TheDC’s Jamie Weinstein: Obama can’t win politically with health care ruling

Photo of Jamie Weinstein
Jamie Weinstein
Senior Editor
  • See All Articles
  • Send Email
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Bio

      Jamie Weinstein

      Jamie Weinstein is Senior Editor of The Daily Caller. His work has appeared in The Weekly Standard, the New York Daily News and The Washington Examiner, among many other publications. He also worked as the Collegiate Network Journalism Fellow at Roll Call Newspaper and is the winner of the 2011 "Funniest Celebrity in Washington" contest. A regular on Fox News and other cable news outlets, Weinstein received a master’s degree in the history of international relations from the London School of Economics in 2009 and a bachelor's degree in history and government from Cornell University in 2006. He is the author of the political satire, "The Lizard King: The Shocking Inside Account of Obama's True Intergalactic Ambitions by an Anonymous White House Staffer."

The Supreme Court is expected to rule this week on President Obama’s health care law. But unfortunately for the president, there are no good political outcomes for him — just varying degrees of bad ones.

Obama hopes the Supremes, who may rule as early as Monday, will uphold his entire health care law. This would undoubtedly be the best political outcome for him, but it still isn’t a pleasant one.

Fairly or unfairly, his health care law — his signature domestic achievement — remains significantly unpopular. The latest AP/GfK poll showed that only 33 percent of Americans support the plan while 47 percent oppose it.

So in the best-case scenario for the president, he is left with an intact law that remains difficult to campaign on since so many Americans aren’t particularly enthused with it. Republicans would also be able to continue to use the unpopular law to their advantage by campaigning against it and charging that Obama wasted too much time and effort (and political capital) — when the economy was in dire straights — ramming it through.

But many legal analysts think it is unlikely President Obama will face this bad outcome. He is more likely to face an even worse one.

A poll of 56 attorneys who formerly clerked for Supreme Court justices revealed that 57 percent of them believe that at minimum, the law’s individual mandate provision will be ruled unconstitutional.

But if the Supreme Court invalidates the individual mandate while leaving the rest of the law alone, Obamacare would be unworkable financially without something to replace the mandate’s function. Even House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has admitted as much.

Insurance companies would incur the costs associated with covering those with preexisting conditions, but without the offsetting income from forcing healthy people to purchase coverage. Americans could also wait until they become sick to buy insurance without any real penalty. This defeats the entire purpose of insurance. Premiums would surely go up for everyone.

The Supreme Court could also rule to invalidate the mandate and other aspects of the law, like the preexisting conditions provision, while not striking down the law entirely. The Obama administration’s lawyer suggested during oral arguments before the court that the justices should do so if the individual mandate should fall.

But the law would then become a shadow of its former self. And the political fallout for the president would be immense, especially if Mitt Romney and the GOP framed the result with appropriate forethought.

Some argue that Obama could benefit if this scenario should play out. The most detested part of his plan — the mandate — would be harder for Republicans to use as a political bludgeon if the Supreme Court nixes it. This misses the larger picture.