Hey, Mr. Brooks, Thanks for Making Conservative Argument on Why Obamacare Should Be Repealed.

In this interview with Meet The Press, Harry Reid says that the media sees efforts to repeal Obamacare as being a waste of time. Really, Mr. Reid? Apparently some of the media disagree with you.

In this article written by David Brooks over the NYT, not only does the author present that it is possible Republicans can repeal Obamacare but he also presents a logical, rational argument on why repeal should be considered. (This wasn’t his intention, which becomes abundantly plain in reading the article, but he’s handed conservatives quite a few points to build the case supporting repeal of Obamacare all the same).

One of the points presented by Mr. Brooks is that Obamacare success was dependent on expert projections of human behavior. Progressives genuinely believed that American citizens would be enamored with the idea of having Obamacare in place and would jump at the chance to be first in line to get these benefits. These events did not take place as projected with has altered the future cost projections.

We as conservatives know that in these days of reckless government spending, we can’t always depend on or trust governmental entities to use public funds wisely, but progressives always seem to be surprised by it when this reality takes place. Mr. Brooks presents the case in point of the situation in NH which has spent nearly double the $650,000 the federal government allotted to them to help run the program but has only 80 members enrolled and how over-spending by governmental entities could add to the cost of Obamacare.

Another point presented in the article is that companies and unions could “dump” their more costly insurance cases into the government system beginning in 2014 for the purpose of reducing business costs. Here’s the point he makes regarding how this influences the projected cost estimates of Obamacare:

The number of people in those exchanges could thus skyrocket, especially as startup companies undermine their competitors with uninsured employees and lower costs. The Congressional Budget Office projects that 19 million people will move to the exchanges at a cost of $450 billion between 2014 and 2019. But according to the economists Douglas Holtz-Eakin and James C. Capretta, costs could soar to $1.4 trillion if those who would be better off in the exchanges actually moved to them. The price of the health care law could double. C. Eugene Steuerle of the Urban Institute, who has been among those raising the alarms about this, calls the law’s structure “unworkable and unfair.

There are several other reasons that are mentioned in the article that make the argument for repealing Obamacare, such as the question of constitutionality of Obamacare mandates, the possibility that hospital systems will develop into oligarchies and how this could have “unforeseeable results” (meaning unintended consequences increasing healthcare costs), and the hostile response of the public to the passage of this law (particularly among private practice health care providers who might be driven out business).

If you read the article, Mr. Brooks’ intentions were along the lines of giving progressives a “heads up” that they could have another opportunity to get a fully-functional government-sponsored single-payer healthcare system in place rather than the present “hybrid” system and to be ready for this opportunity when it comes.

Mr. Brooks wasn’t intending to make our argument for us or to hand conservatives solid reasons that we can use to support the repeal of Obamacare.

But hey, I’m not one to “look a gift horse in the mouth”. Thanks for your help, Mr. Brooks.

Get Alerts