Health insurance

Conservatives Still Don't Want You to Get Sick and Die

It is possible to deem Obamacare destructive policy and still support "expanding affordable health coverage."



The notion that conservatives not only oppose liberal health care reforms but are vigorously working to deny Americans access is a popular one on the left. If you don't support Obamacare, you are basically endorsing murder. A recent contemptible piece in The New Republic, which argues that Democrats should—without any evidence, if necessary—blame the unfortunate deaths of Americans on the rival political party, is perhaps the pinnacle of this brand of absurd demagoguery. Alan Grayson mainstreamed.

Although, it's also the unspoken starting point for many pundits, including The Washington Post's Greg Sargent, who believes he's detected a seismic shift within Republican ranks:

"Republicans remain gung-ho for repeal, and continue to insist Obamacare is destroying the lives of millions, if not American freedom itself. And yet, Republican Senate candidates are increasingly sounding like Obamacare's most ardent supporters in one key way: they are rhetorically embracing the imperative of expanding affordable health coverage to those who need it."

Two small problems with that contention: 1) It is possible to deem Obamacare destructive policy and still support "expanding affordable health coverage," and 2) the GOP has been using the exact same rhetoric Sargent points to from the beginning of the debate. And I mean exactly the same.

The majority of Americans believe that Obamacare is detrimental to the health care system yet, one assumes, many of them believe extending "health coverage" to everyone is a worthy cause. There are— and I realize this might be inconceivable to some—other systems that deliver affordable, high-quality services and products to lots and lots of people. Presumably, most of you have bought food or clothing without an individual mandate in a highly regulated government exchange? This kind of delivery system may seem excessively chaotic, antiquated or even unfair to you, but it's worth mentioning that the moral objective of those who support competitive markets over contrived technocratic schemes is probably just as good as yours.

Now, Republican Senate candidate Tom Cotton's recent comments—"We want every American to have quality, affordable access to health care"—were the grist for the left's proposition that the GOP is in the midst of abandoning its position on Obamacare. But the only possible reason you could believe Cotton's words are, in Sargent's words, "increasingly sounding like Obamacare's most ardent supporters" is that you haven't been paying attention to the debate.

OK, not the only reason. Liberals such as Sargent are trying to create the perception that there is a widespread capitulation among conservatives on the "big idea" leading up to the 2014 midterms.

Obamacare, fait accompli. But Republicans (and I think they're misguided) have never argued about the big idea. The GOP has never been able to settle on a set of reforms because of well-known internal differences. Rhetorically, though, Republicans have been using the same exact formulation as Cotton did.

In 2009, at the height of the Obamacare debate, all Republicans were rhetorically embracing the imperative of expanding affordable health care:

Roy Blunt: "Make quality health care coverage affordable and accessible for every American."

The title of a news conference by John Boehner: "Boehner, House GOP Outline Plan to Make Health Care More Affordable & Accessible for All Americans."

Dave Camp at "These and other measures will ensure every American, regardless of income, regardless of where they choose to live, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illness, will have access to affordable, quality health care."

Paul Ryan's plan to replace employer-provided health insurance with a refundable tax credit available to every American was, in essence, a call for universal coverage. Even the more conservative plan offered by the Republican Study Committee promised tax reform that "allows families and individuals to deduct health care costs, just like companies, leveling the playing field and providing all Americans with a standard deduction for health insurance."

Workable? That's another debate. Rhetorically embracing the big idea? Yes.

NEXT: Ukraine: Pro-Russian Militants Reject Diplomatic Agreement

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Alan Grayson mainstreamed? I know you guys are short a proofreader, but it’s getting ridiculous.

  2. “it’s worth mentioning that the moral objective of those who support competitive markets over contrived technocratic schemes is probably just as good as yours.”

    While true, most on the Left believes that fundamentally the Right is immoral and doesn’t care if poor people suffer. It’s a viewpoint unsupported by the evidence. Indeed, the fact that the Right as a group has a higher level of charitable giving to the poor than the Left, indicates that the Right will actually do more on a personal level than the Left. But none-the-less, the subtext that the Right is heartless and cruel is prevalent.

  3. It’s because I want affordable health care for everybody that I oppose Obamacare. Obamacare isn’t delivering affordable health care or containing health care costs.

  4. Everyone wants SOMETHING to be affordable. But they’ll balk at making any sort of sacrifices (justified or not) to make that a reality.

    Are doctors and nurse going to accept pay cuts? Any reduction in administrative personnel? Nope.

    How about paying for some treatments out of pocket, so the burden falls less on the insurance pool and tax payers? Not forcing insurance companies to take on more at risk individuals? Not happening.

    This blessed scheme can only float because there are still (law abiding) middle class Americans to support it. They’ll live with the increased premiums for the time being. ACA foes were right about the glitchy rollout and enrollment demographics. Now we just have to clasp our hands like Mr. Burns and say “excellent” when Obama fans are hit with limited choices and waiting lines.

  5. Don’t worry, the doctors’ labor union (the AMA) will take care of everything.

  6. To think that Conservatives don’t want affordable health care is a total liberal delusion. What they don’t want is the government monkeying around with another marketplace making it malfunction. Every time the government distorts a market it causes shortages, higher prices,higher costs and lower quality of goods and services.

    1. Name a republican who wants the government out of health care licensing.

      1. He didn’t say “Republican”, he said “Conservative”; there’s a big difference.

        Most mainstream Republican politicians are paid off by roughly the same interest groups as mainstream Democrats.

  7. The fastest way to increase access to affordable medical care is to end the government restrictions on what consumers can by, and who they can buy from. Let consumers have the freedom to buy from who they want, instead of having to go to the government approved rent seeking cartels.

    Progressives want to “expand access”. What a laugh. Like always, they want to expand their *power*.

    1. Well, Obamacare was intended to preserve the freedom to choose from who you buy as long as you bought from someone. So it satisfies your requirement (licensing is another issue).

      Problem is that economics sucks, and it turns out that the choice not to buy at all is essential for making markets work.

  8. I wonder how many people must be sacrificed at the political alter before people stop supporting institutions funded by extortion. Obamacare is a symptom of a sickness in our political culture. Obamacare and other worse policies, are inevitable outcomes of statism. But the problem, make no mistake, is statism.

  9. If you disagree with my means, you must disagree with my ends. My ideas are so plainly intelligent, not a single person could disagree with me in good faith. All my opponents must be evul.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.