Rick Scott and Florida Republicans Backing Down on Obamacare Opposition

Categories: Politicks
rickscottblue.jpg
Not only did Floridians vote to reelect President Obama on Tuesday, they also, by a wider margin, voted down a proposed state constitutional amendment that sought, in theory at least, to limit the effects of Obamacare in Florida.

Dejected, Rick Scott, the former health care CEO, is now backing down on his opposition to the federal law.

A year before his election, Scott founded Conservative for Patients' Rights, a group that sought to fight what it perceived as Obama's march towards "socialized medicine."

Scott's opposition to the Affordable Healthcare Act became one of the central tenants of his campaign alongside his promise to bring Arizona-style immigration laws to Florida.

Left with last week's double electoral loss, Scott and the state GOP are backing down.

"I don't like this law," incoming Senate President Don Gaetz told The Miami Herald, "but this is the law, and I believe I have a constitutional obligation to carry it out."

"Just saying 'no' is not an answer," Scott said in a statement last Friday. "We need to focus on how Obamacare affects each of our families. Will it increase the cost of health care for our families? Will it impact the quality of health care for our families? Will it impact Floridians' access to our health-care system?"

So Florida Republicans will no longer stick their fingers in their ears and chant "lalalala I can't hear you" when it comes to enacting the law in the state.

There still may be attempts to weaken the law in Florida, but the supremacy clause in that pesky old U.S. Constitution may limit that.

Newly elected Republican Congressman Tray Radel, who will replace Connie Mack in the House, is betting on the law to be a disaster.

"I think more and more Democrats, specifically in the Senate, are going to see the negative impact of Obamacare and there are areas we can work on together, at the minimum, to repeal parts of it," he said.

Follow Miami New Times on Facebook and Twitter @MiamiNewTimes.
My Voice Nation Help
6 comments
watchfuleye
watchfuleye

Because it "Forces" everyone to to either buy a product or pay a tax. There will be many unintended consequences due to the way this Tax/Law  is designed. In many cases it will be cheaper to pay the fine than to pay for coverage. Or what we are already seeing, employers reducing hours so they don't have to pay for either. This funnels more and more people onto Medicaid. Yes, not Obama care... Medicaid. which states must pay a portion of. ( This may be the true intention of the law to begin with. There was no hiding the fact that the administration wants a "Single payer system")

And what happens when all the private markets are gone? What happens when you don't like the coverage? Like in England where there are many people who's services are not "approved". Things like joint replacement and Mental Health services, Talk to some people in England. There needs to be reform. but think about this for a minute, The money to fund this mandatory program was "found" by waste in Medicare. So, It took the government 46 years to find waste and rather than putting it back where it came from; they took it and decided to start a new program? That's our money that was taken out of our checks for Medicare (which will go broke in 10 yrs at the current rate) Entitlement spending is what 's driving us into default. What happens when the gov can not meet it's obligations?

I'm no fan of insurance companies, personally I think Health care should be on a cost plus ( cost of claims plus administration) basis with a cap on administrative costs. not paying agents renewals all the way up to the CEO's bonus and share holder dividends. That's where all the money is going. There is more than enough to take care of the claims and make sure Dr.'s get paid for their work. Do you trust a politician with your life? with the life of your family? I sure don't . and you can't sue the government for malpractice. 

martineb72
martineb72

How is it socialized medicine?  It just basicly says you must health insurance or pay a little more in taxes.  You can get the health insurance from any company you want.  How does having all that choice in private health insurance equal socialized medicine?  I am sick of the right wing keep calling it that but no reporter saying, 'hey, according to the dictionary that isn't in any way or shape socialized medicine.'  In the long run it is likely to reduce everybodies health insurance cost, because more medical bills will be paid instead of having to write off the bill. 

vey9
vey9

 ' "I don't like this law," incoming Senate President Don Gaetz told The Miami Herald, "but this is the law, and I believe I have a constitutional obligation to carry it out." '

 

Well, Scott could try an pull an Orval  Faubus and have the National Guard ordered in to enforce the law. 

Anthonyvop1
Anthonyvop1 topcommenter

As Florida slides into the equivalent of a failed, socialist state like California, Texas is beginning to look better and Better.

yehyeh76er
yehyeh76er

 @Anthonyvop1 Florida has the 19th lowest spending rate on education, national average spending on medicaid, has virtually no public transportation, and is one of the states with least regulations on businesses. And because it has no state income tax, the sales tax brings in the largest share of revenue, so the lower your income, the higher your effective tax rate. Where in that formula do you find anything remotely resembling socialism?

 

 

 

Now Trending

Miami Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...