• Churchlady320 Of course there are important differences between the two, but Obamacare is conceptually modeled after Romneycare, which was modeled after the idea of the individual mandate first presented by the Heritage Foundation in the late eighties.  
    The point is that even if the legislative framework for Obamacare were identical in every way imaginable to that of Romneycare, the GOP would vehemently oppose the PPACA for the many obvious reasons of which we have all grown tired 5 years into Obama’s presidency:they wish to see the President fail,they fear the popularity of the PPACA, they do not wish to increase access to health care in an increasingly heterogenous society with a growing wealth gap (note that industrialized countries that have single payer systems are mostly homogenous),and they do not want the black President to get any credit for the construction and passage of the law.
    The numbers, however, speak for themselves, and there is no stopping the ACA train (and the new legislative health care frameworks it might lead to one day).  The GOP doesn’t have an endgame and everyone knows it.

  • Churchlady320

    Because it is NOT Romneycare – it erased much of the original $15,000 per person per year deductible from which almost nothing was immune – and because it is far more fairly priced with rates targeted to your income, the ACA is anathema where Romneycare was not.  Why? Romneycare protected the insurance companies from expenditure, from rate regulation, and increased their market without their breaking a sweat over larger payouts.  ACA imposes responsibilities on insurance companies mandating coverage at a vastly higher level and with far more control.  That is not widely discussed because it is complicated, but it’s the hidden reason the GOP hate it.  ACA actually delivers insurance coverage at affordable standards with oversight and control over insurers.  Big difference.