Juan Williams outlines a course of action in the event that the ACA AKA “healthcare reform” is overturned by the Supreme Court:
The Democrats have a nuclear option in this political game if the high court throws out the healthcare law as unconstitutional.
That blowup-the-system button, not pushed since FDR’s attempt to stack the court with Democrats during the New Deal, is for Obama to use the bully pulpit of the White House, and the national stage of a presidential campaign, to launch a bitter attack on the current court as a corrupt tool of the Republican right wing.
It is a move that could energize Democrats and independents even as Republicans celebrate a major legal victory.
Some Democrats, sensing a political windfall, can’t wait to start the offensive.
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
I think Democrats would be mistaken if they believe that course of action will help them. I’m sure it would motivate the base, but I doubt it would energize independents.
I think it’s a fantasy. This is Obama, not Clinton. Obama doesn’t do nuclear.
Juan, you amuse me. I agree with michael, what has Obama ever done to suggest he would try to blow-up the Court? I predict Obama would go full-out passive aggressive at most.
George Will just wrote a column saying conservatives should vote for Romney because of the SCOTUS appointments. I suspect Juan is just mirroring Will, but agree it would not be like Obama to go all out on this. However, I can certainly see some of the hotheads using this approach.
Steve
I had to refresh my memory, but the gallup poll in February has only 20% of Americans thinking the law is Constitutional (only 37% of Democrats). Shaping public opinion should have started at least two years ago.
I agree that Obama is unlikely to adopt this approach. However, what if it looks like he’s losing? If he wants reelection bad enough and the situation is desperate enough, then he could go nuclear. Not that it would help IMO.
I’ve never found the “bully pulpit” argument to be that persuasive. Especially these days as people seem to take a far more cynical view of our elected leaders.
Since the most likely justices to retire in the 2013-16 timeframe will be liberal justices, even if Obama won he would only be replacing and not tipping the balance. However, if Romney wins and he appoints conservatives to replace liberals, that’s a B.F.D. (to quote Biden)!
The political strategy after the Supreme Court decision is immaterial compared to the damage done if they find the whole law unconstitutional. Just the potential ramifications to those now on the federal high-risk plan are extremely saddening. (A close friend of my brother’s is in this position and there are life-and-death consequences for many.)
As bad as the law is (and I think it’s pretty bad), at least it keeps some principle of “we have to solve these problems together” instead of the “let them die” philosophy.
I’m sick of horserace comments. What happens to people on Medicaid or that would go on Medicaid if the law takes effect, to doctors and hospitals, to people on the high-risk plan is WAYYY more important than what some damned Democrat is going to say about this and capitalize with a few votes if the law goes down.
No “political windfall” can compensate for the damage caused to individuals by a bad decision.
I mean, what I care about is what people who are elected DO, not who gets elected.
That said, I have to agree that Obama is a whiner not an effective attacker, one reason he got such a bad bill passed instead of something better.