Local congressional candidates weigh in on decision
From Staff Reports June 28, 2012 9:38PM
Updated: July 30, 2012 6:26AM
Here’s how area members of congress and candidates in November’s general election reacted to Thursday’s Supreme Court decision upholding Obamacare.
Republican incumbent Joe Walsh of McHenry: “Today, I, along with most Americans, am disappointed with the Supreme Court decision. It is now clear that the only way to repeal this law is legislatively. Today’s decision only affirms what we have known all along – the president’s health care plan is a massive tax increase. The president insisted that his health care plan would not cost the American people anything, but that is just untrue. To be clear, this is not a tax on wealthy Americans who already have insurance. This tax hits the 44 million uninsured Americans, who are already struggling and cannot afford to pay more hard-earned income in taxes.
“The American people deserve a choice in their health care plans, not government mandates. The president’s health care plan is an unworkable mega-bill that will destroy small businesses, kill jobs, stunt economic growth, and bankrupt the nation.”
Democratic candidate Tammy Duckworth of Hoffman Estates: “As someone who survived a serious health crisis I understand how important it is to have affordable and quality healthcare. The ruling today is a victory for children with preexisting conditions who can’t be denied coverage, women who can’t be charged a higher premium, seniors who won’t suddenly find themselves without coverage, and young adults who will be covered under their parents until they are 26. However, I’m still concerned that ACA places an unfair burden on employers, especially our small businesses. We will need to evaluate these provisions as we move forward. I look forward to getting to Washington, rolling up my sleeves and getting to work.”
Republican incumbent Randy Hultgren of Winfield: “Today, I’m disappointed for America. This entire law goes against American principles.
“Actions have consequences, we all know that. In this case the court has ruled that the government can tax you not only for choosing an action — moving to a certain neighborhood, earning a certain amount, or having a certain number of dependents — but for choosing inaction. This is unprecedented.
“Should we levy a special tax on individuals who don’t give to charity? Should we penalize families that don’t buy American built cars? As Chief Justice John Roberts points out, under this theory, the government could address the diet problem by ordering people to buy vegetables.
“To be clear, this is just one of many new taxes in the Affordable Care Act, which included over $525 billion in new taxes. Average family insurance premiums expected to increase by $2,100. 20 million Americans could lose their employer-sponsored healthcare. Worst of all, the employer mandate could destroy as many as 1.6 million jobs.
“This is a tax increase cloaked as healthcare reform. In this economic environment, I think that’s a shame.”
Democratic candidate Dennis Anderson of Gurnee: “What we saw was a classic example of ‘if you can’t convince them, confuse them. Most polls have shown that people are generally in favor of the individual components of the act. Opponents of the act have relied on a variety of scare tactics, ranging from ‘death panels’ to ‘socialism.’ Implementation of the act will make care available to millions who have been locked out of the health care system and, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, will reduce the deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars.”