The Republican party is the chief cause of govt. inaction for crucial issues.
Debate Rounds (5)
Put simply, I'm implying that the Republican party has a negative influence on the govt. because of their partisanship and stubbornness, and their insistence to cling to ideas that would hamper the country if implemented.
I want a clean debate, with no overtly offensive comments about either side.
Round 1- acceptance and declaration of position.
Round 2- Opening arguments only
Round 3- Rebuttal and any further arguments
Round 4- Rebuttal
Round 5- Concluding rebuttals, assertions and final statements
I look forward to this debate. Anyone can accept.
I'll start with the biggest impact of their inaction- the government shutdown.
There is no doubt that the shutdown was caused by House Republicans in an attempt to derail Obamacare. The thing is, Obamacare isn't even directly funded by the budget. The healthcare bill was more or less used as a bargaining chip. Granted, it does have its flaws, such as raising taxes, it does ensure insurance for all, eliminates discrimination for buyers and excludes no-one, and it improves healthcare quality. So is this one law worth shutting down the government and putting a nation into panic over? It isn't. Especially when the budget had little to do with it. Therefore, what they did was essentially blackmail the country. But when you consider the amount of time and effort wasted in trying to repeal Obamacare, it's astounding. The House has tried 54 times since 2011 to chip away at Obamacare. A bit excessive?   
Immigration reform is a crucial issue now, with the undocumented children crisis at the border. Yet the Republicans flatly refuse any Democrat attempts to reform it, preferring the current, broken system. House leader Eric Cantor himself has said that Republicans wanted nothing of the plan and wouldn't even consider it in a deliberation. 34000 immigrants are held in detention centers each night, as thousands upon thousands of people make a long, treacherous journey to this country. What about reform? Almost every attempt has been shot down. As Representative Jason Chaffetz explained, "One of the root challenges is the lack of trust in President Obama... "It"s a shame because we agree perhaps on most of the issues, but getting past the basic hurdle of who we can work with is hard." This is the main problem in Congress. The Republicans won't even work with the Democrats, not only to appeal to the Tea Party which distrusts Obama, but because of the method of approach altogether. Politics aren't important, solutions are.  
The economy is another issue. The style of economy they pursue is a major issue. One issue is trickle down economics. That's Reagan's idea that why letting the rich keep more money, then they'll invest more and let the economy jumpstart. Only problem- it doesn't work. No, all it's really done is to dramatically increase our horrendous income inequality and let the top 1% be richer. So when the Democrats come out demanding more regulation, the Republicans argue with laissez-faire economic arguments, declaring Obama's ideas socialism. What the facts point to is that less regulatory, Republican economic values have offered little help (higher debt, massive deficits) , while Democratic policies offer more. (Income equality, job growth)  In their constant desire for this flawed system, all Republicans are doing is 1) supporting something that would ruin the economy and 2) only add to the backlog of partisan bickering.
Another failed economic policy they're trying is massive govt. cuts and less interference. These ideals are actually copied from the EU, which tried the same thing. The result? Greece, Spain, and Ireland going or nearly going bankrupt. These Reagan-esque policies which Republicans insist should be used in place of Obama's tax increases only result in drained federal reserves, no money for both consumers and the govt., and therefore leaves the govt. helpless in a crisis. So what happens when Obama proposes not doing these things? He gets blocked. Months-long debates on tax increases that may help the country are ignored, and Democrats have to reach a compromise which hardly allows for any of the intended benefits. This stubborn insistence on the GOP's part only hampers the potential growth of this country This is in part not only due to Tea Party stubbornness, but also due to that of House leader Boehner's insistence not contradicting and uncompromising policies. .  
I'll go into more detail in round 3, but for now I'm interested in my opponent's argument.
I should note that Obamacare's effects are neither devastating nor wildly unpopular, in fact they are very helpful. Looking at recent polls, it would appear that Obamacare has a 37-40% approval rating. Let's dig a little deeper. When asking those who disliked the ACA why they did, 80% said they didn't want the gov. in health care, 76% said they feared for the costs, and 58% didn't like having insurance for everyone. That's one flaw with my opponent's argument- he says that people can't get health insurance. That's a lie- anyone can get health insurance. 
Looking at your sources, they contradict all other credible sources. Your tax argument is completely inaccurate. 85% of people with health insurance will be almost unaffected by the tax hikes, which apply almost solely to people making $200K income, and very large businesses, no one else. These are necessary so that coverage can be given to people with pre-existing conditions, the elderly, and the poor, so they can also afford a doctor visit. As a whole, the accessibility, quality, and costs of health insurance are all improved. In fact, tax CREDITS are given to the low-middle income classes. Your tax argument is invalid.  
Therefore, I reaffirm my argument that the Republican time-wasting on Obamacare has been both unreasonable and untrue.
As for its popularity, that's another issue. While over half the population may not be enamored with the ACA, most people view all of its individual components highly. As a non-partisan poll shows (link is below if anyone wants to see), the majority of the components that the Affordable Care Act contains are highly approved of by the American public, however, the least popular components are the ones that are the most well known? Why? The GOP exaggerates those only, and makes false cases and ridiculous arguments to try to prove their point. 
As for your large tax increase story, keep in mind that it's a lot better than it would be without it. Did the ACA reduce taxes... no. But it reduces the rampant medical expense increase of the millennium, it reduces our huge Medicare deficits, and most people have been happy with their new plans.
To conclude this Obamacare argument, my opponent's argument has been proved false. The Republican argument against Obamacare is unfounded, inaccurate and absurd.
To call Obama a radical is like calling Bush a liberal. It's absurd. A study by political scientists have placed Obama as the most moderate leader of the last few decades, more so than Truman, Clinton, and LBJ. The Republican party is engaging in baseless mud-slinging when they call him a radical, because he's not. He's not radically liberal, in fact he seems concerned with trying to cure the strife and increasing political divide within Congress. He doesn't get much support- the political divide has been growing over the past decades, as the two parties diverge further away. The Republicans, in their attempt to get support from the truly radical Tea Party,are leaning far righter than the Democrats are leaning left. Their stubborn partisanship and inability to accept Democratic proposals is what is helping to stagnate Congress. 
Your comments on Greece and Spain are also wrong. The governments there stepped back and let the situation work itself out, with disastrous results.
I'd also like to mention that you need to answer my arguments about immigration, government intervention, and economic policy. I don't want to limit this debate to Obama-care.
For the reasons above, I have reaffirmed my initial statements about Republican partisanship and backlog being unfounded and inaccurate, and stagnating Congress.
All polls saying obama worst president since wwii found on washingtontimes, nytimes, usatoday, the hill, quinipiac, real claer politics, foxnews, nbc, abc, cbs, cnn, and even the very liberal msnbc
Ronald *Reagan* is a totally different story. Any number of factors could have caused that. But that's irrelevant, because today's GOP has nothing to do with (and none of the charm of) Reagan.
You didn't pay attention when I said that Obamacare was unpopular because people don't understand it, people don't know what's in it (including the GOP), and the majority of people actually positively view the main points of Obamacare. It's because they don't understand what it is and the Republicans won't stop bashing it that people think its bad.
Your tax premiums haven't really 'skyrocketed.' Nobody's taxes have. It's because of Obamacare that your health and insurance premiums won't continue to skyrocket, and your parents will have decent health insurance even when they're in their 70s.
As for your parents' and friends' concerns about the employer mandate, they have nothing to fear. 96% of firms in the US have under 50 employees, and this doesn't affect them. 96% of these firms already cover their employees. In fact, less than 0.2% of small businesses will actually be affected by this.  More than 1/2 of Americans already have coverage anyway. From this law, 6 million people will get insurance.
Nobody will get laid off. This law forced Wal-Mart of all companies to give 35000 employees full-time jobs and family benefits. The law is designed so that nobody has an incentive to cut jobs. I suggest you read more about this.
This finally concludes my assertion that the GOP assault on Obamacare is unfounded.
Nobody knows whether the average businessman will invest in the public interest or not. The govt. needs more control not only for safe management of the economy but also in the interest of preventing another crisis like 2008. 
Before I tackle Obama's popularity issue, let's look at Congress's popularity. from a record low 9% in November, it's now a still-awful 15%. The popularity of the president is tied to what he can deliver on, and his policies. He's not blameless, sure, but Congress has passed the fewest laws in recent history, becoming increasingly unproductive. If Congress, namely the radical Republicans who refuse to even look at Democratic propositions won't agree with Obama's agenda, then nothing gets done. And as the face of the country, Obama's reputation goes down as a result.  
A side by side graph comparison shows that Obama's approval ratings rise and dip as the average approval rating for Congress rises and dips. They are tied to each other, with good reason. I should also mention that at all times during his term, the approval ratings for the Democrats are about 15-20% higher than those of the Republicans.  Why? Because they're inactive. They shut down the government for illogical reasons, have caused the most unproductive and unpopular Congress in recent history, and refuse to pass anything, relying instead on inactivity and partisanship.
In conclusion, I have continued my logical assertions that the Republican attack on Obamacare is a waste of time and unfounded, justified Obama's issues, and explained how the GOP is damaging both Congress and the USA.
The last three are for the last argument, I apologize for not posting them, my IPad wouldn't let me for some reason. And with the first website link, those polls are very general, you have to select each race for more specifics.
I'm honestly not sure why your family's premiums went from $50 to $180. The average premium increase is 49% for people who don't get employer insurance or are on medicaid/care  This shouldn't happen unless your parents don't get get employer health insurance. If your parents don't want new health insurance, then they don't have to buy Obamacare, however, it is a good alternative for many people. Honestly, it's cheap, the aspects themselves are relatively popular (as shown in previous rounds).
In conclusion, I finally prove my assertions on the unfounded and wasteful Republican argument on Obamacare.
I want to draw more attention to the many things that Republicans have blocked with negative consequences on this country.
In 2012, the Republicans blocked Obama's initiative to increase job growth by giving tax breaks to companies that bring jobs back into the country, and eliminating tax breaks for those that outsource- a very attractive incentive package that might have truly helped. Why? They refused to allow it unless health care reforms were stopped and tax breaks were introduced . Those things have absolutely nothing to do with helping the employment rate. It was nothing but blackmail, and a blackmail that has kept our employment growth rate miserable.
Another motion they blocked was the bill that would have provided better healthcare to our veterans as well as education programs to allow them to live normal lives with normal jobs. The GOP refused to allow it to pass. Why is that? They wouldn't let it pass until another round of sanctions for Iran was approved- when we already have virtually total sanctions on them.  This really proves where their priorities are. Helping the people who fought for us isn't their concern, what they're concerned about is only politics- trying to use their welfare as blackmail for irrelevant agendas.
They're also trying to block any sort of minimum wage increase. It would really help our struggling poor to be able to live better lives and support their families. This was a very popular bill- 86% of Democrats, 62% of Independents and 46% of Republicans were in favor of a wage hike. But no- they could put aside politics for the common good, and the working poor will continue to toil endlessly. The Republicans fail to realize that this is necessary for building a middle class. There is no excuse for something that the American people truly need.  And I know what you'll say- that most people dislike Obamacare as well. The difference is that people don't understand Obamacare until it affects them, whereas people who are perpetually in poverty or dependent on food stamps will definitely know that they really need a wage increase.
That takes me to my final point-why are Republicans winning the Senate? As I've already shown in the above rounds, the president's popularity is tied to Congress's performance. When the GOP congressmen/representatives irrationally block all Democrat bills, it creates the illusion that the Democratic president isn't doing his job, and therefore Democrats are less popular. This is also helped by the GOP representatives, Fox and their ridiculous rhetoric of lies about Obama, lies about the Affordable Care Act, and lies about the Democratic ideals.
So conclude my arguments. Since I leave my opponent with the last word, I'd like to ask him to see if he can counter my claims above and all my claims. Admittedly the both of us spent too much time on Obamacare and not enough on other topics. I bear him no ill-will, and I don't hate Republicans as a whole. I thoroughly enjoyed this debate.
For the reasons stated above, I have proved that the Republican attack on Obamacare is unfounded, explained the reason why little in Congress is done, and provided numerous examples of how Republican attacks on Democrat bills are both factually unfounded, and harmful to the country.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SocialistAtheistNutjob 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||6||0|
Reasons for voting decision: In one case Pro had to request sources from Con. Also, Pro met the burden of proof while Con relief on public opinion polls for his information.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.