Heartless and Guiltless

In all the coverage of frontrunner squabbling, a little noticed moment when the Tea Party crowd celebrated at the thought of innocent people dying may have indicated the broader problem with the Republican Party today. When Ron Paul suggested a 30-year-old who opted against health care and got sick should die with no chance at government support, the gathered masses went nuts.

As Mother Jones notes in the link, this is just the most recent sign the death and suffering are not reason for intervention but for celebration. Last week, a crowd cheered the fact Rick Perry had signed off on a record number of executions.

But this was the Republican base for Florida cheering Ron Paul's crazy remarks. And it was more disturbing to me to see the revelry than Paul's cold-hearted remarks. He is a crazy right libertarian, and it wouldn't surprise me if he wanted ambulances to pass a bleeding man on the road if it meant saving on government-purchased gasoline. (I do hope this reminds the anti-war crowd that sees the value of Paul in the debates to remember we do NOT need this man to actually become president).

The thing most striking to me, though, is that opponents to ObamaCare always said the hypothetical 30-year-old in Wolf Blitzer's question needed that choice to live without health insurance. That claim was the basis of Bill McCollum's so-far-successful lawsuit against ObamaCare on behalf of all of Florida. And it was always the top complaint from the right. I can hear my brother-in-law now saying 'Why shouldn't a guy who is young and healthy be able to say, I want to save the money and not buy insurance?"

The reason why is that a Republican will some day be in the White House. When that happens, the citizen with no insurance is screwed. Ron Paul said as much last night, and the crowd cheered.

People said Alan Grayson was uncivil suggested the GOP health care plan was 'Don't Get Sick,' and if you do, 'Die Quickly.' Last night, we learned most Republicans will cheer the young people who take their own advice all the way to fast grave.

Update: Grayson has actually responded to this now at HuffPost.

The Bright Side to the ObamaCare Ruling

An appeals court today ruled that the individual health mandate is unconstitutional. That's ridiculous. But i am sure Bill McCollum is feeling vindicated to see his politically-driven lawsuit filed on behalf of us, the Florida taxpayers, result in some embarrassment for the White House.

I wonder, though, how he feels that the greatest political damage this will cause is likely to Mitt Romney. I expect the hit county on video of the ex-Massachusetts governor proclaiming "I like mandates" is soaring as we speak.

But this, of course, is a matter of law, and I can't help but wonder what the long-term ramifications will be with the courts ruling the government can't tell citizens to buy insurance. Personally, I am waiting to see if state AG Pam Bondi will now tell lawmakers in Tallahassee to drop a requirement for Floridians to own car insurance. Considering Florida has long held that all children should have health insurance with the state even if parents didn't buy it for themselves, I wonder if the state will find itself arguing a "compelling reason" to at least apply the concept of health mandates to minors.

This ruling, of course, is a disappointment to me, but I must say there is some schadenfreude to experience knowing how complicated this will make things for the right. Even though conservatives have long cried about the mandate as the worst part of this bill, that was never what really drove them crazy. Actually, the mandate is what was used to appease insurance companies. The judge in this case ruled that the mandate could be ruled unconstitutional without tossing ObamaCare completely, so this in some ways is a terrible outcome for Republicans, and especially for insurance companies. The ruling essentially says that all the reforms in ObamaCare are legal and sound, and that only a requirement to buy insurance crosses the line.

So when Gov. Scott is next caught beaming about how he was right about ObamaCare all along, ask yourself whether this former healthcare CEO was really bothered by a requirement for Americans to be insured, something which guarantees people are using hospitals more often, or if the problem he and his lobby always had was with the regulations intended to stop insurance companies from screwing patients. Because those parts of ObamaCare still stand.

And remember, if reasonable leaders can get back to Washington, changes can always be made to legislation. Maybe this ruling will embolden leaders in Washington to push for true universal health care and avoid the entire mandate argument in the first place. This ruling is a knock on Obama, for sure, but is no defeat for true health care reform.