tra­tion. But bar­ring any ma­jor mis­takes, Re­pub­lic­ans don’t have a lot of open­ings left to force the health care law back in­to the head­lines.

The GOP will get some mileage out of 2015 premi­um in­creases as rates trickle out over the sum­mer. But at least so far, the hikes are far smal­ler than what most crit­ics pre­dicted. No one likes a 15 per­cent premi­um in­crease, but that doesn’t look so ter­rible com­pared with crit­ics’ pre­dic­tions that premi­ums would skyrock­et by as much as 300 per­cent. Some car­ri­ers are even cut­ting their prices for next year.

An­oth­er round of plan can­cel­la­tions will also hit shortly be­fore the midterms, al­though health-policy ex­perts say this one will prob­ably be much smal­ler than last year’s.

Whatever open­ings the GOP can find, though, have to com­pete with a stronger-than-ever Demo­crat­ic re­sponse: 8 mil­lion people signed up for cov­er­age through Obama­care’s ex­changes. An­oth­er 3 to 6 mil­lion en­rolled in Medi­caid.

The en­roll­ment num­bers beat the White House’s own pro­jec­tions, and cer­tainly out­stripped Re­pub­lic­ans’ glee­ful pre­dic­tions that people would re­ject the law’s cov­er­age. And they rep­res­ent a comeback from the law’s worst, most glar­ing fail­ure — the launch of Health­

Holler ac­know­ledged last month that “there’s a lot of good news for the law,” but said Re­pub­lic­ans should still fo­cus on premi­ums and the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s uni­lat­er­al delays.

Bur­well’s nom­in­a­tion wasn’t the per­fect ven­ue, he said — the Sen­ate’s minor­ity party doesn’t have much lever­age to stall nom­in­ees any more, and Bur­well has a par­tic­u­larly strong repu­ta­tion. But he put most of the onus on Re­pub­lic­ans.

“Most of this, I think, is fa­tigue,” Holler said.

What We're Following See More »
CFPB Decision May Reverberate to Other Agencies
48 minutes ago

"A federal appeals court's decision that declared the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau an arm of the White House relies on a novel interpretation of the constitution's separation of powers clause that could have broader effects on how other regulators" like the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

Morning Consult Poll: Clinton Decisively Won Debate
59 minutes ago

"According to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, the first national post-debate survey, 43 percent of registered voters said the Democratic candidate won, compared with 26 percent who opted for the Republican Party’s standard bearer. Her 6-point lead over Trump among likely voters is unchanged from our previous survey: Clinton still leads Trump 42 percent to 36 percent in the race for the White House, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson taking 9 percent of the vote."

Twitter Bots Dominated First Debate
2 hours ago

Twitter bots, "automated social media accounts that interact with other users," accounted for a large part of the online discussion during the first presidential debate. Bots made up 22 percent of conversation about Hillary Clinton on the social media platform, and a whopping one third of Twitter conversation about Donald Trump.

Center for Public Integrity to Spin Off Journalism Arm
2 hours ago

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, the nonprofit that published the Panama Papers earlier this year, is being spun off from its parent organization, the Center for Public Integrity. According to a statement, "CPI’s Board of Directors has decided that enabling the ICIJ to chart its own course will help both journalistic teams build on the massive impact they have had as one organization."

EPA Didn’t Warn Flint Residents Soon Enough
2 hours ago

According to a new report, the Environmental Protection Agency waited too long before informing the residents of Flint, Mich. that their water was contaminated with lead. Written by the EPA's inspector general, it places blame squarely at the foot of the agency itself, saying it had enough information by June 2015 to issue an emergency order. However, the order wasn't issued until the end of January 2016.


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.