Healthcare ruling is good for democracy

 
Crowds outside the US Supreme Court Washington Dc 28 June 2012 The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to uphold the healthcare reform law

Related Stories

There was not much calm before the storm. Political Washington has been living on its nerves for weeks and the crowds outside the Supreme Court today were jittery, in a good-natured way.

As the clock ticked down to 10:00 both sides of Washington's 1st Street NE were packed with supporters and opponents of President Barack Obama's healthcare law. They were waving banners, erupting in occasional chants.

As one side yelled: "Healthcare for all," there was an answering cheeky chorus of "we're broke".

It was so busy that there was no phone coverage, a sobering experience for those, like me, who frantically check Twitter, the superb Scotusblog and emails.

'Sigh of relief'

The first indication of the ruling was a scream of delight from a group carrying pink placards, declaring: "Women for healthcare".

Obama: "A victory for people all over this country"

To the surprise of many, and against the expectation of a lot of commentators, the Supreme Court had ruled that the Affordable Care Act - "Obamacare" to its detractors - was constitutional.

While supporters of the law danced in a small, celebratory circle, opponents took to the microphone venting their fury.

They warned this was the end of the republic, that socialism was heading to the US, and speaker after speaker said the court had proved that President Obama had lied (by saying the "individual mandate" was not a tax).

Inside the White House there must have been a gust of air as everyone from the president down breathed a huge sigh of relief.

This ruling means President Obama avoids a humiliating shellacking and does not have to make a near impossible decision about how to replace an eviscerated law.

He could wipe his brow and make a speech about how this was not about politics but about the American people.

It was not one of his best: slightly hectoring, with rather a lot of numbers. He did not, for once, use the word "choice" or talk about the election.

A good betrayal

Mitt Romney did. This is good news for the president in the sense that the alternative would have been much worse.

That does not mean it is bad news for Republicans. Far from it. Mr Romney made a short and effective speech making the central point that the only way to get rid of the law was to elect him.

He has been handed a cause.

Romney blasts healthcare ruling

Remember that it was fiery opposition to President Obama's healthcare plans from individuals at town hall meetings that propelled the Tea Party to national prominence and helped make it into a movement with huge political clout.

So there is no doubt this really fires up the base, They love a good betrayal and can now add the conservative chief justice to their little list.

But that is not all. Poll after poll shows a majority of Americans want the law repealed. And some surveys show that feeling is strong among independents.

It is now clear the only way it will be repealed is at the ballot box, by putting Mr Romney in the White House.

If it is true that his promise appeals strongly to swing voters then Thursday's ruling gives them a big reason to vote for him.

This is good for democracy.

Although it is the Supreme Court's job to make far-reaching decisions, it would have left a slightly sour taste in some mouths if judges, not the people, had decided the fate of this important legislation.

Now, as Mr Romney said, people have a choice.

This election really is about two very different visions of America, and there could be no more appropriate issue to fight over than healthcare, where arguments about the size and role of government and the duty of citizens and care for the vulnerable clash head-on.

 
Mark Mardell Article written by Mark Mardell Mark Mardell Presenter, The World This Weekend

East-West conflict set to run and run

The current dispute between Russia and the EU is not likely to be resolved any time soon, says Mark Mardell.

Read full article

More on This Story

Related Stories

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 185.

    While Obama care is not perfect it is better than nothing. He is trying to reduce future increase in premium costs by making everybody buy insurance which means the insurance companies will have more funds coming in.This will probably not lead to reduce premiums because of greed in the industry. However the new law does nothing for the COSTS associated with US healthcare.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 184.

    117, 118:J Williams:The government is implementing the law in pieces, and they are putting the pieces everyone likes in first. When the entire law is implemented in 2014 we will see how it plays out.

    When I was young I didn't have insurance. After I got seriously sick the 1st time I tried to have insurance all the time so I did have it when I really needed it.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 183.

    108, 111, 116:Backup:It wasn't Obama's health care plan as he didn't present one but simply let Congress do its own thing. It's the Senate's health plan which Obama signed. The poor still won't have insurance under this plan.

    The Tea Party was a reaction to government intrusion into places the average Joe didn't want them.

    In the US the young pretty much don't vote. It's the old who do.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 182.

    181 - really? Be realistic. If they're poor they likely don't have insurance anyway. If they're ill they would have to fight to get insurance from insurance companies. The system isn't perfect but there's no such thing as a perfect thing in a non perfect world. The attitude of americans like you make me ill. You think this is a civilized country? Yet so many don't care about others. Civilized? Not

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 181.

    91:Chuckles:The people were massively opposed to this here and our legislators at the time wouldn't listen, so we voted in their opponents who happened to be Republicans. They know where the people stand and will act accordingly.

    93:GH1618:Yes, policy should be set by Congress

    98:Bobertbobert:This law doesn't help the working poor who can't afford health insurance and now will not be covered

  • Comment number 180.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 179.

    54. mgoulden
    Where do you get your [required in most states] auto insurance, then, from the government or from a church?

    117. J Williams “Which should also point out that many Americans haven't bothered to understand the act itself.” They trust “fair and balanced” FOX/GOP/TEA Party 24/7 Propaganda Service [AKA Rupert Murdoch.].

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 178.

    So, Romney, how is this a job killer? And if it is a job killer, how come you're so much better than Obama when he based the plan on your plan for Mass.? Why don't you tell the truth? In any case - no system is perfect, there's cheater's in any system. But anyone who thinks they're ill and says an HMO insurance is enough is simply lying or doesn't know what serious illness is. That's a fact.

  • Comment number 177.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 176.

    87:probit:Unfortunately, this legislation doesn't help the poor because the Supreme Court ruled that the states could refuse to provide health care for all the poor, as required by this law, without facing major penalties. That's what this lawsuit by the states was all about. The states won.

    89:Peter Dewsnap:The problem is who gets to define reasonable profits.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 175.

    52 MidwesternSue
    “I doubt God is happy with providing the birth control pill,”
    Then let God punish whom He will, but do not inflict your religion on others. Would you like Muslims to punish you in accordance with what they think God wants? Unveiled woman = harlot, stone her. [I have lived there, this is how they see it, their God sees it.]

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 174.

    79:Reid:The judges ruled that this is a tax and as such it is legal, or at least can't be argued against until it is implemented.

    81:enkephalin07:The court ruled that the individual mandate was not covered by the commerce clause. If it looks like a tax and acts like a tax then it should be called a tax.

    85:Scotchsky:Yes, this is the issue that cost the Democrats the House.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 173.

    38 MidwesternSue
    How would Jesus feel about “take care of the poor, but only if someone profits thereby.”
    How about “It is as easy for a rich man to enter heaven as to contribute to a GOP politician.”
    Or "Judge not that you be not judged."
    Or, if a poor man ask you for charity, “make him pray at your church or vote GOP.” I don’t think He would approve.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 172.

    77:Nose for News:I don't trust big government any more than I trust big business. They're together in most things, and if either runs health care we're in for more costs and less care.

    78:Andrew Griffiths:Here's another IARC site. I don't know who cancerresearchuk is. IARC's international and run by the UN.

    http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol72/index.php

  • Comment number 171.

    All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 170.

    75:MrCinColumlbus:Given that NBC & ABC didn't mention when many Catholic organizations including Notre Dame started lawsuits against the HHS mandate, it strikes me as odd that one would attack Fox News as the sole source of bias in American news organizations.

    76:publiusdetroit:The executive branch isn't doing its job. It should be enforcing all the laws as written, including immigration laws.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 169.

    11. Vireo

    Why not call it what it is, Romney care? Surely nobody would be so dull as to vote for the inventor in the hope that he would get rid of his own invention, would they? What could possibly motivate people to vote that way? What makes President Obama different from all other presidents to call forth such a reaction, unseen since 1859?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 168.

    69:Backup:Universal Health Care would be better than ObamaCare, but personally I would like it better if various states tried different approaches to health care and then the federal government took what worked best and applied it to the whole country.

    71:Mark:The best way to get quality care is to open medical schools to as many competent people who want to be doctors as possible.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 167.

    30. mscracker
    Let’s talk freedom of conscience. Does a Catholic pharmacist have a right to refuse to fill a contraceptive prescription when that may mean death for non-Catholic patient? Does right to life mean protecting a fetus so that both fetus and mother will die? This has, unfortunately happened, and while I don’t like abortion it will happen if religion triumphs over civil rights.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 166.

    64:Backup:Whether a tax is legal or not can only be argued once it has been assessed. All that was proven so far is that government can tax and this is a tax. Universal Health Care would be better because it would include the poor.

    67:EKL:No, I'm looking at a table listing major carcinogens which includes the birth control pill in the most serious category. The category that includes asbestos.

 

Page 1 of 10

 

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.