Suddenly, Vulnerable House Republicans No Longer Bash Obamacare on Their Websites

[catbyte]

Gideon Resnick
09.21.18 5:16 AM ET

If you visited Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers’ (R-WA) campaign website in 2014, you would have had no doubt what she wanted to do with Obamacare. She wanted to kill it.

Four years later, Rodgers’ hatred for President Obama’s signature domestic law has not just softened on her campaign website, it’s disappeared. Her site today doesn’t make reference to the Affordable Care Act under the healthcare section. Instead, it refers to Rodgers “getting a ten-year extension for children’s health care funding” and her support for “more doctors in rural communities.”

McMorris Rodgers, the highest ranking Republican woman in the House, isn’t the only one making such edits. Across the country, endangered Republican incumbents have dramatically softened their tone on the Affordable Care Act. Some have fully whitewashed their previous criticisms.

A thorough review of current and former websites of endangered Republican House members found 20 examples of these changes from either 2014 or 2016 to this current election cycle. The alterations reflect the dramatic evolution in the politics of Obamacare. The law had been the bete noire of conservatives since the moment it was conceived. And when Donald Trump won the presidency, the Republican-led Congress made a run at repealing it, with House members, including McMorris Rodgers, passing legislation to replace the bill in May 2017. The Senate ultimately failed to act. But as part of the tax reform bill, lawmakers did remove one of Obamacare’s chief provisions: the individual mandate requiring people to have health coverage.

...............snip

https://www.thedailybeast.com/suddenly-vulnerable-house-republicans-no-longer-bash-obamacare-on-their-websites?source=twitter&via=desktop
----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Aristus]

1. We Washingtonians need to either turn Eastern Washington (aka Spokanistan) blue,

or cut it loose to become West Idaho.

[Zambero]

3. Hope for Idaho?

As the fastest growing state, when Idaho eventually gains a third House seat, Boise as a potential stand-alone would
be competitive for Dems. Right now it's split between the two House districts.

[Aristus]

5. That's interesting and gratifying to know.

I know that urban areas tend to be more progressive that rural areas. But I had no idea that Boise was progressive enough to make Idaho a competitive state. Is there a projection as to when the third-House-seat-blue-Boise might happen?

[Zambero]

6. Projected 2030 and perhaps sooner

Boise city voted twice for Obama and also for HRC by a slimmer margin. Suburbs trend redder. Depending on how district lines are drawn, Dems could have a shot. Idaho had Dem reps elected on occasion, as recently as 2006.

[Doreen]

4. Fellow Washingtonian agrees.

[dalton99a]

2. I hope these Republican incumbents lose their seats AND their health insurance

[Blue_true]

7. They may lose their seats, but not their benefits.

Once they get elected, they get a lifetime pension. Not sure about medical, but would not be surprised that they do get that too.

[obamanut2012]

8. Not true -- they do not get lifetime pensions

Unless they retire.

I know someone whose wife was a three-term Congresswoman, and he wishes she had medical and a pension.

Congressional pension is a pension made available to members of the United States Congress. Members who participated in the congressional pension system are vested after five (5) years of service. A full pension is available to members 62 years of age with 5 years of service; 50 years or older with 20 years of service; or 25 years of service at any age. A reduced pension is available depending upon which of several different age/service options is chosen. If Members leave Congress before reaching retirement age, they may leave their contributions behind and receive a deferred pension later.[1] The current pension program, effective January 1987, is under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), which covers members and other federal employees whose federal employment began in 1984 or later. This replaces the older Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) for most members of congress and federal employees.

[Blue_true]

9. Thanks. I stand corrected. nt