It’s Veterans Day, so there is an ever-so-slight lull in the barrage of criticism aimed at the botched rollout of ObamaCare’s health insurance exchanges. But there have been developments that warrant out attention.
The most interesting (because it comes from President Obama’s hometown newspaper) and most succinct was an editorial in The Chicago Tribune. Here’s the 73-word, power-packed lead:
“President Barack Obama’s signature accomplishment is teetering. The Obamacare website is a national punch line. Millions of Americans, repeatedly reassured by Obama that they could keep their doctors and health plans, are discovering that they can’t. Their insurance policies are being canceled. The price of new coverage is substantially higher. The new coverage may force them to choose new doctors. And the law says they have to buy insurance or pay a fine.”
The only rebuttal Obama and his supporters have is to try to lay the blame elsewere (the “evil” insurance industry is always a first response). That includes Republicans who have opposed ObamaCare from the get-go. The implication is if they hadn’t, while things wouldn’t necessarily be perfect, the roll-out of ObamaCare would have been infinitely better.
This, of course, is to get the cart before the horse. Republicans opposed ObamaCare because they believed it was wrong in principal for the government to assume control over 1/6th of the economy, a foolish attempt that could not possibly work.
The only Obama response is the tiresome mantra that he tried like mad to work with Republicans, the biggest whopper in an administration that treats the truth as if it was radioactive.
Here’s what the Tribune said in its editorial:
“Democratic leaders forced the law through Congress without a single Republican vote.”
In a word, yes.
But it is the Obama Administration’s lethal combination of arrogance and incompetence that has stirred a boiling pot of resentment.
“The architects of Obamacare brushed aside sharp warnings from tech wizards that the computer system wasn’t tested and ready. They piled hundreds of pages of last-minute regulations on insurers. They forced insurers to cancel policies by the thousands because those policies fell short of the soup-to-nuts coverage required by the law.”
However, from the President’s perspective, the most dangerous issue going forward is what did he know and when did he know it? Or, to be slightly more charitable, what did he not know because he couldn’t be bothered? The Tribune editorial ominously suggests it was the former:
“The American public is having a credibility-shattering debate about the president: Did he not bother to learn the details of the law before he told us we could keep our doctors and our insurance, or did he know the truth and flat-out lie?”
Dave Andrusko, National Right to Life