OBAMACARE AND OBAMASCARE EXPLAINED.

The Affordable Care Law or Obamacare has evoked the most bizarre and incomprehensible political response from the Republicans. Opposition to the Law has bordered on the absurd and grotesque. Notwithstanding the fact that John Boehner, Speaker of the House of Representatives had stated after the 2012 Presidential election, in an interview with Diane Sawyer, that the time had come to accept it and move on, he has since moved to repeal it over 40 times. On the most recent occasion he has also threatened to shut down the Government if Obamacare was not at least delayed for a year. So short of a miracle the Government will be shut down.

The rhetoric accompanying the attack on an Act, that was passed by both houses nearly 4 years ago, withstood a constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court and was a centerpiece of the Obama – Romney election has reached maniacal heights.  Ted Cruz, the Tea Party Poster Child, in his 21-hour filibuster in the Senate against it, besides all the irrelevant drivel he spouted, likened his stand against Obamacare to Churchill’s against the Nazis. Those that supported it were likened to Chamberlain. A Republican State Senator claimed that the Act was worse then the Slave Fugitive Act where escaped slaves to the North were returned to the mercies of their Southern owners while several Republican legislators have labeled it the worse Act ever! Some of the crude adverts already produced by the PACS are distasteful beyond belief – a crude leering Uncle Sam doing a speculum examination on a young lady and a rectal examination on a young man.

OBAMASCARE AND WHY

The opposition to Obamacare has very little to do with the Affordable Care Act and plenty to do with Obama and what he believes in. It is obvious whom is calling the shots – not the Establishment Republicans, Boehner declared himself long ago to Diane Sawyer and the Senate Establishment refused to buy the Tea Party circus as articulated by Ted Cruz. John McCain spelled it out that the Affordable Care Act is the law and that elections have consequences. Anyone who is anybody in the establishment have warned the Republicans not to shut the government, the latest being Romney.

As Jay H. Ell has blogged again and again, unelected megalomaniacs and institutions are running the Republican Party. Joe de Mint of the Heritage Foundation is the Tea Party Godfather that is calling the shots. (Blogs: The Republican Party is Dead, June 2013 and Obamagate – Boomerang, March 2013).  This is the height of hypocrisy as the Heritage Foundation originally supported the program and De Mint supported Romney and stated one of the reasons was that Romney introduced the selfsame program as Governor of Massachusetts. The Koch brothers have been rumored to spend between $60 – 400 million fighting Obamacare.

So Obamacare has to be brought down at any cost even at the expense of ruining the Country’s credit rating and/or shutting down the Government. The public does not fully understand the Act so it is as good an issue as any for the Tea Party to use to take over full control of the Republican Party and then the Country. In fact the Republicans as a whole opposed the plan so that they are in a weakened position to oppose the out of control Tea Party crazies.

Obama, also, has become the poster child of all that is wrong with a “country gone soft”. Instead of getting themselves jobs and pulling themselves up by their bootstraps the Democrat supporters stand in line for food stamps, unemployment payments, disability grants and the like. Now they want subsidized health insurance!

 In Kentucky the Affordable Health Care Act was introduced as a Kentucky state project. The Kentuckians have welcomed it and said it is better than Obamacare! A Fox opinion poll, - who else? – showed that 9% more Americans supported the Affordable Health Care Act than they did Obamacare. Obama, himself, has also quipped that if the Act succeeds it will not be referred to as Obamacare.

THE CURRENT USA HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

The Health Care System in the US is dysfunctional. It uses 1 in every 6 dollars spent at an annual cost of three trillion dollars. It is inefficient in that 50 million citizens are not covered by insurance. The reasons for them being uninsured, include, for example, the fact that their employers do not provide insurance or they are excluded because of preexisting conditions. Three out of four citizens who receive health care do so via their employment, the very poor, from Medicaid, the elderly from Medicare and the Veterans from the Veteran’s Administration.

This mixture of multiple payers, private and public result in the highest cost in the world for the administration of health care. Thirty cents in every dollar goes to the administrative costs – or 1 trillion dollars a year. Medical insurance companies are laws unto themselves excluding those with previous illnesses and excluding services prospectively and retrospectively. The companies are not subject to the monopolies act and there is currently very little if any competition between them. Several of the problems that have beset corporations in general such as obscene overpayments of executives beset them too.

Medical expenses are the commonest reason for bankruptcy in the US. These occur mostly with people on insurance as various maximums and exclusions apply. Every study has shown that every service, procedure or medicine in the US costs 3 – 10 times more than in other first world countries. The health care indicators such as longevity and neonatal death are also worse than in any other first world countries. The fear of litigation leads to endemic over servicing of patients by health care providers and nobody is moving to address that problem.

So it is far to say that in the biggest industry in the US no one is getting their bang for their buck.

THE AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE ACT – OBAMACARE

The Affordable Care Act, (AHCA), is a very complicated and tortuous act and is nearly 2000 pages long. Jay H. Ell will not go into why it is so as that is the way things work in the USA or used to work. It is what it is. It was enacted after nearly a century of Presidents’ attempts to create Universal Health Insurance. These included both Republican and Democratic Presidents starting with Republican Teddy Roosevelt at the turn of the twentieth century ending with Democrat Bill Clinton at the millennium’s end.

It is fair comment to say that the AHCA goes a long way to rectify some of the dysfunction in the system.

Below is a brief summary of some of the key components.

First and foremost it gives an opportunity for the 50 million uninsured to obtain insurance at reasonable, and where applicable, generously subsidized rates. (Remember the very poor are on Medicaid already). There is a penalty for those who do not obtain insurance. Already the rates for insurance that are being quoted are less than those being charged for similar plans. This is because for the first time in history insurance companies are competing for these customers.

Then no insurance company may refuse you on the basis of a pre- existing medical condition. Neither can it drop you in the middle of treatment because you have reached the “maximum”.

Benefits that are already in place include that children between 21 and 26 years of age can be kept on their parents’ insurance plan. This has been particularly helpful to those “children” who are unemployed in the current economic climate and would have to have paid astronomical sums to be insured on an individual basis. Those on Medicare are already receiving assistance in medicine purchase and their costs have been reduced dramatically. Another positive established is that all insurance plans have to include payment of preventive care such as mammograms, pap smears and colonoscopies.

Costs too have decreased by putting certain quality indicators in place in hospitals.

WHY OH WHY IS THERE IN AN ISSUE?

The Tea Party Republican Party fighting this as a life or death issue, on its merits is incomprehensible. Rather they are using this issue to reinforce their takeover of the Republican Party. Their ostensible rationale is that the government is forcing individuals to obtain insurance. Ron Paul, Rand Paul’s daddy, when confronted with the issue as to what Emergency Services should do when someone, who has a life threatening condition, has no insurance. Daddy Paul said that the patient has made a decision and he should not get treatment! Obamacare would fine this patient year after year for not getting insurance but would insist on doctors doing what they have to do.

How this is all going to pan out and the impact it will have on the political scene in the USA will just have to be the subject of another blog. One thing is for certain is that Obama has no locus standi to help mediate in what is really a Republican fight. Another certainty is that he is going to hang tough.

AMERICA AT THE CROSSROADS

For the past few years one of the fiercest fights in American political history has been waged. The stakes are the highest imaginable and they relate to the management and distribution of society’s assets, the regulation of the market place and the very value system by which the USA wishes to interact between it’s citizenry. In short this is a battle about the rights of individuals and the economic philosophies on which this country will be run on. The Tea Party has taken on the existing form of the American Society as defined and accepted by the Democratic Party and the former Republic Party for scores of years.

This war is likely to continue till at least 2016 when the dust settles following that election. As with all conflicts there is confusion as to what is going on as skirmishes are fought that appear to have nothing to do with anything. But the battle lines have been drawn and the warring parties have been defined.

If one wishes to dignify the fight in economic terms it is, on the one hand, between Keynesian and on the other, trickle down economics. Notwithstanding America’s adherence to free market capitalism, Keynesian theory coupled with the distribution of assets has been the basis of its economic policies for living memory.

THE DEMISE OF THE OLD REPUBLICAN PARTY.

(Blog: The Republican Party is Dead, June 2013).

In fact a major battle to create an opposition party to take on the societal status quo is all over bar the shouting. Rather than create a new political party, The Tea Party has taken over the Republican Party as their vehicle to create a new order. Their opposition is the existing Democratic Party and an ever-diminishing number of old Republicans who still understand the politics of the past. The latter even occupy key positions in the Republican Tea Party and are unashamedly being used by the new ultraconservative group to create the aura of unity.

The old style Republicans are at a loss as to how to react. Many are in denial, others periodically criticize some of the more outlandish statements of the Tea Party and a few vow to reinvent the old party in the Primary Elections of 2014 and 2016 by selecting “better” Republican candidates. But that will be too little too late. A few hope that the chief representatives of the Tea Party like Cruz will implode with their off the wall positions and that they won’t be caught in the explosion. Most, however, go along with the Tea Party in the vain hope that they will live to fight another day. (John Boehner, the leader of the House of Representatives, who has totally caved into the Tea Party, is still facing a primary challenge never the less).

THE NEW ORDER – THE TEA PARTY.

In January, 2011, Jay H. Ell blogged the coming out of Tea Party and two short years later in March 2013 he blogged that the takeover was complete. While the differences between the Democrats and the Republicans were always there they have sharpened over the past decade. The differences on policies on taxes, individual rights, societal support to the disadvantaged, market regulation and environment, for example, have always been central to the debate between the two dominant parties. However, there was the inevitable compromise at the end of the day otherwise, as the American Constitution is constructed, nothing would ever get done.

THE CENTRAL ISSUE

In this stage of the history of the USA, following the 2008 Great Recession, 1% of the population own one third of the nation’s wealth. The belief is that these selfsame 1% were responsible for the economic collapse with its subsequent unemployment and loss of homes. The 1% were not only not punished but also profited from the mess. Also the Bush tax cuts, that Obama was barely able to tinker with, are still in place and these favor the wealthy.

The income differences, now, between those in the top income brackets and those at the lower end of the scale are as great as they were before the 1928 Great Depression. The result is that more and more people are on unemployment, require food stamps, need health care insurance, have little if any savings and are in debt.

It is at this stage in the Country’s history that the Tea Party want to do away with all social programs and defund Obamacare let alone rectify the current imbalances of society’s resources. The practical means by which they are currently aiming to do is by not passing the annual Governmental budget, in the House of Representatives, which supports the social services and funds Obamacare. This is not ultimately going to happen because the Democratic dominated Senate will never agree and so unless there will be a compromise  all the Government finances will be shut down.

To summarize the Tea Party are quite willing to bring down the ship for their ideological views and presumably build a new America out of the wreck.

CAN THE TEA PARTY SUCCEED?

It is hard to imagine the Tea Party succeed on the National scene. Remember Romney had a manifesto that was a much-watered down version of the current demands and got soundly beaten. Also they and the Republican Party as a whole have done nothing to reassure the key demographic groups, women, Hispanics, African Americans and the youth that they understand their needs. Their tactic has got to be that those in power are responsible for the current and forthcoming economic worsening and that the electorate will turn to them, the only alternative, in desperation.

Remember the Tea Party is not running as the Tea Party per se they are running as the Republican Party.

In their guise as the Republican Party they have proceeded with the politics of nullification. (Blog: Obama and the New Nullification Politics, August 3, 2013.) In addition to getting rid of existing social programs the objective is to let the Obama administration achieve nothing. Now they are going for broke. They will defund the government, produce chaos and hope against hope that the Obama administration will either cave or get the blame.

The Tea Party’s aim must still be to assist the Republican Party in 2014 takeover the Senate so that they then control the House and the Senate. They believe they can do this and then the ultimate prize is the Presidency in 2016.

TEA PARTY ASSETS

The Tea Party’s biggest asset is unlimited amounts of money. In effect by representing business and money this is not surprising. Their largest benefactors are the Koch Brothers who have a combined wealth of $72 billion dollars. And what better way to spend it then by buying your own government? The Koch’s are spending  $60 million on defunding Obamacare alone.

The Tea Party’s ability to obtain unlimited funds has been assisted by a sympathetic Supreme Court that has equated money with freedom of speech.

The Tea Party is also being assisted by the Republicans in State Legislative moves to restrict the vote of minorities such as the African – Americans and the Latinos.

AT THE END OF THE DAY.

The current crises funding the government will resolve. Even if funding is withheld it will be reinstated after a short while. Obamacare cannot be stopped. Obama, on the stump, is welcoming the challenge. Obamacare is the law and recruitment of uninsured citizens starts on October 1. Jay H Ell does not believe this grandstanding will help the Tea Party but nor does he underestimate the Tea Party and their backers’ resolve to change the face of the American Society. However, history does not favor the Tea Party’s chances. Ultimately the rights of individuals triumph. However, never has there been this imbalance of financial resources backing a determined minority group.

.

PUTIN CAVES ON SYRIA

There is endless punditry over the recent events relating to Syria. Most are critical of Obama’s role in the ongoing saga. Some commentators state that Putin has outmaneuvered him. - Putin should get Obama’s Nobel Peace prize and on and on. Why this bizarre interpretation is the consensus of the pundits is beyond Jay H. Ell’s comprehension.

The situation seems straightforward. Obama makes up his mind, rightly or wrongly, that he is going to bomb Syria and Putin and Assad almost immediately admit the existence of Assad’s chemical arsenal and are ready to give it up if Obama does not strike. Putin also then argues that he is on the side of the angels and foolhardily tries to campaign in the USA against Obama.

Rather than weaken the USA in world politics Jay H. Ell believes that Putin’s reaction has strengthened it aS well as Obama’s within the USA.

 CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING FACTS AND WHERE THEY LEAD.

*Obama announces he is going to bomb Syria. Although he wants Congress’s support his Secretary of State John Kerry makes it quite clear that Obama has the right to go ahead with or without Congresses blessings. Obama states that Syria had crossed the red line in the sand – not only his red line incidentally but that of the whole world community. Chemical weapons have been considered barbaric since World War 1. Even Hitler and Stalin did not use them in open warfare. Obama really has been committed since it has become obvious that Assad used chemical weapons.

*Within days of Obama announcing his plan of action, Putin, who had been openly siding with Assad and providing him with arms and advisors drops his all out support of Assad. He calls for bilateral action with the USA, to whom he had been openly antagonistic towards on the Syrian and every other possible question. Within the space of two days Putin says he is party to an ultimatum that either Syria gives up all its chemical weapons or face the music. Putin is ready to go to UNO Security Council on the issue. Syria is given one week to produce a full inventory of its weapons!

*The whole purpose of this volte farce, Putin explains in an unprecedented op-ed in the New York Times, is that he is a man of peace and that it is warmongering to be bombing the Syrians. So the Russian leader, who has vetoed every possible attempt to involve the Security Council in this Syrian atrocity, is now ostensibly doing all he can to resolve it with the aid of the Security Council short of force.

*Also there is no way Putin could have made these moves without the collusion from Assad otherwise he could be made to look ridiculous after all his grandstanding.

*The inescapable conclusion is that Putin and Assad will do anything to avoid the USA bombing Syria. Kerry sensing this fear belabored the point that force was still on the table.

OBAMA AND PUTIN NOW

Obama conditionally and cautiously welcomed Putin’s moves. He is of the hook. It is now Putin that has to deliver and Obama now knows that Syria and Russia are terrified of air strikes. Also Putin has bolstered Obama’s position in the USA where sentiment was leaning towards no foreign involvement anywhere or anytime. Not only has Obama got the deal force is still on the table if plans go awry.

If Obama were to have to opt now for an air strike he would have the political advantage to be answering Putin’s op-ed in the New York Times. Then if Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, John McCain and the like want to ally themselves with Putin so be it. Putin is recognized for the thug he is in the States. He is a relic of the Cold War who cannot come to terms with the outcome of the collapse of Communism and the USSR. He has been constantly in the news here for his backing of Iran and Syria, his refusal to allow Americans to adopt Russian orphan babies, his protection of American “traitor” Snowden, his attitude towards gays and his locking up of dissidents.

Obama will be recognized as the only international leader to act on humanitarian principle and to back an international resolution against chemical warfare. The rest have either bailed out or their electorate wouldn’t allow punishing the Syrians. Maybe he did deserve that Nobel Peace Prize!

Incidentally no one is happier than Netanyahu at this outcome and his undisguised glee when appearing with Kerry at a combined Press Conference was there for all to see.

WHY?

Putin must have a ton of technology, weaponry, advisors and financial infrastructure that would be vulnerable to a USA air strike to have backed down as he did. If this is indeed so then the Iran, Syrian, Hezbollah, Hamas and Russian axis is pretty brittle. Putin obviously not want to see what he has established in Syria go up in smoke. So he took the lead in selling the diplomatic deal in the hope that that his protégé, Assad, will still beat the rebels without chemical weapons. In all probability however the Syrian war will drag on much like the Iraqi one has.

Also Putin’s miserable empire is highly dependent on Syria being intact. If Syria goes, Iran is weakened and with them Hezbollah and Hamas as well. This is his area of influence and then maybe, even worse for him Kerry/Obama may get something going in the Middle East between Israel and Palestine.

So Putin and Assad decided to cut their losses. The USA could have done to Syria what they did to Kosovo or at least thrown Assad’s administrative and military infrastructure into a shambles. And the reason they caved was Obama’s threat of force. Certainly not because Putin suddenly developed into a statesman who grabbed center stage in order to lead the world to a better place