Sen. Ben Nelson (D., Neb.) thinks the time has come to get rid of the individual mandate in the Democratic health-care law. Politico reports:
Speaking to more than 150 insurance brokers, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) called the individual mandate “the biggest sticking point” in the health reform law.
“It’s time to change the mandate,” Nelson told members of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA), gathered in Washington for their “Day on the Hill” event. “People don’t like mandates. I don’t think it’s a good idea.”
Nelson supports the health reform law but has also emerged as a leader in exploring options to the individual mandate, a health reform provision now ruled unconstitutional by two federal judges.
Nelson, who is up for reelection in 2012 (and polling rather poorly at the moment), will likely come under a lot of pressure to support legislation introduced by Sens. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and John Barrasso (R., Wyo.) that would allow states to ‘opt out’ of reform provisions like the individual mandate — even though Graham has clearly stated that the bill’s ultimate goal is to undo Obamacare.
Is this a precursor to Cornhusker Deal II?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNice. My state can opt out but I can't. Government still controls my health care.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat puts it at 48, 47 Republicans and a Democrat, they need to find 3 more to put pressure on. My suggestions: Webb of VA, the other Nelson of FL, Tester of Montana, and Manchin of WV. That's 4, there are probably some others who are already under some pressure, but this a start.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf it is the core of the legislation, then he must vote for repeal.
Similarly, President Obama-Reagan, the new centrist, must also support repeal. Anybody channeling Reagan would be against Obamacare.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse----"Graham has clearly stated that the bill’s ultimate goal is to undo Obamacare."----
Sorry, I don't believe him on that any more than I believed his conversion to border security and against amnesty while he was running for re-election.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf I'm not mistaken Judge Vinson said the law was unconstitutional in toto. Besides, ObamaCare is dead without the Mandate. Wihtout the Mandate, the ObamaCare would most certainly bankrupt the federal government as younger healthier Americans opt out until they are actually ill.
I'm sure there are RINOs who would go along in order to get along. But, the House GOP has no incentive to go along with the Senate. This is just some Blue Dogs trying to get out from the consequences of thier earlier votes for ObamaCare. The Dems made thier bed, now they have to sleep in it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf people really do think, as Senator Nelson suggests, that the individual mandate is the biggest sticking point, then the public at large still hasn’t taken on board the dark heart of Obamacare.
Obamacare will give power to federal government officials to decide which medical treatments and as to which classes of patients may be paid using insurance. Ultimately, all insurance will have to conform to the government requirements. Why would a free people ever grant such sweeping power over themselves to government officials?
Keep in mind the federal bureaucracies tend to attract as officeholders people who want to use that power to achieve their own social agendas.
Will the federal officials require that insurance cover the expensive drugs of your HIV-positive bathhouse-loving colleague in the office down the hall? Of course, no limit on expenses, and pills to be dispensed from a gold-plated container. He is a member of a favored liberal constituency with powerful advocacy groups.
How about a hip replacement for your tea-partying grandma who has spent a lifetime exercising responsibility and self-control? No, say the federal officials, it’s just too expensive and we as a society need to control healthcare costs.
For classes of patients who fall outside the favored liberal political constituencies, the federal bureaucracy will prove more cold, callous and arrogant than the most gimlet-eyed private insurance executive.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse