Showing posts with label Hurdles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hurdles. Show all posts

Sunday, August 18, 2013

Obamacare"s hurdles higher than Medicare"s

Linda Door of Laguna Beach, Ca., protests outside the United States Supreme Court in Washington, March 26, 2012, as the court begins hearing arguments on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama

Political opposition to Obamacare is still as strong as ever. | AP Photo | AP Photo





President Barack Obama says he’s not worried that all the Obamacare fights will kill the law — because people fought the creation of Medicare and Social Security too, and now they’re more popular than ever.


Democrats have always wanted to believe Obamacare would follow the same pattern: Opponents tried to block passage of the new programs, but once they became law, the public saw the benefits and the opposition faded away.







But this time there’s a difference. Political opposition to Obamacare is still as strong as ever, more than three years after it was signed into law.


That means the administration’s task in launching the health care law — the biggest new social program since the creation of Medicare in 1965 — is harder than anything its predecessors had to face.


(PHOTOS: 25 unforgettable Obamacare quotes)


Between now and Oct. 1, the Obama administration has to get ready to enroll millions of people, just as Lyndon Johnson’s administration did during the rollout of Medicare. And it has to put the infrastructure in place and make sure the health care industry is ready to participate, just as Johnson’s people did.


But on top of all that, Obamacare has a huge extra layer of political hurdles LBJ didn’t have to worry about like battling Congress for money, persuading Republican governors and legislatures to go along, and quieting the well-funded outside groups.


Republicans insist that this is what Obama and the Democrats signed up for when they decided to push ahead without Republican votes. “It’s very short-sighted to think you can do something this big on a partisan basis,” said Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas). “At some point, you’re going to need bipartisan support for the implementation.”


Democrats insist that they tried to win GOP support — especially Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, who spent months trying to negotiate a compromise with Senate Republicans — and they wouldn’t bite.


(Also on POLITICO: TOP 5 complaints about Obamacare)


They also say it’s hardly the first time a major health program was created by one party. The Medicare prescription drug program, created under the George W. Bush administration, passed Congress in 2003 almost entirely with Republican votes, including a pre-dawn House vote that was held open for nearly three hours while GOP leaders twisted arms.


And Obama administration officials don’t buy the comparison to either program. The real model for Obamacare, they say, is the Massachusetts health reform law — the one signed by Mitt Romney. It inspired the structure of Obama’s health care law, and it’s now so popular in that state that repeal isn’t even a remote possibility.


But at least one veteran of the launch of Medicare — Joseph Califano, one of LBJ’s top domestic aides at the time — isn’t too surprised with the fallout of the decision to move ahead on Obamacare without GOP support.


Even though LBJ had huge Democratic majorities in 1965, he insisted that “we have to shoot for half the Republican votes, because if we don’t, they’ll drive us crazy — they’ll kill us on appropriations, they’ll kill us with the Republican governors,” recalls Califano, now the founder and chairman emeritus of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. It was a different GOP back then, but LBJ still managed to win half of the House Republicans and nearly half of the Senate Republicans.


(Also on POLITICO: Obama: GOP trying to ‘gum up’ ACA)


“I don’t know if Obama’s problem was the incalcitrance of the Republicans or his inexperience — probably both,” said Califano. But whatever the reason for the failure to get Republican buy-in, he said, “they’ve got a hell of a difficult couple of years ahead.”


One Obama administration official acknowledged that the ongoing Republican resistance is “unprecedented, and it creates new challenges.” But the political mood is very different in the states that are trying to implement it, the official said, and there will be “enormous successes” in the states that give the law a genuine effort — “and there will be many of those,” citing California, Maryland, New York and Nevada.


But former administration officials acknowledge that the Obama administration never anticipated the battles would drag on this long. One said the view within the administration was that, once the Supreme Court upheld the law last year, “it would be a new environment” and the law would become more accepted.


The congressional fights are an enormous problem. Obama needs Congress to drum up money for the Department of Health and Human Services and the Internal Revenue Service for next year. He’s has asked for $ 1.5 billion for staffing and other needs. But the Republicans are facing strong pressure within their ranks — including the high-profile voices of Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz — to cut off the funding even if it means a government shutdown this fall.


(Also on POLITICO: Liberal groups fight anti-Obamacare tour)


But that’s only the beginning of the problems. House Speaker John Boehner has promised to hold more votes to chip away at the law, even after the House has already held 40 votes to roll back some or all of it. And the investigations and hearings will continue in the House, pouncing on everything that goes wrong with the law — including the latest problems with the “data hub” for checking people’s eligibility for coverage, which has had so many delays it’s not clear it will be ready for prime time on Oct. 1.


The data hub, which is supposed to allow real-time checks of an Obamacare customer’s income and other information, is one example of a logistical problem that will get an even harsher spotlight because of the ongoing Republican resistance. A recent report by the HHS inspector general’s office said that because of all the delays, the official security authorization for the hub is now expected on Sept. 30 — one day before enrollment begins.




POLITICO – TOP Stories



Obamacare"s hurdles higher than Medicare"s

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Exclusive: U.S. congressional hurdles lifted on arming Syrian rebels


Free Syrian Army fighters move through a hole in a wall in the northern town of Khan al-Assal, after seizing it July 22, 2013. REUTERS/Hamid Khatib

Free Syrian Army fighters move through a hole in a wall in the northern town of Khan al-Assal, after seizing it July 22, 2013.


Credit: Reuters/Hamid Khatib






WASHINGTON | Mon Jul 22, 2013 9:03pm EDT



WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama will move forward with a plan for the United States to arm the struggling Syrian rebels after some congressional concerns were eased, officials said on Monday.


“We believe we are in a position that the administration can move forward,” House of Representatives Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told Reuters.


The White House announced in June that it would offer military aid to vetted groups of Syrian rebels after two years of balking at directly sending arms to the opposition.


“We have been working with Congress to overcome some of the concerns that they initially had, and we believe that those concerns have been addressed and that we will now be able to proceed,” a source familiar with the administration’s thinking told Reuters on condition of anonymity.


But both Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees had expressed worries that the arms could end up in the hands of Islamist militants in Syria like the Nusra Front, and would not be enough to tip the balance of the civil war against President Bashar al-Assad anyway.


Part of the logjam was broken on July 12 when members of the Senate Intelligence Committee who had questioned the wisdom of arming the insurgents decided behind closed doors to tentatively agree that the administration could go ahead with its plans, but sought updates as the covert effort proceeded.


Now, the House committee has also given at least a cautious go-ahead.


“It is important to note that there are still strong reservations,” Rogers said. “We got a consensus that we could move forward with what the administration’s plans and intentions are in Syria consistent with committee reservations.”


The source familiar with the administration’s thinking said, “The committees were persuaded and we will be able to move forward.”


The timeline was unclear, but supporters of the rebels hope the deliveries of U.S.-provided arms will start in August.


They hope for “a large number of small weapons” such as rifles and basic anti-tank weapons, said Louay Sakka, a co-founder of the Syrian Support Group, which backs the Free Syrian Army fighting Assad.


Committee sessions on arming the rebels are classified and have been held in secret. Senior government figures like Secretary of State John Kerry have briefed lawmakers behind closed doors to persuade them to back the White House’s Syria strategy. Rogers said he still had “very strong concerns” about the plan’s chances of success.


REBELS LAGGING


The mostly Sunni Muslim rebels have been struggling since government forces, helped by Lebanese Hezbollah allies, took the strategic town of Qusair in early June. Backed by warplanes and artillery, Assad is much better armed than the rebels.


Representative Adam Schiff, a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, opposes sending U.S. arms to the rebels.


“It’s too late to affect the outcome with a small amount of arms,” Schiff said. “I think we would have to provide such a massive amount of arms, and additional military support to change the balance on the battlefield, that we would inevitably be drawn deeply into the civil war,” he said.


“And I think we also have to expect that some of the weapons we provide are going to get into the hands of those who would use them against us,” Schiff said.


He said his view is probably a minority one within the intelligence committee – but that for many Americans, after two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is “little appetite for getting involved in a third.”


Obama has been reluctant to intervene in the civil war in Syria, in which more than 100,000 people have died.


“Arms do not make peace,” said Lakhdar Brahimi, the special peace envoy for Syria of the United Nations and the Arab League. “We would like to see the delivery of arms stopped to all sides,” he told reporters in Washington.


He said the United States and Russia both agreed there was no military solution to the Syrian conflict “even if they are delivering weapons in the hope their side is going to win.”


Brahimi said it was possible to find a political solution in efforts to bring together the warring parties for a peace conference in Geneva. “It is extremely difficult to bring (together) people who have been killing one another for two years just by waving a magic wand to a conference like this. It will take time but I hope it will happen.”


Supported by Iran and Russia, Assad has looked increasingly stronger in recent months while the opposition has been fractured.


Clashes between Islamist rebel forces and Kurdish militias spread to a second Syrian province last weekend.


The fighting is further evidence that the 2011 uprising against Assad’s rule has splintered into turf wars that have little to do with ousting him.


(Additional reporting by Lesley Wroughton; Editing by Alistair Bell, Eric Walsh and Lisa Shumaker)






Reuters: Politics



Exclusive: U.S. congressional hurdles lifted on arming Syrian rebels

Exclusive: U.S. congressional hurdles lifted on arming Syrian rebels


Free Syrian Army fighters move through a hole in a wall in the northern town of Khan al-Assal, after seizing it July 22, 2013. REUTERS/Hamid Khatib

Free Syrian Army fighters move through a hole in a wall in the northern town of Khan al-Assal, after seizing it July 22, 2013.


Credit: Reuters/Hamid Khatib






WASHINGTON | Mon Jul 22, 2013 9:03pm EDT



WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama will move forward with a plan for the United States to arm the struggling Syrian rebels after some congressional concerns were eased, officials said on Monday.


“We believe we are in a position that the administration can move forward,” House of Representatives Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told Reuters.


The White House announced in June that it would offer military aid to vetted groups of Syrian rebels after two years of balking at directly sending arms to the opposition.


“We have been working with Congress to overcome some of the concerns that they initially had, and we believe that those concerns have been addressed and that we will now be able to proceed,” a source familiar with the administration’s thinking told Reuters on condition of anonymity.


But both Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees had expressed worries that the arms could end up in the hands of Islamist militants in Syria like the Nusra Front, and would not be enough to tip the balance of the civil war against President Bashar al-Assad anyway.


Part of the logjam was broken on July 12 when members of the Senate Intelligence Committee who had questioned the wisdom of arming the insurgents decided behind closed doors to tentatively agree that the administration could go ahead with its plans, but sought updates as the covert effort proceeded.


Now, the House committee has also given at least a cautious go-ahead.


“It is important to note that there are still strong reservations,” Rogers said. “We got a consensus that we could move forward with what the administration’s plans and intentions are in Syria consistent with committee reservations.”


The source familiar with the administration’s thinking said, “The committees were persuaded and we will be able to move forward.”


The timeline was unclear, but supporters of the rebels hope the deliveries of U.S.-provided arms will start in August.


They hope for “a large number of small weapons” such as rifles and basic anti-tank weapons, said Louay Sakka, a co-founder of the Syrian Support Group, which backs the Free Syrian Army fighting Assad.


Committee sessions on arming the rebels are classified and have been held in secret. Senior government figures like Secretary of State John Kerry have briefed lawmakers behind closed doors to persuade them to back the White House’s Syria strategy. Rogers said he still had “very strong concerns” about the plan’s chances of success.


REBELS LAGGING


The mostly Sunni Muslim rebels have been struggling since government forces, helped by Lebanese Hezbollah allies, took the strategic town of Qusair in early June. Backed by warplanes and artillery, Assad is much better armed than the rebels.


Representative Adam Schiff, a Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, opposes sending U.S. arms to the rebels.


“It’s too late to affect the outcome with a small amount of arms,” Schiff said. “I think we would have to provide such a massive amount of arms, and additional military support to change the balance on the battlefield, that we would inevitably be drawn deeply into the civil war,” he said.


“And I think we also have to expect that some of the weapons we provide are going to get into the hands of those who would use them against us,” Schiff said.


He said his view is probably a minority one within the intelligence committee – but that for many Americans, after two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is “little appetite for getting involved in a third.”


Obama has been reluctant to intervene in the civil war in Syria, in which more than 100,000 people have died.


“Arms do not make peace,” said Lakhdar Brahimi, the special peace envoy for Syria of the United Nations and the Arab League. “We would like to see the delivery of arms stopped to all sides,” he told reporters in Washington.


He said the United States and Russia both agreed there was no military solution to the Syrian conflict “even if they are delivering weapons in the hope their side is going to win.”


Brahimi said it was possible to find a political solution in efforts to bring together the warring parties for a peace conference in Geneva. “It is extremely difficult to bring (together) people who have been killing one another for two years just by waving a magic wand to a conference like this. It will take time but I hope it will happen.”


Supported by Iran and Russia, Assad has looked increasingly stronger in recent months while the opposition has been fractured.


Clashes between Islamist rebel forces and Kurdish militias spread to a second Syrian province last weekend.


The fighting is further evidence that the 2011 uprising against Assad’s rule has splintered into turf wars that have little to do with ousting him.


(Additional reporting by Lesley Wroughton; Editing by Alistair Bell, Eric Walsh and Lisa Shumaker)






Reuters: Politics



Exclusive: U.S. congressional hurdles lifted on arming Syrian rebels