For Obama the SCOTUS ruling on ObamaCare is a single-edge sword
posted at 2:23 pm on March 31, 2012 by Howard Portnoy
By the close of judicial business on Friday, the nine members of the U.S. Supreme Court knew with near certainty the fate of the Affordable Care Act. The rest of us won’t learn what the justices discussed until the end of the current court term in June, when they officially announce their decision.
That hasn’t stopped pundits on both sides of the political spectrum from predicting how a defeat of the individual mandate, which is the beating heart of the legislation, might affect President Obama’s campaign strategy.
In a Washington Post op-ed, former Clinton adviser and pollster Mark Penn lays out two scenarios following a strike-down of the mandate that would lead to an Obama victory in 2012. “In the first scenario,” Penn writes, the president would “launch the political equivalent of a drone strike on the Supreme Court.”
The Obama campaign could paint the court as out of step with the modern world, in which the state needs to help redress the inadequacies of global and national markets. After all, the mandate is about everyone paying their fair share toward health care; it eliminates free-riders from the system.
Recognizing that this appeal would serve to energize only Obama’s extant base, Penn moves on to Plan B, which sounds a lot like the theory advanced last week by James Carville: that the defeat of the individual mandate would remove an albatross from around the administration’s neck. It would also deprive the Republicans of one of their most potent talking points.
The Weekly Standard’s Fred Barnes puts forward an argument that rains on Carville’s parade:
If Obama-care falls, it will be a devastating rebuke to the president. The crown jewel of his presidency will have been repudiated as unconstitutional. His pretensions of uniquely knowing how to get things done in Washington will be shattered. Obama will be a diminished political figure. He will become a lesser president, far from the top ranks where he has envisioned himself.
Barnes also sounds a cautionary note that a Supreme Court affirmation of the law’s constitutionality would permit Obama to “crow that he has succeeded where presidents over the past century failed.”
But there is problem with that assumption that, in fact, arches over the entire conversation. And that is that the law has already been roundly repudiated—by the American people. As Penn concedes in his column, a poll recently conducted by ABC News-Washington Post found that 67% of Americans think the court should toss at the entire law or at least the mandate. A current Real Clear Politics average shows 51% favoring repeal of the law, while only 39.5% favor retaining it.
For Team Obama to score points with voters in the event the law is struck down, they need either to invent a time machine and go back and undo the health care law or to induce mass amnesia. If the court upholds the law’s constitutionality, the Obama campaign faces the equally unpalatable task of persuading the public that the law won’t be as bad as they think once it takes effect. But that’s a public relations coup that they have failed at realizing repreatedly. Why should anyone assume it will work this time around?
If Republicans play their cards right, they will remind voters daily that the choice in November is between their candidate and an incumbent who pushed through one of the least popular law in American history.
Related Articles
- Team Obama on the likely demise of ObamaCare: Be afraid; be very afraid
- Obama was against an individual health care mandate before he was for it (Video)
- The spin doctors handicap the effect of the Supreme Court ruling on the election
- With lawyers like Donald Verrilli, ObamaCare supporters need no enemy
- The dumbest arguments in re SCOTUS’s ObamaCare ruling
- 900-pound gorilla: Obama campaign’s new touchy-feely approach to ObamaCare
- ObamaCare architect: Health insurance premiums will rise, not fall, under law
- Obama: If you oppose me, you’re “scared” and not thinking “clearly”
- New survey: 65% of doctors say healthcare quality will decline under ObamaCare
- Poll: 13% of Americans approve of the health care law as written
Follow me on Twitter or join me at Facebook. You can reach me at howard.portnoy@gmail.com or by posting a comment below.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
You do understand that currently the GOP is putting up as a front runner the only person that will give the choice of our guy who passed obamacare at the state level or Obama right?
Do you really think that is a choice? Mitt or Obama both passed an individual mandate. what a choice.
unseen on March 31, 2012 at 2:35 PM
Pushed it through with not only a super-majority, but also used every dirty trick that 300 years of politicians could conceive of, plus some they couldn’t.
HopeHeFails on March 31, 2012 at 2:35 PM
Do we have to wait until June to recognize the fact that we have completely wasted four years? Four years of gimmicks like cash for clunkers, mortgage gimmicks, and green energy giveaways instead of some intelligent recession recovery policies and recognition of the nation-destroying debt and annual trillion dollar deficits.
parke on March 31, 2012 at 2:42 PM
If the law is upheld, 0bama can finally proceed in total disregard to the Constitution, because the SCOTUS will have shown that it simply doesn’t matter what it says. Anyone who disagrees will have to attend reeducation camp or pay a
taxfeetax.pedestrian on March 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM
@parke -
Do we have to wait until June to recognize the fact that we have completely wasted four years?
+1000
Let’s hope the speech writers for the GOP candidate read what you typed.
Bigurn on March 31, 2012 at 3:01 PM
Massachusetts got the law that they wanted. That’s federalism. Romney is simply an executive that get’s stuff done. He’s not a conservative heart-throb, but no who was running was, so give it up.
pedestrian on March 31, 2012 at 3:05 PM
no, the mandate is about temporary big business insurance company appeasement at first then, primarily, about massive wealth distribution. the whole wreck is based upon some never having to pay “their fair share” or ever being held to being responsible for themselves.
with 1/2 the population paying no federal income tax whatsoever and a health insurance scam aka obamacare set to dump a massive amount of people onto the insurance dole- that’s not quite “every one paying their fair share.”
and how are those exempted from obamacare- like oh congress and those who got willy wonka golden waiver tickets from Comrade sebelius- paying “their fair share” by not participating?
mittens on March 31, 2012 at 3:12 PM
ROFL…..Federalism does not mean the states can trample on individual freedoms but the federal gov can not. So if Mitt was the POTUs instead of Obama and moved to pass Romneycare at the federal level and it passed with bi[partisan support which it would have under a Pres Romney because the dems would not be stu[pid enough to fight the bill that gives them everything they want then that would have been ok in your book right? After all the country would have got the bill it wanted. Both the gop and dems holding hands passing a law to take away individual freedom. but that would be ok in your book. If Obamacare is struck down Romneycare is not long for the world.
unseen on March 31, 2012 at 3:43 PM
For that matter, why do we have to wait past Friday night closing time? Seems like every other damn “secret” is getting outed. Military. Defense, whatever…
How likely is it really that this outcome isn’t already known by lots of folks? Probably just have to keep an eye on health-insurance company stock trading activities by various congress-critters to get a pretty good idea of which way this thing went.
bofh on March 31, 2012 at 3:59 PM
What Fred Barnes said. That would be my #2 reason, #1 being it’s freekiing unconstitutional.
Kissmygrits on March 31, 2012 at 5:56 PM
Seems a lot of people have forgotten last years SOTU speech when President Whines A Lot dissed the Supremes and Alito mouthed the words, that’s not true. There is no love coming from that side of the court for dear leader.
Kissmygrits on March 31, 2012 at 5:59 PM
SC justices are people. They will not forget Sir Arrogance’s mockery of the robed fellas regarding the Citizens United decision. Not only did the justices not have a chance to respond, but it was in front of the entire country and, ONCE AGAIN, Obama was wrong on his interpretation of the ruling. In my greatest fantasy world, 9-0, to defeat Ocrappycare.
hillsoftx on March 31, 2012 at 8:56 PM
hopefully the gop will follow your advice HP
cmsinaz on April 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM