Going back to the shut-down, Cruz and Lee were told to stand down and just let O-care implode. Right? Cruz said something to the effect that it would be outrageous to let the American people suffer just to prove how bad O-care was. The "establishment" view was to let the whole thing implode.
Cruz, Lee and their supporters lost that battle: the Ds would not defund it, or delay it. The Ds also got an unlimited debt ceiling for 5 months. The Ds got everything they wanted.
They also got the roll-out of O-care. Not rolling so smoothly though.
Now D's want the individual mandate delayed. Ostensibly because of the flailing website, which is valid enough; but also because of people finally discovering that they canNOT keep the plans or doctors they liked, and in a majority of cases, spending more for their health coverage.
A month ago, the establishment Rs said O-care should be allowed to implode ... while Cruz et al were saying that was a wrong thing to do to the American citizenry.
One month later, the Ds and Rs are both wanting a delay. The Ds up for re-election in red states, of course, are the most anxious to see it happen. No longer are establishment Rs saying that O-care should e allowed to implode. I'd say the establishment was wrong a month ... Cruz et al were correct that it was irresponsible to punish their constituents with the pain that O-care would bring them.
As I see it, the Rs must vote for a delay ... to help their constituents. They should not be like the Ds were in the shutdown. trying to create the most pain for political purpose. This will probably help the Ds in the mid-terms (depending on how long the delay is). Rs voting FOR delay would be consistent with their position at the outset. Not so for the Ds. Most especially not so for Obama, Reid and every D who voted against delay a month ago. Some of them had an inkling, even then, (Baucus?) that this rollout was going to be disaster. Sebelius surely knew there were going to be big problems.
Meanwhile, I had read that good ole Harry was not going to let such a bill come to the floor of the Senate unless he was sure it would NOT pass. Obama and Reid don't want to delay since then more wheels start coming off the whole vehicle as the whole actuarial basis is changed.
Part of the problem could be that since the insurance companies have already deep sixed those old policies, trying to resurrect them would cause even more confusion and disarray ... which might, indeed, result in the individual mandate being delayed, in total, close to a year, if it is possible to un-do what has already been done & then start over again a few more months down the road.
The dirty, little secret is that when the employer mandate goes into effect, the pain will be even greater. That might be why Obama delayed the employer mandate. Right now the WH can say "it's ONLY 11 million people affected." When the employer mandate hits (lots of those plans will also NOT meet O-care requirements), it will be a heckuva lot more people impacted (estimates of CBO around 96 million). It was easier for the administration to deal with 11 million now, and then deal with the other 85 million AFTER the mid-term elections.
What do you think? Will the individual mandate be delayed? Should it be delayed? Will this whole mess be forgotten by Nov. 2014? Or will the pain continue unabated? Do voters still have faith that this law can be made to work if something positive isn't happening by Nov. 2014? Will anyone still trust anything that the administration says between now and then?