Jay Leno pushed Mitt Romney last night “to explain what he would offer Americans with pre-existing medical conditions so that they might retain their coverage, perhaps the most popular provision of the president’s health care law,” NBC News reports.
 
Romney: “People with pre-existing conditions, as long as they have been insured before, they are going to be able to continue to have insurance.”
 
Leno: “Suppose they haven’t been insured.”
 
Romney: “If they are 45 years old and they show up and say I want insurance because I have heart disease, it’s like, ‘Hey guys. We can’t play the game like that. You’ve got to get insurance when you are well and then if you get ill, you are going to be covered.'”

Though Republicans are hoping the U.S. Supreme Court declares President Obama’s health care law unconstitutional, David Frum points out the GOP has no alternative and says they will be punished for it by voters.

“Republicans will need a Plan B. Unfortunately, they wasted the past three years that might have developed one. If the Supreme Court doesn’t rescue them from themselves, they’ll be heading into this election season arguing, in effect, Our plan is to take away the government-mandated insurance of millions of people under age 65, and replace it with nothing. And we’re doing this so as to better protect the government-mandated insurance of people over 65 — until we begin to phase out that insurance, too, for everybody now under 55.”

James Carville told CNN a Supreme Court ruling invalidating President Obama’s health care law may not be such a bad thing — at least politically.

Said Carville: “I think this will be the best thing that has ever happened to the Democratic Party.”

He added: “Then the Republican Party will own the healthcare system for the foreseeable future. And I really believe that. That is not spin.”

“This was a train wreck for the Obama administration. This law looks like
it’s going to be struck down. All of the
predictions including mine that the justices would not have a problem
with this law were wrong.”

— Jeffrey Toobin, in an interview on CNN, on the tough questions by the Supreme Court over the health insurance mandate.

Toobin, author of The Nine, is considered a leading authority on the current court.

“With the fate of President Obama’s health care law hanging in the balance at the Supreme Court on Tuesday, a lawyer for the administration faced a barrage of skeptical questions from four of the court’s more conservative justices,” the New York Times reports.

Wall Street Journal: “The most worrisome remarks for the plaintiffs–the side arguing against the Obama health law–came from Justice Kennedy, who wavered over the claim that when it came to health care, a bright line could be drawn between those engaged in commerce by buying insurance and whose wholly outside the market by declining to do so.”

SCOTUSblog: “If Justice Anthony M. Kennedy can locate a limiting principle in the federal government’s defense of the new individual health insurance mandate, or can think of one on his own, the mandate may well survive. If he does, he may take Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and a majority along with him. But if he does not, the mandate is gone.”

First Read: “Yesterday’s oral arguments were simply the opening act in the Supreme Court’s consideration of President Obama’s signature health-care law. But today’s discussion — over whether or not the individual mandate to purchase health insurance is constitutional — is the main event. And there’s plenty of irony (and even hypocrisy) on this issue. After all, it was then-candidate Barack Obama who railed against the individual mandate, which was supported by Hillary Clinton. What’s more, the individual mandate was once a conservative-leaning idea (championed by the Heritage Foundation, Newt Gingrich and, yes, Mitt Romney).”

“The final bit of irony: Only a small percentage of the public would even be subject to the individual mandate, if it’s found to be constitutional. A new Urban Institute study finds, per Huffington Post, that 98% of Americans ‘would either be exempt from the mandate — because of employer coverage, public health insurance or low income — or given subsidies to comply.’ So there you have it, folks: The central issue before the Supreme Court was once opposed by Obama, supported by conservatives and Republicans, and won’t even affect most Americans.”

Ryan Lizza has the memos that show exactly when President Obama changed his mind about the individual health insurance mandate.

After President Obama spent months fighting back against opponents’ use
of the term “Obamacare” as a pejorative for his health care reform law,
the President and his team have begun to embrace the term in a reversal
that is no accident, reports The Fix.

“What
the White House and the Obama reelection team in Chicago clearly
believe is that the Supreme Court case amounts to the opening of a new
front of the message wars surrounding the health care law. And, if they
lost the first fight because they played too much defense, now they are
doing their damnedest to get on offense — early and often… Embracing
the term ‘Obamacare’ is a recognition that the president owns the law
politically-speaking no matter what the court decides. That reality
means he must re-define ‘Obamacare’ in the eyes (or, more accurately,
ears) of the public. ‘Obamacare’ currently stands for everything people
don’t like about the law. The White House has to make it stand for all
the good things in the law.”

The campaign even launched a “I like Obamacare” Facebook page.

“In taking up President Barack Obama’s health overhaul Monday, the
Supreme Court wades into an issue that not only could sway this fall’s
elections but also could help define for generations what Congress is
and isn’t entitled to do,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

First Read: “So, that’s all, just the fate of the president’s re-election and the
limits on Congressional power, but beyond that, nothing major. “

A ruling from the court is expected in late June.

As the Supreme Court takes up President Obama’s health care plan today, a new CBS News/New York Times poll shows 47% of Americans disapprove of the law, including 30% who strongly disapprove. Just 36% of those questioned said they support the law either somewhat or strongly.

Ezra Klein notes the court hearing “will last six hours and stretch over three days, the longest arguments in 45 years. One reason these oral arguments will last so long has to do with the variety of the topics that the justices will address. The Court won’t consider the Affordable Care Act as one single issue, but rather has broken the case into four, separate issues.”

National Journal reports “a survey of legal insiders released Monday morning found a widespread
expectation that the Court would uphold the central pillars of the law.”

“Well, now, it’s becoming a big f-ing mess for the Democratic Party and the country as a whole.”

— Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), in a CNN interview, alluding to Vice President Joe Biden’s famous comment when President Obama signed his landmark health care law two years ago.

First Read: “Two years ago today, surrounded by legislators and cameras, President Obama signed the health care act into law. Today, there won’t be a commemoration but the real action is NEXT week. The fate of the president’s signature legislation will be in the hands of the Supreme Court, which begins oral arguments in the case Monday. The country remains split to slightly more unfavorable on the law, and how the Supreme Court will decide is anybody’s guess.”

“But it’s clear whatever the court decides in June could have a big impact on the presidential race. There are a lot of different ways to slice it and speculate what the various potential outcomes could mean, but no one’s EXACTLY sure how it will all play out. Certainly, if the mandate is struck down, that will be a major black mark for the president. Anything other than it being upheld is bad for the president. It’s simple: The court upholds it, it’s good for the president. If it doesn’t, it’s bad for him.”

President Obama will not recognize the two-year anniversary of his signing of the health care law — “which takes place days before the Supreme Court offers a decision on the constitutionality of his signature legislative achievement,” The Hill reports.

“Senior administration officials said on Tuesday that Obama will not be offering a vigorous public defense of the law, holding events or even making public remarks in the lead-up to the Supreme Court case. Obama will instead leave arguments to the Justice Department, which begins defending the law on Monday.  Likewise, Obama is not expected to hold an event around the two-year anniversary on Friday, said officials who labeled it a faux milestone and off the radar of most Americans.”

“Madam, trying to have a conversation with you would be like trying to argue with a dining room table. I have no interest in doing it.”

— Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA), at a town hall meeting on health care reform in August 2009.

[Read more…]

On the same day that the Supreme Court granted review of President
Obama’s health care reform law over the constitutionality of the mandate
that all Americans have health insurance, a new CNN/Opinion Research poll finds Americans approving of the provision, a marked improvement since June.

Key
findings: “According to the poll, 52% of Americans favor mandatory
health insurance, up from 44% in June. The survey indicates that 47%
oppose the health insurance mandate, down from 54% in early summer.”

Paul Krugman:
“Since that’s the core of health reform, this basically means that
proponents are slowly winning the argument. If we make it to actual full
implementation, this reform will be irreversible.”

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a challenge to President Obama’s sweeping health care reform law, CNN reports.

Oral arguments will likely be held in late February or March, with a ruling by June.

SCOTUS Blog has the details.

President Obama’s signature healthcare law got a boost when an appeals court agreed with a lower court that dismissed a challenge and found the law’s mandate that everyone buy health insurance was constitutional, Reuters reports.

Said one judge: “It certainly is an encroachment on individual liberty, but it is no more so than a command that restaurants or hotels are obliged to serve all customers regardless of race.”

The Wall Street Journal notes today’s ruling comes as the Supreme Court is scheduled to
discuss several challenges to the health-care overhaul during the
justices’ private conference. “The court decides during its
closed-door conferences which cases it will consider in the coming
months. The high court isn’t required to hear a health-care case, but
given the disagreement in the lower courts, it is highly likely to do
so.”

A new Kaiser Family Foundation poll shows the health care reform law’s popularity hit an all-time low this month.

Just 34% of those surveyed said they have a favorable view while 51% said they have an unfavorable view.

Politico: “That’s more lopsided than most of the Kaiser tracking polls have found since President Barack Obama signed the legislation into law. In most cases, the public has been about evenly split in its views of the law. The big difference this time is that Democrats seem to be souring on the reform law.”