This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/17/us/politics/on-politics-lisa-lerer-republicans-obamacare.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
On Politics With Lisa Lerer: Republicans Got Their Health Care Wish. It Backfired. On Politics With Lisa Lerer: Republicans Got Their Health Care Wish. It Backfired.
(about 17 hours later)
Hi. Welcome to On Politics, your guide to the day in national politics. I’m Lisa Lerer, your host.Hi. Welcome to On Politics, your guide to the day in national politics. I’m Lisa Lerer, your host.
[Get On Politics delivered to your inbox.]
For eight years, Republicans dreamed of repealing the Affordable Care Act.For eight years, Republicans dreamed of repealing the Affordable Care Act.
Now, they’re finding that eliminating the health care law may actually be more like their version of the nightmare before Christmas.Now, they’re finding that eliminating the health care law may actually be more like their version of the nightmare before Christmas.
A ruling Friday by a federal judge in Texas striking down the entire law has forced Republicans into yet another difficult moment of confrontation, after an election season spent fending off a barrage of Democratic attacks over their former opposition to the law’s more popular provisions.A ruling Friday by a federal judge in Texas striking down the entire law has forced Republicans into yet another difficult moment of confrontation, after an election season spent fending off a barrage of Democratic attacks over their former opposition to the law’s more popular provisions.
Already, the ruling has injected new pressure into the races of three Republicans running for governor in Louisiana, Mississippi and Kentucky next year. And Democrats hope they can keep up the drumbeat of attacks well into 2020, seeing the decision as a potent combination of two issues that they argue play well with the suburban women and blue-collar voters who could be crucial in the presidential race: protecting the health care law and attacking “activist” judges.Already, the ruling has injected new pressure into the races of three Republicans running for governor in Louisiana, Mississippi and Kentucky next year. And Democrats hope they can keep up the drumbeat of attacks well into 2020, seeing the decision as a potent combination of two issues that they argue play well with the suburban women and blue-collar voters who could be crucial in the presidential race: protecting the health care law and attacking “activist” judges.
Andy Beshear, the Democratic attorney general of Kentucky challenging Gov. Matt Bevin, promised to take a “more vocal” role in a multistate lawsuit opposing the health care ruling, calling it a “matter of life and death.” Mr. Bevin, a Republican, shot back, accusing the man he calls “little Andy” of joining the suit for personal gain.Andy Beshear, the Democratic attorney general of Kentucky challenging Gov. Matt Bevin, promised to take a “more vocal” role in a multistate lawsuit opposing the health care ruling, calling it a “matter of life and death.” Mr. Bevin, a Republican, shot back, accusing the man he calls “little Andy” of joining the suit for personal gain.
“Little Andy, he never sues on behalf of the people of Kentucky. He does it on behalf of his own political career, so anything he would do in response has nothing to do with what’s best for Kentucky,” Mr. Bevin said in an interview with a local television station.“Little Andy, he never sues on behalf of the people of Kentucky. He does it on behalf of his own political career, so anything he would do in response has nothing to do with what’s best for Kentucky,” Mr. Bevin said in an interview with a local television station.
During the final weeks of the midterm campaign, President Trump and Republican candidates promised to protect elements of the law, even as the administration backed a lawsuit brought against it. That lawsuit led to Friday’s decision — and, for Republicans, a new round of their political two-step on the issue.During the final weeks of the midterm campaign, President Trump and Republican candidates promised to protect elements of the law, even as the administration backed a lawsuit brought against it. That lawsuit led to Friday’s decision — and, for Republicans, a new round of their political two-step on the issue.
In Washington, Democratic operatives are already thinking about how to use the ruling to undermine Republicans in the Senate. The first political advertisement focused on the ruling, released online Monday night by Protect Our Care, a group dedicated to preserving the Affordable Care Act, calls the decision a “disaster for American health care.”In Washington, Democratic operatives are already thinking about how to use the ruling to undermine Republicans in the Senate. The first political advertisement focused on the ruling, released online Monday night by Protect Our Care, a group dedicated to preserving the Affordable Care Act, calls the decision a “disaster for American health care.”
Even more dangerous for Republicans is the possibility that if the ruling reaches the Supreme Court, arguments could happen during the 2020 spring term — right in the midst of the general election.Even more dangerous for Republicans is the possibility that if the ruling reaches the Supreme Court, arguments could happen during the 2020 spring term — right in the midst of the general election.
“Trump’s only path to re-election is winning the very voters who are harmed the most by his lawsuit overturning health care,” said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist who worked for several progressive groups that opposed the lawsuit. “You think you put a Band-Aid on the issue, and then the ruling rips the Band-Aid off and jabs it with a hot poker.”“Trump’s only path to re-election is winning the very voters who are harmed the most by his lawsuit overturning health care,” said Jesse Ferguson, a Democratic strategist who worked for several progressive groups that opposed the lawsuit. “You think you put a Band-Aid on the issue, and then the ruling rips the Band-Aid off and jabs it with a hot poker.”
The essential problem for the G.O.P. is that provisions of the law protecting millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions have grown increasingly popular since its passage in 2010. Thirty-six states have voted to expand Medicaid under the law, with three red states — Idaho, Nebraska and Utah — approving ballot measures last month to cover hundreds of thousands more low-income people.The essential problem for the G.O.P. is that provisions of the law protecting millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions have grown increasingly popular since its passage in 2010. Thirty-six states have voted to expand Medicaid under the law, with three red states — Idaho, Nebraska and Utah — approving ballot measures last month to cover hundreds of thousands more low-income people.
Republicans are trying to cast this as a golden opportunity to rework the law. “We have a chance, working with the Democrats, to deliver great HealthCare! A confirming Supreme Court Decision will lead to GREAT HealthCare results for Americans!” Mr. Trump tweeted on Monday morning.Republicans are trying to cast this as a golden opportunity to rework the law. “We have a chance, working with the Democrats, to deliver great HealthCare! A confirming Supreme Court Decision will lead to GREAT HealthCare results for Americans!” Mr. Trump tweeted on Monday morning.
But there’s no indication that Republicans will be able to bridge any of the divides that prevented passage of previous efforts to overhaul the law, particularly now that they face the added political challenge of a Democratic-controlled House.But there’s no indication that Republicans will be able to bridge any of the divides that prevented passage of previous efforts to overhaul the law, particularly now that they face the added political challenge of a Democratic-controlled House.
“We’ve done this play before,” said Thomas P. Miller, a lawyer and health economist at the American Enterprise Institute and a critic of the law. “Republicans can talk about working on legislation, but they are looking for exit doors. That’s where most of them are.”“We’ve done this play before,” said Thomas P. Miller, a lawyer and health economist at the American Enterprise Institute and a critic of the law. “Republicans can talk about working on legislation, but they are looking for exit doors. That’s where most of them are.”
But the decision will put new pressures on Democrats, as well. The continued threats to the health care law pushed Democrats to the left, expanding calls for a single-payer “Medicare-for-all” plan. Nearly all the serious Democratic contenders for president in 2020 already support such a system.But the decision will put new pressures on Democrats, as well. The continued threats to the health care law pushed Democrats to the left, expanding calls for a single-payer “Medicare-for-all” plan. Nearly all the serious Democratic contenders for president in 2020 already support such a system.
Some progressive activists see the ruling as an opportunity to push their party into a more aggressive stance against all of Mr. Trump’s judicial nominees.Some progressive activists see the ruling as an opportunity to push their party into a more aggressive stance against all of Mr. Trump’s judicial nominees.
“Part of the message we want to send to Democrats is that this radical decision is a prime example why you can’t let your guard down,” said Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, a liberal judicial advocacy group. “More Democrats are going to have unclean hands because they looked the other way or helped give consent to allow more and more of Donald Trump’s judges to get through the pipeline.”“Part of the message we want to send to Democrats is that this radical decision is a prime example why you can’t let your guard down,” said Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, a liberal judicial advocacy group. “More Democrats are going to have unclean hands because they looked the other way or helped give consent to allow more and more of Donald Trump’s judges to get through the pipeline.”
[Sign up here to get On Politics in your inbox every evening.]
________________________________________
It’s too early for 2020 polls. We’ve explained this before: At this point, with 23 months to go until the election and almost no one officially running, they’re basically a measure of name recognition. (For proof, take a look at what the 2016 Republican polling looked like four years ago. Jeb!) But that hasn’t stopped people from conducting those polls. If you must peek, here’s the latest one, from CNN. But don’t say we didn’t warn you!It’s too early for 2020 polls. We’ve explained this before: At this point, with 23 months to go until the election and almost no one officially running, they’re basically a measure of name recognition. (For proof, take a look at what the 2016 Republican polling looked like four years ago. Jeb!) But that hasn’t stopped people from conducting those polls. If you must peek, here’s the latest one, from CNN. But don’t say we didn’t warn you!
Here’s what else is going on in the way-too-early race for president:Here’s what else is going on in the way-too-early race for president:
• Mayor Pete announced today that he won’t seek a third term — a move that’s likely a precursor for a presidential bid. Who’s “Mayor Pete,” you ask? He’s Pete Buttigieg, the 30-something mayor of South Bend, Ind., who dreams of a slightly bigger office. This profile can help catch you up.• Mayor Pete announced today that he won’t seek a third term — a move that’s likely a precursor for a presidential bid. Who’s “Mayor Pete,” you ask? He’s Pete Buttigieg, the 30-something mayor of South Bend, Ind., who dreams of a slightly bigger office. This profile can help catch you up.
• “I’m heterosexual.” The Philadelphia Inquirer delves into Senator Cory Booker’s bachelorhood (do we still use that word?). Fun fact: America hasn’t elected an unmarried president since 1884. Want more on Mr. Booker? The Atlantic has an interview.• “I’m heterosexual.” The Philadelphia Inquirer delves into Senator Cory Booker’s bachelorhood (do we still use that word?). Fun fact: America hasn’t elected an unmarried president since 1884. Want more on Mr. Booker? The Atlantic has an interview.
• Buzzfeed gives us a primer on Tulsi Gabbard, the congresswoman from Hawaii who both rebuked the Democratic National Committee to back Bernie Sanders in 2016 and was considered for a cabinet position in the Trump administration.• Buzzfeed gives us a primer on Tulsi Gabbard, the congresswoman from Hawaii who both rebuked the Democratic National Committee to back Bernie Sanders in 2016 and was considered for a cabinet position in the Trump administration.
• What do Mr. Booker, Kamala Harris and Sherrod Brown have in common? They’re all senators. They’re all considering runs in 2020. And they all have plans to steer a whole lot of money to lower- and middle-class families, NBC reports.• What do Mr. Booker, Kamala Harris and Sherrod Brown have in common? They’re all senators. They’re all considering runs in 2020. And they all have plans to steer a whole lot of money to lower- and middle-class families, NBC reports.
________________________________________
• A new report by the Senate Intelligence Committee shows the Russian influence campaign during the 2016 election targeted African-Americans, tried to suppress turnout among Democratic voters and was all over the ’Gram.• A new report by the Senate Intelligence Committee shows the Russian influence campaign during the 2016 election targeted African-Americans, tried to suppress turnout among Democratic voters and was all over the ’Gram.
• We wrote about the Brooklyn mom who had her baby ripped out from her arms by the police. Hear Jazmine Headley’s story.• We wrote about the Brooklyn mom who had her baby ripped out from her arms by the police. Hear Jazmine Headley’s story.
• In Woody Allen’s “Manhattan,” his character has an affair with a 17-year-old girl. Now, a woman has come forward who says her relationship with the director inspired the movie — and that she was actually 16 at the time.• In Woody Allen’s “Manhattan,” his character has an affair with a 17-year-old girl. Now, a woman has come forward who says her relationship with the director inspired the movie — and that she was actually 16 at the time.
________________________________________
It’s National Maple Syrup Day! What’s the weirdest food you put syrup on? Mine’s chili. No judging.It’s National Maple Syrup Day! What’s the weirdest food you put syrup on? Mine’s chili. No judging.
__________________________________________
Were you forwarded this newsletter? Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox.Were you forwarded this newsletter? Subscribe here to get it delivered to your inbox.
Thanks for reading. Politics is more than what goes on inside the White House. On Politics brings you the people, issues and ideas reshaping our world.Thanks for reading. Politics is more than what goes on inside the White House. On Politics brings you the people, issues and ideas reshaping our world.
Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com.