Obama, Romney Reaction to SCOTUS Ruling on Affordable Care Act
Karen Ocamb
6/28/2012

The contrast could not have been more stark. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who worked her tail off getting the Affordable Care Act passed by Congress on March 21, 2010, immediately called Vicki Kennedy, the widow of former Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., to share the news about the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. Pelosi choked up, telling reporters how she knew the late Ted Kennedy, who worked hard to pass universal healthcare, would go to heaven and help pass the bill. “Now he can rest in peace,” she said. “His dream has become a reality.”

On the other side of the aisle, Politico reports that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., almost immediately promised that the Republican-dominated House would vote on repealing the health care law on July 11. “The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold ObamaCare is a crushing blow to patients throughout the country,” Cantor said. “ObamaCare has failed to keep the President’s basic promise of allowing those who like their health care to keep it, while increasing costs and reducing access to quality care for patients.”

On the presidential level, the reaction was also starkly different. TalkingPointsMemo has a good analysis of how the ruling will play out politically for the next few months of the presidential campaign.  For his part, Mitt Romney spent four minutes telling voters they should decide who to vote for in November based on the healthcare plan. “If we want to get rid of ‘Obamacare,’ we’re going to have to replace President Obama,” Romney said. “What the court did not do on its last day in session, I will do on my first day if elected president of the United States. And that is I will act to repeal ‘Obamacare.’”

President Obama, on the other hand, appeared, well, presidential—not gloating over his win, but rather explaining what the Affordable Care Act does in factual and personal terms (full remarks below):

The highest Court in the land has now spoken. We will continue to implement this law. And we’ll work together to improve on it where we can. But what we won’t do—what the country can’t afford to do—is refight the political battles of two years ago, or go back to the way things were.

With today’s announcement, it’s time for us to move forward—to implement and, where necessary, improve on this law. And now is the time to keep our focus on the most urgent challenge of our time: putting people back to work, paying down our debt and building an economy where people can have confidence that if they work hard, they can get ahead.

But today, I’m as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now, or 10 years from now, or 20 years from now, we’ll be better off because we had the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward.

Here’s the text of his remarks, provided by the White House:

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

ON THE SUPREME COURT RULING

ON THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

East Room

12:15 P.M. EDT

     THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. Earlier today, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act—the name of the health care reform we passed two years ago. In doing so, they’ve reaffirmed a fundamental principle that here in America—in the wealthiest nation on Earth—no illness or accident should lead to any family’s financial ruin.

I know there will be a lot of discussion today about the politics of all this, about who won and who lost. That’s how these things tend to be viewed here in Washington. But that discussion completely misses the point. Whatever the politics, today’s decision was a victory for people all over this country whose lives will be more secure because of this law and the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold it.

And because this law has a direct impact on so many Americans, I want to take this opportunity to talk about exactly what it means for you.

First, if you’re one of the more than 250 million Americans who already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance—this law will only make it more secure and more affordable. Insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime limits on the amount of care you receive. They can no longer discriminate against children with preexisting conditions. They can no longer drop your coverage if you get sick. They can no longer jack up your premiums without reason. They are required to provide free preventive care like check-ups and mammograms—a provision that’s already helped 54 million Americans with private insurance. And by this August, nearly 13 million of you will receive a rebate from your insurance company because it spent too much on things like administrative costs and CEO bonuses, and not enough on your health care.

There’s more. Because of the Affordable Care Act, young adults under the age of 26 are able to stay on their parent’s health care plans—a provision that’s already helped 6 million young Americans. And because of the Affordable Care Act, seniors receive a discount on their prescription drugs—a discount that’s already saved more than 5 million seniors on Medicare about $600 each.

All of this is happening because of the Affordable Care Act. These provisions provide common-sense protections for middle class families, and they enjoy broad popular support. And thanks to today’s decision, all of these benefits and protections will continue for Americans who already have health insurance.

Now, if you’re one of the 30 million Americans who don’t yet have health insurance, starting in 2014 this law will offer you an array of quality, affordable, private health insurance plans to choose from. Each state will take the lead in designing their own menu of options, and if states can come up with even better ways of covering more people at the same quality and cost, this law allows them to do that, too. And I’ve asked Congress to help speed up that process, and give states this flexibility in year one.

Once states set up these health insurance marketplaces, known as exchanges, insurance companies will no longer be able to discriminate against any American with a preexisting health condition. They won’t be able to charge you more just because you’re a woman. They won’t be able to bill you into bankruptcy. If you’re sick, you’ll finally have the same chance to get quality, affordable health care as everyone else. And if you can’t afford the premiums, you’ll receive a credit that helps pay for it.

Today, the Supreme Court also upheld the principle that people who can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance. This is important for two reasons.

First, when uninsured people who can afford coverage get sick, and show up at the emergency room for care, the rest of us end up paying for their care in the form of higher premiums.

And second, if you ask insurance companies to cover people with preexisting conditions, but don’t require people who can afford it to buy their own insurance, some folks might wait until they’re sick to buy the care they need—which would also drive up everybody else’s premiums.

That’s why, even though I knew it wouldn’t be politically popular, and resisted the idea when I ran for this office, we ultimately included a provision in the Affordable Care Act that people who can afford to buy health insurance should take the responsibility to do so. In fact, this idea has enjoyed support from members of both parties, including the current Republican nominee for President.

Still, I know the debate over this law has been divisive. I respect the very real concerns that millions of Americans have shared. And I know a lot of coverage through this health care debate has focused on what it means politically.

Well, it should be pretty clear by now that I didn’t do this because it was good politics. I did it because I believed it was good for the country. I did it because I believed it was good for the American people.

There’s a framed letter that hangs in my office right now. It was sent to me during the health care debate by a woman named Natoma Canfield. For years and years, Natoma did everything right. She bought health insurance. She paid her premiums on time. But 18 years ago, Natoma was diagnosed with cancer. And even though she’d been cancer-free for more than a decade, her insurance company kept jacking up her rates, year after year.  And despite her desire to keep her coverage—despite her fears that she would get sick again—she had to surrender her health insurance, and was forced to hang her fortunes on chance.

I carried Natoma’s story with me every day of the fight to pass this law. It reminded me of all the Americans, all across the country, who have had to worry not only about getting sick, but about the cost of getting well.

Natoma is well today. And because of this law, there are other Americans—other sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers—who will not have to hang their fortunes on chance. These are the Americans for whom we passed this law.

The highest Court in the land has now spoken. We will continue to implement this law. And we’ll work together to improve on it where we can. But what we won’t do—what the country can’t afford to do—is refight the political battles of two years ago, or go back to the way things were.

With today’s announcement, it’s time for us to move forward—to implement and, where necessary, improve on this law. And now is the time to keep our focus on the most urgent challenge of our time: putting people back to work, paying down our debt and building an economy where people can have confidence that if they work hard, they can get ahead.

But today, I’m as confident as ever that when we look back five years from now, or 10 years from now, or 20 years from now, we’ll be better off because we had the courage to pass this law and keep moving forward.

Thank you. God bless you, and God bless America.

                             END                12:23 P.M. EDT


 «  Return to previous page
 »  Send to a friend
Subscribe to channel

Leave a comment:

· Subscribe to comments
Be the first to comment here.

FRONTIERS BLOG

 

ElectionChannel

  • Meet the 13th C.D.'s Gay Candidates
    Our News Editor Karen Ocamb asked each of the three openly gay candidates seeking L.A.'s 13th Council District seat now held by Eric Garcetti—Matt Szabo, Mitch O’Farrell and Alex De Ocampo—to please answer a few questions about why they’re running and why LGBT voters should pick them. Below you'll find links to stories on each of them, followed by their answers.Click here for the story on Matt Szabo. Click here for the story on Mitch O'Farrell. Click ...
  • Meet the L.A. Mayoral Candidates
    People in the LGBT community first got to know the name “Garcetti” when Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti appointed a lesbian to head up the new Hate Crimes unit. A lesbian Deputy DA best known for prosecuting murderers – Carla Arranaga – took over shortly thereafter as Garcetti expanded the Hate Crimes Unit. Arranaga networked with targeted and vulnerable community organizations around LA County, bringing that expertise to Washington DC in 1997 as ...
  • WATCH: Meet the 2013 West Hollywood City Council Candidates
    Watch below as Traipsing Thru Film's Renee Sotile and Mary Jo Godges interview each West Hollywood City Council candidate at the WeHo City Council Candidate Public Forum held on Wed., Feb. 6. Stay tuned for more on the upcoming election in the Feb. 20 issue of Frontiers from news correspondent Peter DelVecchio. CHRISTOPHER LANDAVAZO JEFFREY PRANG JOHN DURAN NICK GARZILLI RUSTY WIGGS SAM BORELLI STEVE MARTIN TOM DEMILLE TRISTAN SCHUKRAFTPhotos by Paulo Murillo
  • California Democrats Vote for Party Delegates on Sunday
    One lesson voters in the 50th Assembly District learned during the contentious November elections was just how intricate and explosive the endorsement process can get for any candidate seeking elective office. But for political junkies—it’s also thrilling, a challenge to one’s intellectual and persuasive skills and a way to develop the insider skill-set to become a candidate or a party operative. But perhaps most importantly—the state party delegates determine what the California Democratic Party ...
  • Amazon Founder Pledges $2.5 Million to Marriage Battle in Washington State
    In response to an email plea from one of his first employees, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and his wife MacKenzie pledged to contribute $2.5 million in the fight to retain same sex marriage rights in Washington State. Last February, Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire signed the marriage equality bill in an emotional ceremony. Two rival groups of marriage opponents immediately tried to collect enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot to repeal the law—one ...
  • Romney, People for the American Way Agree That Elections Have Consequences
    Mitt Romney’s campaign is already using the Supreme Court decision on the Affordable Care Act to fundraise. Today, the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. But regardless of what the Court said about the constitutionality of the law, Obamacare is bad medicine, it is bad policy, and when Mitt Romney is president, the bad news of Obamacare will be over. This November it’s all on the line. The stakes couldn’t be higher. Tea Party Sen. Rand Paul, ...