After a second federal judge, Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, Fla., ruled it unconstitutional for Congress to enact health care laws that would require citizens to become insured, a Supreme Court ruling on the issue seems ever more likely.<\/p>\n
In a recent op-ed piece for The New York Times<\/em><\/a>, Frank Rich interprets some of the most recent polling data on presidential approval ratings and issue salience. He points out that while the G.O.P. and speakers of the Tea Party seem obsessed with repealing \u201cObamacare\u201d, the country seems more focused on job creation.<\/p>\n New polling data by the Associated Press<\/em><\/a> suggest, that while the country is more or less evenly divided on the issue, only a quarter of Americans would support repealing the law. This seems somewhat at odds with the priorities demonstrated by the 112th Congress, making one of the first orders of business a symbolic gesture: passing a Bill called \u201cRepeal the Job-Killing Health Care Law and Health Care-Related Provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010\u201d<\/a>, which never had a realistic chance of passing through the Senate and would still have to face the President\u2019s potential (and certain) veto. As the Bill\u2019s name indicates, House Republicans clearly aimed to link the two subjects of Health Care and job creation. Will this be an effective strategy? Are House Republicans making good on a campaign promise or engaging in obstructionist populism? Leave your thoughts and comments below.<\/span><\/p>\n An excellent overview on the legal and political opposition to health care reform can be found here<\/a>.<\/p>\n For more background information on the subject, read last year\u2019s article in Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte<\/em> by Christian Lammert (above <\/a>or here<\/a>).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" After a second federal judge, Roger Vinson of Federal District Court in Pensacola, Fla., ruled it unconstitutional for Congress to enact health care laws that would require citizens to become insured, a Supreme Court ruling on the issue seems ever more likely. In a recent op-ed piece for The New York Times, Frank Rich interprets […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":762,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,204,157],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-97","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allgemein","category-health-care","category-the-state-of-american-democracy-innenpolitik"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/762"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=97"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":100,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/97\/revisions\/100"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=97"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=97"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.fu-berlin.de\/jfkpol\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=97"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}