A political idea, once it becomes a national program, achieves legitimacy with the public. Over time, that legitimacy deepens. So it has been with the idea of national social insurance.
While I recognize that as the fear of ObamaCare’s opponents and the hope of its supporters, I don’t think it’s completely correct. Social programs retain popular support as long as the people receiving the benefits don’t need to pay for them. That’s ObamaCare’s great weakness. It depends on people who won’t receive benefits paying for them anyway.
Nonetheless I agree with Mr. Henninger’s prescription:
The odds of ObamaCare’s eventual self-collapse look stronger every day. After that happens, then what? Try truly universal health insurance? Not bloody likely if the aghast U.S. public has any say.
Enacted with zero Republican votes, ObamaCare is the solely owned creation of the Democrats’ belief in their own limitless powers to fashion goodness out of legislated entitlements. Sometimes social experiments go wrong. In the end, the only one who supported Frankenstein was Dr. Frankenstein. The Democrats in 2014 should by all means be asked relentlessly to defend their monster.
Republicans and conservatives, instead of tilting at the defunding windmill, should be working now to present the American people with the policy ideas that will emerge inevitably when ObamaCare’s declines. The system of private insurance exchanges being adopted by the likes of Walgreens suggests a parallel alternative to ObamaCare may be happening already.
If Republicans feel they must “do something” now, they could get behind Sen. David Vitter’s measure to force Congress to enter the burning ObamaCare castle along with the rest of the American people. Come 2017, they can repeal the ruins.
I don’t oppose ObamaCare; I am merely concerned about it. My concern is that it is not healthcare reform, merely a system of subsidies for healthcare insurance. The healthcare system remains desperately in need of reform and I worry that ObamaCare postpones that reform rather than facilitating it. Time will tell. Sadly, policy-making by crisis, a very flawed process, looks more likely now rather than less so.