The 112th Congress is off to a roaring start, now that the remaining two Republicans have finally been sworn in (or something like it). So how should we evaluate the work that the new Congress is doing? Megan McArdle's budget advice to legislators provides a nice standard for judging whether the new Congress is doing its job: We need politicians who think about these things the way a financially sound family thinks about their budget. First, [sic] they prioritize the absolute essentials: food, shelter, transportation, utilities. Then they think about everything else in the context of building a sustainable overall budget--where the first priority is making sure that the whole budget balances, and works together. No matter how nice things like music lessons or restaurant meals may be, they are subordinate to the need to keep spending sustainable.
Is the 112th Congress approaching their budget in a way commensurate with the principles of a financially strapped family? A family looks at their estimated income and recorded expenses in an attempt to project a reasonable fiscal path into the future. This is actually pretty easy for legislators to do because they have an agency which does this for them. Non-political professionals at the Congressional Budget Office provide this analysis to politicians whenever a bill is proposed.
Instead of acting like our model family, Congressional Republicans are simply ignoring the CBO report, attacking the office for doing its job. In John Boehner's words, "I simply do not believe that [repeal]... will add to the deficit." If he were to read the report, however, he might come to a different conclusion. The GOP doesn't want to acknowledge that the first substantive bill they will introduce in the House would raise the federal deficit by $770 billion so they are attempting to kill the messenger. Republicans have routinely attacked "the reality based community" over the past decade when Republican ideology is contradicted by evidence. And I'm sure that they will continue to do so. Don't expect much respect for the analysis that the Obamacare repeal would kill millions of jobs.
Taking in evidence and trusting expert analysis is a prerequisite of creating a budet for a family or the country. That is what parents do when they make and follow family budgets. The Republicans are acting instead like teenagers. If they're not going to take their responsibilities seriously, it may be time to ground them.
The headline says it all, at least as far as the political elite and policy wonks are concerned. But what exactly does the GOP plan to overturn the 2008 electoral mandate for health reform mean?
Off the top of my head: the people who vote for this bill want to take away vouchers from millions of Americans to make health insurance affordable. They want to let health insurance companies refuse to insure Americans with preexisting conditions, many of whom would be healthy and productive members of society if they had access to health insurance. Republicans want to force people to have only one health insurance option in their market, granting monopolies to HMOs. Those are things that everyone should care about (and be against, those who own enough HMO stocks to balance out insurance premium increases excepted). Oh- I forgot, and defunding the implementation of the Affordable Care Act will make it less likely that insurance companies will stop raising their premiums to enlarge already sky-high profits.
For social Republican voters, there's the fact that Republicans will be voting to allow federal funding for abortions by repealing the Stupak amendment. Forcing more employees onto employer-provided plans will also inhibit hiring and slow job growth.
So if you were a Democratic strategist, which message would you stick to in order to ensure that it survived a few news cycles? I would pick the "Takes millions of dollars out of the pockets of American families that would pay for health insurance" angle. It matches the recent GOP tax cuts for millionaires in showing that Republicans want to tax the poor in order to pay for the wealthy's excesses. Oh- and while we're at it, bring on financial reform repeal, where the GOP will be voting for more bonuses for Wall Street.
A somewhat galling narrative is being repeated around Washington pundit circles these days: Americans want to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The animosity towards the bill is bringing down Obama's popularity and strengthening the Republicans hand. Not only is this story not supported by polling evidence, it is directly contradicted by all polling on the matter.
An typical example surfaces in Michael Barone's piece "Even after shellacking, 2012 looks OK for Obama:"Working against Obama still will be substantive issues. Most Americans want to repeal Obamacare; he wants to keep it. Most voters rejected his vast expansion of the size and scope of government; he still thinks it's a good idea.
This is a pretty big claim: most Americans want to repeal the Affordable Care Act? It's also easily testable, and one which media organizations have been checking since the bill was signed into law.
