Sen. Chuck Schumer: Democrats Shouldn’t Have Passed Obamacare
Posted on December 23, 2012 by admin
The Senate’s third-ranking Democrat recently stated that his party made a serious mistake in 2010 when they chose to pass the Affordable Care Act through Congress. But the reasoning behind the senator’s statement is not what cynics of the law would expect.
It is important to note that Sen. Schumer (D-N.Y.) supports Obamacare, and believes that its positive effects will continue in the future, but he believes that the Obama administration should have maintained its focus on the struggling economy during the time when it decided to pass the healthcare reform. Schumer says that Democrats had an “opportunity” to build upon the “partial success” of President Obama’s stimulus package. They could have implemented additional programs geared towards the middle class to boost economic activity and support for their party. President Obama and his administration chose to go another direction and focus on healthcare: a matter that Schumer describes as “the wrong problem.”
Seeing as only about five percent of registered voters did not have health insurance in the United States at the time of the healthcare law’s establishment, Sen. Schumer labels the president’s decision to go through with the reform as lacking in “political sense.” He argues that because middle-class Americans likely felt that they were not receiving “enough attention” from the Democratic party, their allegiances wavered.
Even with the New York senator’s qualification and praise of the bill, Schumer is certainly adding fuel to the fire of repeal. Approximately two years until the next presidential election, one can expect conservative officials to continue campaigning on the promise to remove the Affordable Care Act, whether they choose to reform or replace it later. The last thing that the Democratic Party and the Obama administration need is for officials within their ranks, especially high-ranking leaders, to speak out against Obamacare. This is particularly the case when the senator in question is not trying to poke holes in the legislation, and is only arguing that there were more pressing matters to attend to four long years ago.