Home / Congress / What if House Republicans Refused to Fund ObamaCare This Fall?
Print Friendly and PDF

What if House Republicans Refused to Fund ObamaCare This Fall?

Posted on August 14, 2013

Even if Republicans gain the majority after the 2014 elections, they will probably not overcome a filibuster in the Senate to pass an out-and-out repeal.

In fact, the Republicans have not had a 60 vote majority in the Senate since 1911.  The time for defunding ObamaCare is right now, given that the President has already announced he is delaying implementation of the employer mandate for one year.

But if not now, when?

Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) and Representative Steve Stockman (R-TX) are leading the charge in their respective chambers to stop any funding bill from containing money for the implementation of ObamaCare.

One would think that given the national outpouring of support for repealing this law, Republicans (as the opposition party) would jump at this chance.

But most have remained silent.  And some have offered lame arguments for doing nothing or for continuing down the path of passing meaningless bills to repeal ObamaCare — bills they know will never reach the President’s desk.

The following are misstatements put forth by these Republicans, and each one is then answered in turn.


ANSWER: First of all, the government won’t be shut down. Most entitlements will continue. “Essential” functions will continue, under regulations dating back to the Reagan administration.

Republicans can push this even further by proposing a “prioritization” bill comparable to Senator Pat Toomey’s 2011 proposal, which would require Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, air traffic controllers, etc. to be paid, even if there are no appropriations.

Second, every penny of government spending can go forward if ONLY ONE THING HAPPENS: If Obama agrees to suspend for one year, the wildly unpopular, expensive, individual insurance mandate — just as he has already done for the employer mandate.

To recap: Obama will be in the position of shutting down the government for the sole reason that he insists on cramming ObamaCare insurance down the throats of the American people. How is this not a win-win for Republicans?


ANSWER: To the contrary, this strategy has been a political winner for the GOP in the two times they have used it.

The Gingrich shutdown threat of 1995-6 saw GOP poll numbers going up – right up until the point where Gingrich chickened out. Then his numbers plummeted.

Even though Gingrich “blinked,” Republicans kept the House in the following election and gained Senate seats. And the only reason Clinton hung onto the Oval Office is because Republicans nominated a horrific stand-for-nothing distasteful candidate as their standard-bearer.

Clinton was so chastened that he, nevertheless, signed a landmark conservative welfare reform proposal and pushed a balanced budget.

Similarly, in July 2011, when House Republicans credibly threatened to shut down the government over the debt limit, Obama’s polling numbers dropped 10 points – precisely because of that threat.

Even though Obama swept over Mitt Romney in 2012, GOP House members benefited from their intransigence over the debt limit.

Continue Reading on gunowners.org

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

14 thoughts on “What if House Republicans Refused to Fund ObamaCare This Fall?

  1. Texas Chris says:

    GOP is still listening to Rove. Republicans may have done well threatening a shutdown, but ROVE did not. It made his job harder, that being getting Republicans elected. See, Rove is a big-government Republican, and shutting the government down is a small-government Republican position.

  2. “Clinton was so chastened that he…signed a landmark conservative welfare reform proposal and pushed a balanced budget.”

    It should never be forgotten the “balanced” budget Clinton and the Gingrich-misled House hatched was paid for by raiding the Social Security trust fund surpluses that were supposed to cover the Baby-Boomers’ retirement.

    The withholding rates were raised in the 1980’s specifically to build up a surplus for the Boomer generation. Now the coffers are filled with IOU’s that can’t be redeemed.

  3. Rabelrouser says:

    Most Republicans are too afraid of a preceived "political backlash"; because they will be blamed by the "talking points". They have become too sensitive to the political game to the position of being unable to show integrity and intellect to the problems. They are afriad of losing , but yet they offer no strength of conviction in their actions in the house or those who they nominate for any election. So maybe they are just going along hoping that something might happen to make it all better.
    Should they take a more conservative position, one that is uncompromising, they would see that a greater number of the populace would give them the support that they want.
    The people see that the Republicans have lost their backbone, and so,they have lost the peoples trust.
    Sad , because they dont have my trust either.

  4. Redwhiteblu says:

    Probably because most of them do not have any BA@@'S. if they ad any we probably would not be in this predicament today

  5. Heck, the only way I can see we can get rid of OCare is to force ALL to go onto it. Drop the employer mandate and the sick congressional gift reprieve, and so the whole country will be under the effects of this monster and then see how quick it will get changed. The folks will be so PO'd the dems will have to give up or fight another revolution.

  6. sjbbouton says:

    I take issue to your statement "…Obama swept over Mitt Romney in 2012…". What was it? 52%? That's HARDLY a sweep. Now if the GOP can grow a backbone…

  7. "What was it? 52%? " And that was with all the cheat votes! Fix the illegal voting problem and the Republicans may have a better chance.

  8. Actually, the root problem is electronic black-box voting machines with no paper trail to verify WHO was elected. Since 2000, when the election was stolen in a lopsided conflict-of-interest vote by 9 batsuits in the US Supreme Court (instead of by the House of Representatives as the Constitution mandates), we don’t know which elected officials are really legitimate.

    And we have a tipsy Rep. Peter King (R-NY) on tape during the 2004 race saying (even before the polls were closed), “It’s all over but the counting. And we’ll take care of the counting.”

  9. The root problem is voting, and the unreasoned delusion that it will change anything

  10. The congress sould introduce an amendment that would require states to ntroduce counterfeit proof voter IDs which were also the activation code for voting machines. The voting machines should produce a paper ballot which the voter could thn verify and insert into an electronic counting machine. The paper ballots would then be transferred automatically to a srtong box where they would be held for a human recount, which would consist of a Republican recount, a Democrat recount, a recount by a mixed recount committee, and an electronic recount.

  11. We have had illegal voting in this country from it's inception. It's historically unpalatable so very few bother going through the primary sources. It's nothing new, we just hear about it more due to the internet. If Romney had won the last election, I very much doubt anything would be very different. The political system is geared to elect people who are loyal to the current order.

  12. We’ve had dead people voting and ballot boxes go missing in the past, but never have we had privatized electronic voting with proprietary software that no one (not even the elected officials who are supposed to certify the counts) is allowed to see the source code for.

    When voting in most of the 50 states went electronic, there was one proposed system — Accu-Vote — that would have produced a paper trail, but the inventor was killed in a mysterious one-car accident, and the Diebold solution was adopted instead.

    The software is so buggy and easy to hack, it was intentionally written with that in mind. The same company that produces ATM machines that never miss a penny, somehow cannot produce reliable electronic voting machines, obviously wants its machines to be hackable.

  13. excellent point.

    If you invest 12.4% of $42,537/yr (BLS avg wage dec., 2012) – $439.55/month @ 5% compounded (0.40667%/mo) from 18 to 65th birthday (46 years) you would have $941,686 cash that would pay $8,005/mo for 13.5 years (avg age 78.5) – total payback is $1,296,880! That's what SSI should payback.

    SSI pays back avg $1,235/mo & $200,070! (total SSI benefits – widow, disabled, etc was 141.8% with total bene – payback of $283,733). Payback is less than 22% of a real trust fund. Original intent was to be a genuine trust fund – the records were out there. According to most gov clowns, around 2.8 worker deposits are Ponzied out of the system to pay current benefits. "Remember Madoff" needs to be the battle cry of citizens at all "town hall" infomercials!

    Government inflation geometrically devalues the investment, especially when benefits are inflation indexed while investments rapidly rot over a "Ponzi’s lifetime". Ponzi means invested funds are used to pay benefits… a crime everywhere but at the executive-legislative levels of federal government!

    SSI fund was $2.4 trillion Dec., 2012 if memory is correct (bankrupt & paying benefits with deposits) -funds would be well over $100 trillion if 1/2 funded @ workforce levels. Prior 5 yr avg interest reported was appx. 5% – bonds printed by thieves can yield whatever they want them to yield – same effects with counterfeit cash or the payday loan bonds (T-bill) they print if any money is left over after paying benefits. It's worth getting angry, prosecuting, & sending some of the lying rats off to jail, but we have to prosecute & jail Holder & the sneaky counterfeiters first

  14. Rabelrouser says:

    The BEST WAY to kill Obamacare is for the people to have some courage, some back bone and stand firm and say NO!!!
    But the American people have become a cowardly bunch; if it can not be fixed from their computer chair, or just by voting, they just go along.
    The American people are afraid of being punished, because it will take them out of their comfort zone; but the "punishment" of being led like sheep into a life of total control becomes a greater punishment in the long run, and they are too blind to see that.
    As for me, I will stand up, I will say NO, I WILL REFUSE!!
    I know not course others may take ( but I have my suspicions) I chose the course of my actions to speak loudly; even if it should lead to my demise.