According to the latest Gallup Poll.
Americans have paid fairly close attention to the news about whether religious-based employers should have to provide contraception coverage for employees as part of their health plans. When asked what they think about the issue, 48% of all Americans say they sympathize more with the views of religious leaders, while 45% sympathize more with the Obama administration. The views of men and women are nearly identical.
But. let’s break it down by religion:No surprise here with Protestants and Catholics siding more on the religious side.
But, for President Obama who is running for re-election, this poll must give him pause. Catholics by a 17 point margin are favoring their religious leaders and not his Administration.
Since the Catholic Bishops have not accepted Obama’s compromise, this issue will come back again closer to the election, unless ObamaCare is ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in the early summer.
All, I can say is wow!
It is all about the government and ObamaCare mandates for Boxer and Al Sharpton. Do as WE say, because we (the government) know what is best for you.
Maybe Senator Boxer would like to tell me where the right to buy health insurance is located in the Constitution?
Oh yeah, the religious one is in the first amendment, remember Senator?
Yet, Democrat U.S. Senate majority leader Harry Reid will provide cover for pro-life, Catholic Senators who want to vote NO on the Blunt amendment.
Guess all of those Catholic Bishops should have examined the Affordable Care Act a little more closely, no?
My bet is that President Obama will cave somewhat and work out some compromise. But, I also bet that whatever political damage has been done to his re-election chances will NOT be improved by this action.
If the compromise is not wholly acceptable to the Catholic Bishops look for them to pull back on some social services provided by the church.
According to the latest Gallup Poll.
Given a choice, 47% of Americans favor repealing the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, while 42% want it kept in place. Views on this issue are highly partisan, with Republicans strongly in favor of repeal and the large majority of Democrats wanting the law kept in place.
The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it would review the healthcare law’s constitutionality, a case that is likely to be heard in March, with a ruling issued by next summer. Thus, the law’s ultimate fate may now be in the court’s hands, rather than in Congress’, although it will continue to be a dominant issue in the 2012 presidential campaign. Republicans and conservatives have continued to level criticism against the law since it was passed in March 2010, while President Obama has been just as vigorous in defending its objectives and future benefits.
Americans’ views on repealing the healthcare law mirror their reactions to its passage. In October, Gallup found 40% of Americans saying passage of the healthcare law was a good thing and 48% a bad thing.
The possible repeal of the healthcare law is highly important to Americans on both sides of the question, with 66% of those favoring its repeal saying it is very important that Congress take this action, and 60% of those who believe it should be kept in place saying it is very important that Congress not repeal it.
This issue is now in the hands of the United States Supreme Court.
If SCOTUS rules the law unconstitutional, then I believe President Obama will have an easier time for re-election. If not, and the law remains as is, there will be an increasing unrest in the country for Congress and a NEW President to repeal it.
We will have to wait until early summer for a decision and unfortunately so will American business with any employment plans.
About damn time. Let’s get this issue decided before it destroys more of the American economy.
The Obama administration chose not to ask the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to re-hear a pivotal health reform case Monday, signaling that it’s going to ask the Supreme Court to decide whether President Barack Obama’s health reform law is constitutional.
The move puts the Supreme Court in the difficult position of having to decide whether to take the highly politically charged case in the middle of the presidential election.
The Justice Department is expected to ask the court to overturn an August decision by a panel of three judges in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that found the law’s requirement to buy insurance is unconstitutional. The suit was brought by 26 states, the National Federation of Independent Business, and several individuals.
Since the ruling, the Justice Department had until Monday to ask the entire 11th Circuit to review the case. Administration lawyers didn’t file the paperwork by the 5 p.m. deadline, so the ruling would stand unless the Justice Department asks the Supreme Court to step in.
The petition isn’t due until November, and the administration could get an extension.
Opponents of the law had expected the government to ask for the so-called en banc hearing to delay a ruling by the Supreme Court.
“The president and solicitor general deserve full credit for refusing to employ delaying tactics in this pressing constitutional controversy,” said Randy E. Barnett, a Georgetown Law professor who is working with the plaintiffs.
But former acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger, who has worked on briefs in support of the legislation, said the move should be read as a sign of confidence from the administration.
“This confirms what I had already concluded: That the government is confident that it’s going to prevail in the Supreme Court and would like to have a decision sooner rather than later,” Dellinger told POLITICO.
The issue of the constitutionality of the individual mandate has been widely expected to be decided by the Supreme Court. The key question has been the timing.
So, it looks like the Supremes will take up the case during this year’s term and render a decision during the Presidential election. If SCOTUS accepts the case by January, it could be heard in the Spring with a decision sometime in June.
ObamaCare WILL be an issue during the Presidential campaign season and if SCOTUS were to rule the law constitutional, it could galvanize the RIGHT to defeat President Obama in November.
Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney delivers his annual State of the Commonwealth, January 18, 2006. Massachusetts lawmakers overwhelmingly approved an ambitious health-care bill on Tuesday that would make it the first U.S. state to require nearly all residents to be insured or face penaltiesI was reading a tweet from Washington Examiner’s Phil Klein about cleaning out his old G-Mail box and discovering an old Google Chat about Mitt Romney and RomneyCare. Then, I remembered I had written a post many years ago (April 5, 2006 to be precise) criticizing Romney and his Massachusett’s health care plan.
Here is the old post (some of the links are bad) and it rings true today as it did then.++++++
ASSociated Press: Clinton Praises Romney Health Care Plan
A Massachusetts plan that blends the Democratic goal of universal health care with the Republican philosophy of personal responsibility could be a model for politicians nationwide â€” and a presidential launching pad for its chief sponsor, GOP Gov. Mitt Romney.
The proposal, approved Tuesday by Massachusetts’ Democratic-led Legislature, won Romney cautious praise from Democrats, including a longtime champion of health care overhaul: Sen.
Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
“To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable,” said the former first lady, who led President Clinton’s failed health care campaign.
She embraced the Massachusetts measure’s most striking aspect ” requiring people to purchase health insurance ” but questioned Romney’s plans to eliminate a fee on companies that do not provide health insurance for employees.
“That would unravel the plan,” Clinton said.
Of course, the LEFT and Clinton like this compulsory state sponsored plan – they want national universal care and this is a step toward their goal.
Hugh Hewitt calls this bill a “Home Run” for Governor Mitt Romney.
Flap says Hugh Hewitt has it WRONG.
Romney STRIKES OUT with this proposal.
Romney’s health care plan is another socialistic attempt to nationalize medicine. Why would ANY conservative support this fiasco?
Sally C. Pipes over at National Review has Unhealthy in Massachusetts, The Romney plan doesn’t cut it.
READ IT ALL.
As for Hillary……she will have to debate health care with Rudy Giuliani in the 2008 Presidential debates not a light weight (who has decided to NOT run for re-election) like Mitt Romney.
Mitt Romney has a RomneyCare problem which will likely be exploited by Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry. If he gets by them, then he will have to convince the American people that Sally Pipes is wrong and that ObamaCare is different than RomneyCare.
Providing Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Speaker John Boehner get thier Members in line, the next generation will have a little less debt. But, not a lot less and not a lot less anytime soon.
…The debt limit will be raised by the $2.4 trillion needed to allow the federal government to pay it’s bills through the 2012 election. But this does not mean that President Obama will be able to avoid the debt, or any of the other surrounding issues, in the election.
The deal supposedly cuts $2.4 trillion over ten years, but a quick reading shows that only $2.1 trillion of them are guaranteed to go into law, and less than 1 percent of them will actually occur before Obama’s current term is up. The plan calls for $900 billion in spending cuts from statutory caps on discretionary spending over ten years, but only $10 billion of those cuts are scheduled to occur over the next two years. The remaining $1.5 trillion in cuts is supposed to come from a “Super Congress” made up of House and Senate members pulled equally from each party.
This Super Congress will fail to come to an agreement. No Republican appointed to the committee will be able to agree to any entitlement reform that does not fundamentally repeal Obamacare. And no Democrat appointed to the committee will sign off on any reform that does. When the Super Congress fails to reach agreement, another $1.2 trillion in cuts will be triggered, at least half of which will come from defense spending. But these cuts are spread out over nine years and none of them occur before 2013. The triggered defense spending cuts are a completely empty threat.
So, America is saved from default and Washington can now concentrate on the economy, jobs and re-election. But, not in that order — of course.
ObamaCare goes to court and it is running into constitutional problems.
A top Obama administration lawyer defending last year’s healthcare law ran into skeptical questions Wednesday from three federal judges here, who suggested they may be ready to declare all or part of the law unconstitutional.
Acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal K. Katyal faced off against former Bush administration Solicitor General Paul Clement in what has become the largest and broadest challenge to the healthcare law. In all, 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business joined in urging the judges to strike down the law.
And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government’s power to force someone to buy a product.
That argument is at the heart of the constitutional challenge to the healthcare law and its mandate that nearly all Americans have health insurance by 2014.
“I can’t find any case like this,” said Chief Judge Joel Dubina of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. “If we uphold this, are there any limits” on the power of the federal government? he asked.
Judge Stanley Marcus appeared to agree. “I can’t find any case” in the past where the courts upheld “telling a private person they are compelled to purchase a product in the open market…. Is there anything that suggests Congress can do this?”
ObamaCare is obvioulsy in trouble and the political ramifications are huge if and when the federal 11th Circuit Court of Appeals declares the legislation unconstitutional.
Already, appeals courts in Richmond, Va., and Cincinnati have heard legal challenges to the healthcare law, and a fourth hearing is set for September in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The challengers hope that at least one of those appeals courts strikes down the law as unconstitutional. Such a ruling would almost certainly require the Supreme Court to take up the case and decide the issue.
The United States Supreme Court will ultimately decide the issue but it is doubtful they would take it up prior to the 2012 Presidential elections and remember – NO Republican votes in favor of passage.
Dilbert by Scott AdamsSort of like Obama’s Affordable Care Act – ObamaCare…..
Day By Day by Chris MuirThe American economy has changed under the Obama Administration – unfortunately for the worst. Mounting debt, home foreclosures and high unemployment stagger Americans.
And, what has President Obama done?
A phony economic stimulus plan which is nothing but wasteful spending with its concomitant massive debt. And, pass a health care reform plan, ObamaCare, which will burden the economy to the point of bankruptcy.
Time for a change is correct, Chris.
Time for a new President and new ideas.