Obamacare: Victory or Disaster?

We live in arguably one of the most rigid and ridiculous eras of political discourse to occur in the last century. And that’s just what this issue has become: in an all-or-nothing political election year, this debate has turned completely and utterly political.

Divided into nine titles, the Patient Protection and Affordability Care Act (ACA) – or the colloquial Obamacare – is one of our generation’s most contentious political and ideological issues. It  has been both chastised and revered for its intended goal: to establish an egalitarian, national health care plan.

Liberal Illness, Conservative Malfeasance, or Both?

As with any issue, there are at least two sides in this debate. Here, we find ourselves with two, unoriginal contenders and, of course, the spectators of sport – the media.

In one corner, we have conservative rhetoric guided by the principles of laissez –faire economics, rugged individualism, and the tea party’s unwavering stand against intrusive government’.

Across the ring stand the progressive liberals. The ACA is their brainchild, and they stand resolute and firm in their viewpoints. They feel they have conceded enough by not passing a universal health care act that looks more European in the scope of its programs and in its general nature.

Washington’s quarrelsome nature  obscured the ACA’s benefit to it’s public. Instead, the firestorm that was this summer’s ruling overtook the true intentions of the Act. The public was lost in translation with regard to what the ACA would mean for them while the political elite bickered instead of focusing on their duties.

With the somewhat-surprising ruling that took place this June, we may well have broached the most important campaign debate issue of the 2012 election cycle: national health care reform and its place in American society. So where do the two sides stand on the issue?

 Mitt’s Position: Rhetoric vs. Reality?

What would the political atmosphere feel like if the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the individual mandate? Well, for one, President Obama would have lost the hallmark of his presidency. It is important to note, however, that the Right has no intention of retreating to a dark corner; in fact, the Romney camp was given a new rallying cry for the upcoming Presidential Debates. Not minutes after the ruling, Capitol Hill was aflame with rejoice – from both sides. Romney and republicans began attacking the President, some going as far to call him, “the poster child for the nanny state.” Mr. Romney has vowed  to repeal the Affordable Care Act on his first day in office. At a campaign speech in Iowa, Mitt Romney criticized Democratic health care plans, saying, “The path of Europe is not the way to go. Socialized medicine. Hillarycare. Obamacare.” In essence, either outcome could have been viewed as beneficial for the GOP.

However, because the ruling favored the President, the feeling among most conservatives now is that while, “…attempts to thwart Obamacare by challenging its constitutionality were unsuccessful, Americans can stop the law from going into effect by electing Republicans who have pledged to repeal and replace it.”  The ruling by Justice John Roberts, if nothing else, provided the platform on which republicans will attack Obama’s leadership.

Their argument is fairly uniform for a party that has an ideology that encompasses moderates and Tea Party alike:  The ACA, according to Republicans, is just another tax; it gives government too much power, and soon one will be taxed for not eating vegetables or exercising at the gym.

What many on the left find entertaining is the fact that Mr. Romney introduced an almost-identical piece of legislation during his tenor as governor of Massachusetts. The reply from conservative pundits has been, almost resoundingly, a delineation of the notion of ‘state’s rights.’

Obama’s Folly or Triumph?

After the phrase ‘Obamacare’ was coined by House republicans in 2010, Mr. Obama used the word in a speech, adding, “I have no problem with people saying ‘Obama cares.’ I do care. If the other side wants to be the folks who don’t care, that’s fine with me.”

The Affordable Care Act is sure to be an issue that Obama will not let go of. Sometimes criticized for being too weak and not the right leader for our country, the President needs this to show the American voter that he has what it takes – whether one agrees with him or not – to be an effective President. Perhaps his ineffectiveness in explaining the program to the public has left him shuffling with an air of incompetency.

But regardless of where one stands on the issue, one thing remains clear: President Obama will have forever changed the structure of the U.S. federal government through the ACA. Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan said in 2011 that while opponents use “Obamacare” in a derogatory sense, “it’s going to go down in history as a the major accomplishment of the president’s [time in office].”

As Politico reported, “the administration took a gamble when it asked the court last fall to hear the case more quickly than necessary. That risk appears to have paid off, providing Obama with validation before the November election. But it will also fire up Republicans who plan to campaign on a pledge to repeal the law in Congress.”

The Future, What Future?

The ultimate fate of Obamacare is unclear. If the President loses the election in November, there is a good chance that the Act will be repealed entirely. However, if he is able to win reelection, the plan should begin its implementation in the next few years, not taking into account the various components that have already been put into place.

Without guidance from the public, elected officials are, in some ways, blind behind the wheel of civic duty. Has politics become just a synonym for disagreement? Is there a cure for our divergent ideological viewpoints? Only time will tell.

What is certain, however, is that the debates surrounding the ACA have only increased the polarization both inside the Beltway and from sea to shining sea, too. With the media to fuel the fire, there have been relentless campaigns by both sides to promote or rip apart the legislation. An outsider looking in, though, must find it strange that this issue is just a microcosm of a larger, drearier picture; in other words, this is only a single piece of the jigsaw puzzle that is pugnacious politics.