Yesterday we mentioned the CNN Jake Tapper interview of Leader Eric Cantor. Tapper continues to repeat a common White House meme about “Junk Plans” as he questions Cantor. Here is the video:
“[00:50] now these plans are being cancelled because they don’t meet the standards of Obamacare, the standards that would allow more / higher quality of quality care the administration says; Better care, covering more things”.
“Is that not a good goal to have fewer of what the Obama administration would call “junk plans”?”
Ergo some of these insurance cancellations are good for the insured, the ObamaCare plan is better for them, and the policy deserves to be cancelled.
Eric Cantor, and just about every politico who is faced with this question, fails consistently to appropriately push back against this framework. A simple one word answer would be the best response, “So?”
If the Obamacare plan is better for the consumer, then let the Obamacare plan be a choice for the consumer.
Put the Obamacare option on the table for the consumer to decide, but let the choice rest with the consumer.
The leftist ideologues present themselves as the party of “pro-choice”. The media is willing to deflect on their behalf, so let their own ideology attack their own position.
What is it about the choice between Obamacare and the people’s existing insurance coverage that frightens the administration? What is there to fear? Why do people need to lose their existing coverage?
The Obamacare argument then shifts to become: the exchange is dependent on their entry.
Once they admit the exchange being dependent on the entry, or that Obamacare cannot exist without the electorate being forced to lose their current insurance coverage, then you bring back the point:
If that dependency argument is true, and ObamaCare success is dependent on people losing their insurance policy options, then why did President Obama and the Democrats tell the American People “if they want to keep their plans they could keep them, period”?
Wash-Rinse-Repeat.