Skip to main content

GOP threatens government shutdown if Obamacare isn't defunded, but...

Some Congressional Republicans are threatening a government shutdown if Obamacare isn't defunded. The only problem with that is, no matter how tough their talk, it will be impossible to defund most of the healthcare bill. In other words, some GOP members are threatening a government shutdown to simply look tough and rile their supporters.

Melissa Seeley of the Health Affairs blog explained the matter as follows:

"The pillars of the law's health insurance expansion strategy-increased eligibility for Medicaid and the new premium and cost-sharing subsidies for private health insurance - are exempt from the annual appropriations process. These so-called 'mandatory' or 'entitlement' programs are permanent and have permanent funding authority. Furthermore, the Department of Health and Human Services has the ability to fund related provisions without seeking additional appropriations from Congress. For example, Federal grants to states to plan and build the new health insurance exchanges fall into this category. It also includes funding necessary to immediately lower insurance costs for uninsured individuals with preexisting conditions and early retirees."

In other words, this tough talk by the GOP is for nothing. Also, they seem to be forgetting the fact that Democrats control the Senate and the Oval Office. A bill to defund Obamacare, even if it were possible, wouldn't pass the Senate, and even in the odd scenario that it did, the president wouldn't sign it.

Can you imagine the following headline- "Obama Defunds Obamacare!"? I don't think so.

So, let's think this over for a minute. The Republican Party is threatening to shut down the government in order to defund a law which will be minimally affected in such a scenario, and there's less chance of the bill passing the Senate and getting signed by the president than a fetus has at winning the lottery. Yeah, that sounds like a winning strategy. If the party does go that route, they may have to alter Vince Lombardi's quote to represent their party before long - from "Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing" to "Winning isn't everything; it's - what is it again?"

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/01/04/171854/defund-entitlement/

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/09/19/2647171/republican-civil-war-breaks-obamacare-defunding-wont-stop-reform/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"