« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Facing the Reality of Obamacare, Entitlements, and Budgets

It’s a done deal.  Republicans in the House will overwhelmingly support a bill (HR 325) today which will suspend the debt limit law until May 19.  The bill will also call on the Senate to pass a budget by April 15 – with the threat of cutting off pay for a dereliction of this duty, as prescribed by the 1974 Budget Act.

In return for voting for the bill, leadership has verbally promised conservative members that they will stand by the sequester cuts in March and craft a budget that balances in ten years.

Passage of this bill is a fait accompli, and Democrats have signaled that they will support it.  So let’s operate under the assumption that this bill takes effect, and unite to force leadership to fulfill their promises during the debate over the CR, which is slated to expire on March 28.

There are many good conservatives who earnestly feel that we have no ability to force any reforms with control of only one house of Congress.  I can respect that view, although they would be wise to study the evolution of welfare reform and balanced budgets in the ‘90s.  However, those who think we can fight for reforms by using leverage points in the budget process, and plan to do so, need to think long and hard whether the current agreement will lock in that commitment from leadership.

If conservatives really desire to use this temporary debt increase to regroup and unite behind entitlement reform, they should fulfill their promise to block any CR that contains funding for Obamacare.  Let’s confront a reality: entitlement reform is mostly about free market healthcare reforms, most notably, restructuring Medicare and Medicaid.  Yet, we will never have the ability to change these 50-year-old programs until we disrupt the new behemoth from taking root.  When fully enacted, Obamacare will take over 1/6 of our economy, create permanent dependency for tens of millions of Americans, induce unsustainable inflationary pressure on the cost of healthcare and health insurance, and saddle the next generation with crippling debt.

If we’ve learned anything from past experiences, it’s that no government entitlement program is ever repealed once the dependency takes root.

Hence, there is no entitlement reform without quashing Obamacare.  There will be no balanced budget as long as Obamacare is still on the books.  Obamacare will cost at least $2 trillion just in the first decade, and that is a modest projection.  If you are one who feels that Obamacare is here to stay as a result of the elections, then stop talking about entitlement reform and balanced budgets.

Last year, 127 members of the House signed a letter pledging to oppose any appropriation bill that contains funding for Obamacare.  105 of those members are still in the House (download here).  The full copy of the letter can be viewed here .  On the very day this letter was finalized, conservatives agreed to suspend the policy and sign onto the FY 2013 CR, which funded Obamacare and is set to expire March 28.  They felt that it was worth deferring the fight until 2013, when we were supposed to control all branches of government.  Well, we lost the election.  Now it’s time to fight Obamacare.

Obamacare might seem like old hat for people looking to chart new territory.  But every new proposal will be moot as long as Obamacare is still funded.

COMMENTS

  • buffmuffin

    I’m honestly unconcerned with lib spending at this point, they won, let them spend us into the toilet, let them own it.

    What i am concerned with is holding a firm line on constitutional rights and being the alternative party to the hell they are about to unleash on the American people in the form of usurpation of inalienable rights, and the madness that will follow when our credit is downgraded and the potential crash of the US Dollar…

    My concern is that they will use these events to allow hunger and anarchy to reign in the streets, to precipitate a desperate public call for US military intervention.

    Once the US military is deployed to the streets, at the behest of a frightened public, the republic will be lost beyond all redress.

    That is the danger i fear in this path.

  • DerKrieger

    Federalism is the answer in my opinion. I’ve written about it extensively in my diary. Still waiting for a front page writer to pick up the baton and spread the message.

    As long as we put our eggs in the national GOP basket, we will remain in dire straits.

  • DerKrieger

    Social Security would be covered. Good points on the rest.

    If we could get the GOP to pass a bill requiring the budgets down to the paperclis of all federal departments be posted online, I’d wager that the public could crowd-source (find) billions in spending cuts.

  • cheesycon

    So to summarize, we caved on the debt ceiling. SO surprised!

    and now we are changing the topic to Obamacare?? oookay.

    and yeah let’s definitively believe the promise that there will be any change for the CR. That will surely work out well, unlike the past 7 times.

  • jaydickb

    Not quite. Look out into the future a little, say to November 2014. For those Democrats in competitive races, of which there will be several, they will be burdened by having voted for that ridiculous budget. Why do you think Reid hasn’t permitted a budget vote for 3 years? Because the vote forces Democrat Senators to go on record. That vote is something the candidate cannot deny and is difficult to spin come election time. That’s why forcing the Senate to pass a budget is an important advantage for Republicans. It may not be huge, but it is important in the 2014 and maybe 2016 elections.

  • jaydickb

    Of course Obamacare didn’t fix anything; it only makes things worse.

    But, your story points out a much more important principle. Government programs that provide cash to those “in need” cannot avoid extensive fraud. And, the more the programs are centralized (especially the funding), the more fraud there will be. As with many other things, big us usually bad, or at least inefficient, especially when government is involved.