Wednesday, September 10, 2014

"Politically, Obamacare Isn't About Healthcare," National Journal

Alan: Obamacare represents inevitable transition from the core conservative belief that "responsible people take care of themselves" to the realization that an appropriate role of government is to provide healthcare as a human right, no longer treating it as a pay-to-play benefit for people who believe others "deserve to die for their sins."

When this theo-philosophical "corner is turned," the cornerstone of The Republican Party will no longer support its ideological superstructure. The issue is that fundamental.

In a larger sense, this epistemological transition in our conception of healthcare represents an end to the Protestant understanding that "justification" derives from an individual's "personal belief relationship" with God and not from overarching social-communitarian concerns. (During the 2008 presidential campaign, recall Republican disdain for Obama's work as a "community organizer.")

In brief, "Rugged Individualism" is exiting the world stage, replaced by growing recognition that goodness AND efficiency are rooted in The Common Good, and will no longer remain private domains of "virtuous" individuals (and individual families) which do "the right thing" by taking care of themselves, only themselves... and, by extension, those individuals who proclaim the required credos to make them members of the same "belief clan."

"Liberalism: Satanic Rebellion Against God?" (The Thinking Housewife)

http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/11/liberalism-satanic-rebellion-against-god.html

The "fly in this ointment" has always been conservatism's recognition of the collective need to repel foreign threats by universally subscribed military action. Belief in this "exceptional need" for universal taxation and universal participation is now being extended to the entire Body Politic.

***

The Hard Central Fact Of Contemporary Conservatism

The hard, central "fact" of contemporary "conservatism" is its insistence on a socio-economic threshold above which people deserve government assistance, and below which people deserve to die.

The sooner the better.

Unless conservatives are showing n'er-do-wells The Door of Doom, they just don't "feel right."

To allay this chthonic anxiety, they resort to Human Sacrifice, hoping that spilled blood will placate "the angry gods," including the one they've made of themselves. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/09/harvard-study-45000-americans-die.html

Having poked their eyes out, they fail to see that self-generated wrath creates "the gods" who hold them thrall. http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-hard-central-fact-of-contemporary.html

Almost "to a man," contemporary "conservatives" have apotheosized themselves and now -- sitting on God's usurped throne -- are rabid to pass Final Judgment.

Self-proclaimed Christians, eager to thrust "the undeserving" through The Gates of Hell, are the very people most likely to cross its threshold.

Remarkably, none of them are tempted to believe this.

Politically, Obamacare Isn't About Health Care

Partisanship, not personal experience, seems to guide public approval of the law.

BY SAM BAKER

Obamacare has taken on a political life of its own, largely separate from the complex series of health care policies it actually comprises.

The health care law has essentially become a proxy for the president who signed it—voters' approval or disapproval of the Affordable Care Act is largely a reflection of how they feel about President Obama, rather than what they think the health care law has or hasn't done.

Democrats hoped for years that Obamacare would become less of an abstraction once its biggest benefits kicked in. That doesn't appear to be happening, if the Kaiser Family Foundation's latest tracking poll is any guide. Partisanship is much better than personal experience at predicting whether voters will approve or disapprove of the health care law.

Kaiser asked registered voters how they would respond if a candidate supported Obama, and if a candidate voted for the Affordable Care Act. The breakdowns are almost identical: 72 percent of Republicans would be less likely to vote for a candidate because he or she voted for Obamacare; 83 percent are less likely to vote for someone who supports Obama.

Conversely, 52 percent of Democrats said they'd be more likely to support a candidate who supports Obama, and 53 percent said they'd be more likely to support someone who supports Obamacare.

This helps explain why public approval of the health care law never seems to change: It's a party-ID issue, not one about a particular set of health care policies. Republicans are also more likely to continue to support repeal and less likely to say candidates should move on to other issues.

But while both parties are dug in about the politics of the law, a majority of voters in the Kaiser survey—including 50 percent of Republicans—said the law has not affected them personally at all.

Among those who say they have been affected, politics still reigns: Republicans overwhelmingly said they've been hurt, while more Democrats said they've been helped. Just 3 percent of Republicans said they've been helped by Obamacare, and just 10 percent of Democrats said they've been hurt.

This article appears in the September 10, 2014 edition of NJ Daily.