ADVERTISEMENT

Ellison's Must Read of the Day

Ellison Barber
December 4, 2013

My must read of the day is "New Obamacare weapon for GOP: Doctors," in Politico:

Get ready for the next line of attack from the GOP on Obamacare: Good luck keeping your doctor.

As other controversies surrounding the law begin to fade, House Republicans are increasingly focused on President Barack Obama’s pledge that "if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor." They’re hoping to replicate the uproar over canceled insurance plans, which have caused problems for millions of consumers nationwide and political headaches for Democrats. […]

Here is the gist of the GOP contention: Some insurers have limited the number of doctors or hospitals their customers can go to in their new coverage plans, and some people will have to get new coverage plans under Obamacare. While a limited inventory of doctors is typical of most insurance policies both on and off the Obamacare exchanges, it runs counter to the Obama administration’s promise that people won’t have to change doctors under the health care law.

Republicans will undoubtedly focus more on this is the coming weeks. From a strategic standpoint, they would be remiss not to, but maybe Democrats should consider joining in on the "attack."

First, it is a broken promise. It's really that simple. The president made repeated promises, and they have been untrue.

Words matter, and the president should be held accountable for them.

Secondly, losing doctors does something Obamacare was supposed to eradicate: It creates a discriminatory system.

Obamacare creates a "two-tiered system of health care." If you have insurance through your employer, you have more options when picking a doctor than the people in the exchanges.

A key motivation in passing this law was to eliminate inequalities in the health care system. Losing your doctor, your hospital, and your health insurance plan creates a new system of inequality. Democrats should be just as upset as Republicans are at these inequities. The fact that they are not undermines the credibility of their party.