ChrisWeigant.com

"Obamacare" Approaching Milestone?

[ Posted Tuesday, December 10th, 2013 – 17:53 UTC ]

Is "Obamacare" approaching a political milestone of sorts? Well, maybe. But first let me explain those "scare" quotes. Obamacare (the program itself) is of course reaching milestones, and will continue to do so for a while. But "Obamacare" (the name Republicans have been using) is what I'm talking about here -- the term itself, not the program. And that may indeed be about to hit a political milestone. Because the first Republican has come out in favor of not calling it "Obamacare" anymore, and instead referring to it by its full "Orwellian" name (his term, not mine): the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

I have believed, for over six months now, that the true sign that Republicans have accepted the new health law (or at least reacted to the public's acceptance of it) would be that they'd stop using the "Obamacare" moniker for the program. The program will begin to be seen as a success, this line of thinking goes, precisely when Republicans decide to stop saying "Obamacare." Unfortunately, while I could have sworn I had written about this previously, when I searched my own site for it, I could not find an article to cite. So you'll just have to take it on faith, I suppose, that I've believed this for a while now.

I don't claim this thought as original, as even President Obama has pointed it out before, speaking of Republicans' love of the term: "I know health care is controversial, so there's only going to be so much support we get on that on a bipartisan basis until it's working really well, and then they're going to stop calling it Obamacare. They're going to call it something else."

Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin may be on the leading edge of this actually happening. Republicans originally latched onto the term because they were absolutely, positively sure the law was going to be an utter failure, and they wanted to tie Barack Obama to that failure. This works just fine as long as that "utter failure" part holds up. But if the law starts to be seen as beneficial by most Americans, then attaching Obama's name to it does the one thing Republicans have sworn not to do for the past five years: allow Obama to enjoy any sort of political victory. To put this more simply, if people like the law, then calling it "Obamacare" just reminds them of who got the law passed. Better to call it the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," or "PPACA," or the more-concise "ACA."

In fact, I'd go even further, and make a prediction truly stunning in its audacity: Obamacare will be seen as a great success when Republicans start claiming credit for it. Think this is beyond the realm of possibility? I don't. Remember, in the 2012 elections, Republicans tried to position themselves as "the saviors of Medicare" [pause for riotous laughter], in a brief hiatus between their efforts to slash (or privatize) the program's funding. The biggest lie of the 2012 campaign was that President Obama wanted to cut "$700 billion" from Medicare, while Republicans were somehow fighting hard to restore that money (they weren't -- Paul Ryan's budgets all did exactly the same thing). I say all this just as a reminder that Republican chutzpah knows no bounds.

Now, I'm certainly not predicting this is going to happen any time soon. I just can't see Republicans in the 2014 election cycle trying to claim any credit for Obamacare. But I could see more and more of them refusing to call it that. It won't be for at least another election cycle before some enterprising Republican tries to claim credit for Obamacare, I think. But I bet it will eventually happen.

Here's one scenario for how this could come to pass. Like any large new undertaking, there is of course room for improving the Obamacare law. When it becomes obvious (even to Republicans) at some point next year that people like a whole lot of Obamacare's benefits, then Republicans will focus on one unpopular aspect of the law, and get behind some sort of very focused reform effort. As I said, there is always room for improvement, so if this Republican effort is truly on the side of fixing (rather than destroying) Obamacare, then Democrats may also get on board. So some sort of reform will pass, with bipartisan support. Whether this is a large reform or a small one, Republicans will immediately pivot to claiming that "Obamacare" -- the law before the reform -- no longer exists, and that now the only proper way to refer to the program is "Republicancare" (or some other catchy name). This way they can campaign on: "Obamacare was a disaster -- until Republicans fixed it! Since we did fix it, we claim all the credit for the whole 'Republicancare' program, so there."

Doesn't seem so far-fetched now, does it?

But, as I said, I think that's a ways into the future. In the 2014 election, I think Republicans are going to be mightily surprised that the issue of the Obamacare program is not going to resonate anywhere near the way they think it will with the public (outside of their own hardliner base). By the election, Obamacare will be over one year old, and the public will be seeing the program through the lens of reality, instead of just Republican scaremongering. A clear sign that they've realized this (and are quietly trying to backtrack) will be the number of Republican politicians who begin to emulate Senator Johnson by calling the program by its correct name. If this doesn't happen -- if Republicans keep on beating the "Obamacare" drum -- then it may take two or three election cycles before they fully admit defeat.

Either way, it will be interesting indeed to watch this development's trendline. Mostly because Republicans have painted themselves into this particular corner all on their own. They've been getting mileage out of the "Obamacare" label for years and years, and so it's going to be hard for some of them to resist using the term even when the public's mood changes. Since the beginning of Obama's term in office, Republicans' number one priority has been to deny Obama any political victory at all, but they may wind up creating the most memorable legacy of all for Obama by insisting on attaching his name to a program they were convinced was destined for failure. If, in a generation's time, people are still calling the program "Obamacare" this will stand as the monument to Obama that Republicans built.

Which is why they may reverse themselves on the whole "what to call it" question. Or perhaps even try to claim all the credit for themselves in a rebranding effort. And that would indeed be a political milestone. Whether Johnson is at the forefront of this movement or whether Republicans continue to insist on calling it "Obamacare," my guess is that it will be a fascinating political development to keep an eye on for the next few years to come.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

33 Comments on “"Obamacare" Approaching Milestone?”

  1. [1] 
    dsws wrote:

    ... when Republicans start claiming credit for it. Think this is beyond the realm of possibility?

    It's a stretch. Wouldn't they have to do it without moving their mouths?

  2. [2] 
    TheStig wrote:

    dws (1)

    I need not be that hard. Obama Care is essentially scaled up Romney Care, which was largely conceptualized by the Heritage Foundation.
    This was not an accident of Obama's part. He remembered the fate of the far more ambitious Clinton health care initiative.

    So, as I see it, the Republican pivot is to move from obstructionism to nitpicking to a few genuine improvements at the margins. This will probably take few years. As the dust settles, and typical amnesia sets in, The Republican narrative ultimately goes something like this:

    Obama Care was a badly executed, bastardized version of sound, severely conservative, market based plan pioneered in Massachusetts. The Republican party fought tenaciously to halt, and then remold Obama's Affordable Health Care into a faithful, dare we say IMPROVED version, of Governor Romney's proven, and popular plan. We, the Republican Party declare victory. It was a hard fight, but we offer our hand in reconciliation to our colleagues across the aisle.

  3. [3] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    TheStig -

    Good point. They can just point to the origins and say "it was a conservative plan all along!"

    Don't know how I could have let that slip when writing this, thanks for pointing it out!

    :-)

    -CW

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again, I am constrained to point out the elephant in the room..

    All of this pre-supposes that obamacare will be a success..

    Considering all the *assured* disasters that are waiting in the wings, the idea that obamacare will be a success is not a foregone conclusion by ANY stretch...

    Michale
    129

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    As far as why Republicans are pivoting to the actual name of the legislation, I submit that there is another, much less nefarious, explanation..

    It's simply easier to ridicule the "affordable" part of the law when you use the "Affordable" part of the name..

    Michale
    130

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    Oh, Bam! President's approval rating plummets to 38 per cent overall, just 34 per cent on health care and 40 per cent on Iran
    Obama's support among young voters has disappeared, with 49 per cent now saying they disapprove of his job performance
    Hispanics' historic preference for the president shows signs of evaporating, with 43 per cent opposing him
    52 per cent of the voting public now says Obama is not 'honest and trustworthy' and 51 per cent say he lacks 'strong leadership qualities'
    Americans who want Republicans to control both houses of Congress now outnumber those who fear one-party control

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521587/Oh-bam-Presidents-approval-rating-plummets-38-cent-overall-just-34-cent-health-care-40-cent-Iran.html#ixzz2n7G9yxAy

    If obamacare is so great and dandy, why have the vast majority of Americans NEVER supported it and the support is getting worse??

    I'm just sayin'...

    Michale
    131

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://tinyurl.com/nstcb3a

    That's our POTUS.. Never met a man so in love with himself..

    It's a MEMORIAL SERVICE, fer christ's sake!!!

    And here he is, flirting up with some hot blond, taking selfies while his wife fumes right next to him..

    What a frakin' clown...

    Michale
    132

  8. [8] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Michael makes a good point - the plan sinks if it doesn't work. That also applies to obstructionism.

    I believe AHC is beginning to distance itself from the disembodied pundit phase and enter the word of mouth phase. Word of mouth is an extremely powerful persuader, especially when it comes to medical matters (and automotive repairs).

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    I believe AHC is beginning to distance itself from the disembodied pundit phase and enter the word of mouth phase. Word of mouth is an extremely powerful persuader, especially when it comes to medical matters (and automotive repairs).

    I couldn't agree more with ya TS...

    Word Of Mouth IS nearly the most powerful persuader...

    And what do you think that word of mouth will say in California when 70% of doctors are not going to take obamacare plans???

    Here is the thing and it is indisputable..

    obamacare will not survive without the Young Invincibles..

    And what do you think is going to happen when the Young Invincibles figure out that they can opt-out of obamacare and pay absolutely NO penalty??

    obamacare will die...

    It's really THAT simple...

    If anyone sees a flaw in my logic.....

    "I'm all ears...."
    -Ross Perot, 1992 Presidential Debates

    Michale

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michael makes a good point - the plan sinks if it doesn't work. That also applies to obstructionism.

    "The government will so stipulate."
    -Captain Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

    :D

    Michale
    134

  11. [11] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Unfortunately, I'm not able to post at Huffington Post anymore.

    To eliminate anonymous posting there, they have chosen, for some reason, to require verification through a Facebook account. I've never had a facebook account and don't want one and so, that is that, apparently. At least, for the time being.

    Which is okay, since my attempts to direct interested people to the Holiday Fund here has already been misinterpreted as some sort of "shilling" ... anyone from there who wants to contribute will find there way here, I am sure.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    HuffPo is a business entity first and foremost.. Any ideological aspects take a back seat to making money...

    Ya gotta remember that some of your biggest Lefties USED to be Righties..

    Until they figured out that they could make a buttload of money being Lefties...

    Michale
    135

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Am I being paranoid for not wanting to open a Facebook account?

    I mean, I'd really like to continue commenting at HP (there are only a handful of bloggers that I care about) but I'm just not sure about this Facebook thing.

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    I opened a FB account for my computer shop. I let my daughter run the day to day operation for it, but it's available to me if I need it..

    I actually have ran into a couple old friends there including a girlfriend from back in 3rd grade... It's pretty nifty...

    But it's my understanding that you don't have to actually USE your FB page. It can sit dormant for decades with no management whatsoever..

    Long story, short (too late!! :D).. If ya need to set one up to get HP access, it probably won't come back to bite ya on the arse...

    Just use a throw-away email addy that you can safely ignore and you should be fine...

    Michale
    136

  15. [15] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale [6] -

    Just a quick note, I'll get back to answering the rest of the comments later.

    Obama's poll numbers have actually been on the rise since the beginning of the month (Obamacare 2.0 rollout), and have taken a dramatic turn upwards in the past three days. Check out RealClearPolitics.com to see. Of course, he entered the month on the lowest spot of his presidency (39.8) but he's making gains right now, not "plummenting," sorry.

    OK, gotta get today's column up, more later...

    -CW

  16. [16] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Okay, so ... now I have another problem.

    I have ever had only one email address and I don't want another one.

    Therefore, if I decide to get a FB account for the sole purpose of being able to verify who I am to the satisfaction of the powers that be at HP in order to have the privilege of commenting, then I will be using my one and only email addy.

    If I do this thing I will have nothing else to do with FB - finding long lost people, sharing photos or whatever the heck else people do there. I'll also have to give FB my phone number.

    Here's what I don't understand ... why does HP need FB to verify their own users? Can't HP eliminate anonymous users all by themselves? And, in any event, it seems that people are still commenting anonymously over there because some of the usernames are obviously not real names.

    To be clear, I have no problem posting under my real name, obviously, as I do that here. I would have used my full name at HP, too but for a very long story.

    Anyway, maybe I should just wait because it looks like this new HP move to eliminate anonymity, which actually does nothing of the sort, is not at all very popular with most users over there.

  17. [17] 
    Paula wrote:

    Chris:
    I remember you writing that the moment we'll know the worm has turned is when the pubs stop using "Obamacare" -- I thought it was a canny observation at the time!

    I think Republicans are going to be mightily surprised that the issue of the Obamacare program is not going to resonate anywhere near the way they think it will with the public (outside of their own hardliner base)

    I'm hopeful that, rather than merely "not resonating" strongly with the voters, that the repubs are actually on the defensive re: ACA, especially with respect to Repub Govs refusing federal funds to expand Medicaid coverage. The Dems need to really publicize the reality of this phenomenon and the needless suffering it will cause.

    Finally, since the repubs have no shame and no functioning memory, it won't surprise me one bit if they eventually try to claim credit for the ACA. Rewriting history is one of their favorite activities!

  18. [18] 
    akadjian wrote:

    why does HP need FB to verify their own users? Can't HP eliminate anonymous users all by themselves?

    Personally, I think it's kind of a crock, Liz, because anyone can setup a bogus Facebook account. The only difference with Facebook is that there Facebook does have a feedback mechanism to get rid of spammers. I think HuffPo accts don't and it might be difficult to add.

    They're probably also trying to link the site in w/ Facebook so they can push page shares.

    I personally don't like it much either but it's what our local newspaper (err ... online paper) went to recently too.

    At least there's always the warm comfort of CW.com :)

    -David

  19. [19] 
    akadjian wrote:

    Finally, since the repubs have no shame and no functioning memory, it won't surprise me one bit if they eventually try to claim credit for the ACA. Rewriting history is one of their favorite activities!

    This is a curious proposition.

    They've spent so much time demonizing it that to turn on this dime would I think snap the necks of 90% of Republicans.

    But you never know :)

    -David

  20. [20] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    David,

    At least there's always the warm comfort of CW.com :)

    Indeed! And, I mean that sincerely, I'm not trying to be facetious, here.

    As for HP, I don't know what the heck I'm gonna do; if HP continues to require a FB account, I just may have to open one and throw caution to the wind - not because I love HP and all of the other recent changes that make civil conversation more difficult - but, because there are a few bloggers there (Chris included, of course) with whom I thoroughly enjoy "chatting" on any number of issues of interest to me.

    I just can't believe that HP isn't capable of making their site closed to anonymous users - who tend to decrease civility AND increase the number of asinine "comments" - without forcing commenters to open up a Facebook account. I think there is something else going on here ...

  21. [21] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale [4] -

    OK, I'll freely admit that the success of Obamacare is not a foregone conclusion. As long as you admit that its failure is not a foregone conclusion.

    Let's meet in the middle!

    :-)

    TheStig [8] -

    AHC = Affordable Health Care? I'm confused...

    Michale [9] -

    70% of CA doctors... what? Cite, please. I live here, and I haven't heard anything like that.

    Although, I must admit, I did laugh at your Perot "quote"... heh...

    LizM [11] -

    I don't know what the HuffPost people are thinking. I mean, I don't have a Facebook page. I guess because I'm their blogger, they cut me some slack, because I seem to be able to still comment, but I understand the frustration completely. Just because you are alive doesn't necessarily mean you're a Facebook customer... sheesh...

    And thanks for plugging the Holiday Drive! So far, it looks like it needs all the plugging it can get... the kittens don't seem to be working, this year.

    :-(

    Michale [14] -

    I hear you, but there are reasons I'm not on Facebook. One of which is "I left my hometown to get away from you people... why would I want to talk to you now?"

    Sorry if that's too cynical or something...

    LizM [16] -

    It behooves everyone online to have a "throwaway" email address for just this sort of reason. It's an email you check only once every so often. I have a few. I just checked one that I don't think I've checked all year long... nuthin' but spam...

    You can use free services like gmail or yahoo to set one up, or if you'd like, I'll set up a chrisweigant.com one for you. Everyone should have at least one throwaway "spam-bait" email address. It comes in handy in all sorts of places.

    Paula [17] -

    AHA! I'm not crazy! I really really remember writing this column, but when I searched I could not find it, no matter what keyword I used. I think I wrote it in the past year, so maybe I'll come across it as I prepare for my year-end "McLaughlin Awards" columns. But I am glad to hear someone else remembers it too! I was beginning to wonder about my memory...

    akadjian [18] -

    Yep, we have no Facebook requirements here. We don't care what you call yourselves. As long as you enter a functioning email address, you're pretty much good to go. We don't have word limits, and we don't have profanity/"PC" filters, either.

    It's an "old school blogger's Paradise" in fact! But, just to remind everyone, it needs funding for 2014!!!

    Don't make me break out more kitten photos... you have been warned...

    :-)

    Seriously, with all the paywalls going up and anonymity being shot down, isn't it worth a few bucks for such a freewheeling site?

    [19] -

    That's precisely what I would have said about "Republicans are the saviors of Medicare!"

    Before 2012, of course.

    Heh.

    OK, that's it for now. Made it to the end!

    :-)

    -CW

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    Obama's poll numbers have actually been on the rise since the beginning of the month (Obamacare 2.0 rollout), and have taken a dramatic turn upwards in the past three days. Check out RealClearPolitics.com to see. Of course, he entered the month on the lowest spot of his presidency (39.8) but he's making gains right now, not "plummenting," sorry.

    As many of ya'all are fond of pointing out, a few days here or there does not a trend make. :D

    As your own Obama Poll Watch has noted, overall, Obama's numbers are plummeting..

    Yes, over the last few days they have gone up a bit...

    But I am sure you will agree that the trend, since the train wreck roll out has been a plummet...

    Michale
    137

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I completely understand where you are coming from..

    As far as why HuffPo is doing it?

    Money...

    They push people towards FB and FB gives them kickbacks..

    It's really that simple..

    I am like you in that I don't have any desire to hook up with old friends or stuff like that. My school years weren't always the most pleasant, so why would I want to hear from people from that era...

    Having said that, I must admit, it was pretty kewl to "see" my old 3rd grade "girlfriend"... :D

    Michale
    138

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    OK, I'll freely admit that the success of Obamacare is not a foregone conclusion. As long as you admit that its failure is not a foregone conclusion.

    Let's meet in the middle!

    Oh, I agree completely..

    Call it a personal request, but I would like to see extrapolated what some of the consequences of what might happen if *I* am right about obamacare.. :D

    70% of CA doctors... what? Cite, please. I live here, and I haven't heard anything like that.

    Ask and ye shall receive.. :D

    I'll even send ya to Canada...

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/59743

    Although, I must admit, I did laugh at your Perot "quote"... heh...

    Yea, I actually saw that (or heard it, the memory is fuzzy) live. It was hilarious... Even Perot himself laughed at that...

    It's an "old school blogger's Paradise" in fact! But, just to remind everyone, it needs funding for 2014!!!

    Don't make me break out more kitten photos... you have been warned...

    Hehehehehe I would love to see people match Liz's contribution of $0.25 for every Michale post.. :D

    I need more challenges in my life.. :D

    Michale
    146

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    If you DO pull out more kitties, Liz had a special request.. :D

    Speaking of which, does anyone recall a beautiful long-haired white cat - Persian, probably - strapped tightly into a full-body golden bustier with the caption, "If I snap, it won't be pretty! ... ?

    Michale
    147

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula,

    Finally, since the repubs have no shame and no functioning memory,

    You DO realize that THAT describes Democrats as well...

    I can provide ample facts to support that conclusion..

    Just wanted to make sure you knew that.. :D

    Michale
    148

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    Call it a personal request, but I would like to see extrapolated what some of the consequences of what might happen if *I* am right about obamacare.. :D

    For example, there are no pay provisions on the obamacare exchange.

    The BIGGEST indicator of success is when people start pony'ing up the moolah...

    Right now, there is absolutely NO WAY for customers to pay the insurance companies thru obamacare..

    Further, the data being sent from obamacare TO the insurance companies is about 25% frak'ed.. So the end user has absolutely NO IDEA if they actually are even insured..

    This is simply one of many issues that are going to blow up over the next 30-60 days..

    The road to success for obamacare is a very thin road..

    The road to hell for obamacare is wide and has many MANY paths...

    Michale
    149

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    HHS to Pressure Insurers to Provide Coverage Before Receiving Payment
    http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/hhs-pressure-insurers-provide-coverage-receiving-payment#.Uqo6MN9M2k4.twitter

    BBWWWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Yea, THAT will go over like a ton of bricks..

    "Hay Insurers.. Could you please cover everyone for free. They will pay you, I promise. Have I ever lied??"
    -President Obama

    Obama's concept of a Free Market is not what everyone else thinks it is....

    Michale
    150

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRyOGGh9WokeF9JwoJJU7Znb105_jfKnnlRm1fwdGcPXLK3pEZB

    THAT'S the guy who is going to save obamacare???

    I really weep for the future.....

    Amazing what passes for "sexy" these days... All tongue and no brains..

    Gotcha...

    Michale
    151

  30. [30] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale [22] -

    We'll see... we'll see... meet you here for OPW in about three weeks, OK?

    :-)

    [24] -

    Call it a personal request, but I would like to see extrapolated what some of the consequences of what might happen if *I* am right about obamacare..

    Aw, but that's no fun...

    Heh.

    Thanks for the cite, but I believe it's already been debunked. 80% of CA docs will keep on keepin' on... I'll hunt up a cite if you need it...

    [25] -

    OK, in the spirit of the holiday season, I'm just going to ignore that altogether.

    Heh.

    -CW

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale[25]

    Well, I guess you're just going to have to be satisfied with what you can imagine about that particular pic. It's a real shame ... you figured prominently, you know. Okay, that's all I have to say about it.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    We'll see... we'll see... meet you here for OPW in about three weeks, OK?

    :-)

    It's a date! :D

    Thanks for the cite, but I believe it's already been debunked. 80% of CA docs will keep on keepin' on... I'll hunt up a cite if you need it...

    Yea, I heard some Left Wing rag tried to cover it up... I'll be happy to look at their "evidence" but it's gonna have to be pretty compelling...

    Michale
    160

  33. [33] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Paula -

    I found it!

    See today's Program Note for details on the cite that really should have appeared in this article:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2013/12/19/program-note-35/

    :-)

    -CW

Comments for this article are closed.