Rand Paul: GOP 'probably can't defeat' Obamacare
Published September 22, 2013
by Adam Sneed, Politico, September 22, 2013.
Sen. Rand Paul conceded Saturday that congressional Republicans have little chance of stopping Obamacare.
“We probably can’t defeat or get rid of Obamacare,” the Kentucky senator told reporters at a gathering of Michigan Republicans, according to the Associated Press.
Paul acknowledged that time is running out for Congress to pass a government funding bill, however he said House Republicans’ efforts to defund Obamacare in its government funding bill could lead to a compromise.
Late Saturday, Paul said in a statement that he still fully supports defunding and repealing Obamacare.
“I will continue to lead the fight until we win,” he said. “I will not vote for any CR that funds Obamacare and if there is one penny for Obamacare I will vote no.”
Congress must pass a funding bill by Oct. 1 to avoid a government shutdown.
The House’s continuing resolution, passed Friday, defunds President Barack Obama’s signature health care law. As the bill goes before the Democratic-controlled Senate next week, it faces essentially no chance of keeping the Obamacare measure intact.
Leading the anti-Obamacare charge in the Senate is Sen. Ted Cruz, who drew heat from House Republicans earlier this week when he seemed to suggest that his Senate colleagues can’t stop Majority Leader Harry Reid from funding Obamacare in the Senate’s continuing resolution.
Late Friday, Cruz asked his Republican colleagues to block upcoming procedural votes on the House bill, even though he supports it. His strategy is to block a cloture vote so Senate Democrats can’t change the bill, but many Republicans have said they won’t block votes on a bill they also support.
Reid has said any bill defunding Obamacare would be dead on arrival, and Sen. John McCain said Thursday that it was “not rational” to think the Senate would pass anything defunding the program.
September 22, 2013 at 8:05 am
TP Wohlford says:
Congressmen voting the wishes of their constituents isn't okay, or so it appears.
In 2010 I lived in a Congressional district where it was clear that Obamacare had, at best, a 45% approval rating. The freshman Dem, a guy who had a bright political future, had to vote for it anyway 'cause his San Francisco overlord told him to do that -- otherwise he'd have no money for his upcoming election.
Later that year, the guy was defeated in his election. Even after the Dems spent $7 million to save him, he only got about 45% of the vote, which is what he polled after the Obamacare vote.
His replacement was sent there with a specific mandate -- stop Obamacare and stop the spending madness. Would anyone then expect the current Rep to vote in any other way?
