SVG
Commentary
Weekly Standard Online

Ryan Responds to Obama's Veto of Repeal Bill

Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) delivers remarks before signing legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the Rayburn Room at the U.S. Capitol January 7, 2016 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Caption
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) delivers remarks before signing legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the Rayburn Room at the U.S. Capitol January 7, 2016 in Washington, DC. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

President Obama vetoed legislation today that would have repealed most of Obamacare. Congress passed the legislation using the same "reconciliation" process that Democrats used to get Obamacare across the finish line in 2010. That process allows senators to circumvent the filibuster and pass budget-related legislation through the chamber via a simple majority vote.

Speaker Paul Ryan quickly issued a strong, succinct response:

"It's no surprise that someone named Obama vetoed a bill repealing Obamacare….But here's the thing. The idea that Obamacare is the law of the land for good is a myth....We have now shown that there is a clear path to repealing Obamacare without 60 votes in the Senate. So, next year, if we're sending this bill to a Republican president, it will get signed into law....It's just a matter of time" (emphasis added).

It's good to see this sort of fighting spirit on Obamacare, which is more reminiscent of Ryan circa 2010 than of John Boehner circa 2011-15.

But the truth is that Republicans won't repeal Obamacare without passing an alternative in its place. Many if not most of the Republican senators who voted for the bill that Obama just vetoed wouldn't have voted for it, in the absence of an alternative, if a Republican president had been waiting to sign it. Such senators will require (A) an alternative and, for many of them, (B) presidential leadership/pressure.

Moreover, it's not clear that just any Republican president would lead the battle for repeal and replacement in 2017—or that a given alternative would get the government out of the business of directly subsidizing insurance companies (as opposed to offering genuine tax credits that lower individuals' taxes) and would save the $1 trillion or more that an Obamacare alternative ought to save.

GOP voters are still waiting to see which, if any, presidential candidate will truly lead on Obamacare—starting by championing an alternative that can truly lead to repeal, save $1 trillion or more, tweak the tax code to revitalize an insurance market that the federal government broke, and restore the government's proper role.