Barnes is not a fan of ObamaCare

Roy Barnes is skeptical of ObamaCare, believing that it’ll hit Georgia’s budget and taxpayers hard thanks to expansion of Medicaid:

Roy Barnes says the new federal health reform law backed by fellow Democrats could be “financially devastating” for Georgia unless officials in Washington figure out a way to help states cope with a staggering jump in Medicaid costs.

Barnes, the Democrat running to reclaim the governor’s mansion, also blasted both political parties and President Barack Obama for failing to win bipartisan support for a law more Americans could get behind.

“I consider it to be the greatest failure, modern failure, of political leadership in my lifetime,” Barnes said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.

“Everybody recognized ‘we’ve got to do something here,’ but there was such partisanship on it.”

Barnes blamed Democrats for failing to explain the plan better and Republicans for not delivering reasonable alternatives. But he said ultimately the buck stops with Obama, as it did with him during his one term as governor.
Barnes said — like Republican Gov. Sonny Perdue — that he worries the plan’s expansion of Medicaid in 2014 to cover more of the state’s estimated 1.7 million uninsured will leave Georgia on the hook for “staggering costs.”

“I hate to agree with Gov. Perdue, but I agree that this is one place that I think could be very financially devastating to the state until we get this ironed out,” Barnes told The AP.

Barnes said current state Medicaid spending of roughly $2 billion could more than double to $5 billion once the federal government reduces matching rates back to more traditional levels.

Barnes also says that he would continue to legal action against the health care “reform” law, though he disagreed with it.


  1. I Am Jacks Post says:

    Barnes doesn’t like ObamaCare. But Barnes endorsed and contributed to Obama, whose major campaign trail policy initiative was . . . . wait for it . . . ObamaCare.

    • polisavvy says:

      Agreed. He was a maxed out contributor to Obama. How can we trust what he says now? He obviously thinks that we aren’t aware of his contribution. And you are correct, Obama was definitely focused on health care as the be all, end all of his campaign. If Barnes supported him that strongly, then did he not also support health care? Also, it appears as though an important verb was left off of Jason’s post: “Barnes also says that he would continue to legal action against the health care “reform” law, though he disagreed with it.” Would continue to what? Pursue? Fight? Stop?

      • ACCmoderate says:

        To argue with that line of reasoning that Barnes donated to Obama solely on the later’s position on healthcare reform.

        In reality, we don’t Barnes’ motivation for donating to Obama.

        Seeing as he supported Edwards in the primary, his reason for donating to Barack Obama could be because of Obama’s emergence as the Democratic nominee, meaning that his donation would have gone to any Democrat in that position.

        Barnes could have supported Obama’s position on a whole host of other issues. OR He could have preferred all or part of Obama’s platform to that of John McCain. It seems, at least from what Barnes has said on the campaign trail, that education is an important issue for him. Perhaps Barnes liked Obama’s proposals for education or at least liked them more than McCain’s.

        Again, Barnes could have donated to the Obama campaign for a whole host of reasons other than healthcare reform. Heck, he could have donated because he wanted to further the Islamic plot to destroy our nation from within.

        I know its hard for members of a party that insists on a “loyalty oath” to believe, but you can disagree with a candidate on an issue(s) and still support that candidate. It’s unjustified to say that because Barnes donated to Obama solely because of the President’s position on healthcare reform.

        As an addition, I would argue that there were many planks to the Obama platform that were completely unrelated to healthcare. I wouldn’t call it the “be all, end all of his campaign.”

        • polisavvy says:

          You’re correct. We don’t know all the reasons why he contributed to his campaign especially since he did support Edwards in the beginning. As far as the “be all, end all of his campaign,” I can’t recall seeing a single stump speech where he didn’t mention health care for all. In light of that, I’d have to disagree with you that it was the major focus of his campaign. On paper his ideas were actually pretty good regarding health care — except how to actually pay for it. However, once it got to Congress, it completely disintegrated. As I said yesterday, Congress can tear up a crowbar.

          FYI, I am a republican; however, I don’t believe in “loyalty oaths.” I vote for the person, not the party. Believe it or not, the first republican I ever voted for was “W” and I’m 56 so you do the math. I know I may have to turn in my “card,” but I still vote for the person and not the party.

    • If you actually read the history, what it really is is Chafee Care, as in the father Chafee from 1993. This bill almost exactly mirrors the Republican alternative to Hillarycare before Bill Kristol came along and told them to stop trying to offer alternatives and just say No – something they’ve basically been doing for nearly 20 years now.

      • Doug Grammer says:


        Did you talk to Nathan Deal about who he was supporting for Predisdent in 1992? I did, but before I share what was said to me, I’d like to hear you admit that you don’t know what you are talking about. FYI, my conversation with him took place in 1992.

          • Doug Grammer says:

            I am asking you a question. Do you care to answer it? Here it is again: “Did you talk to Nathan Deal about who he was supporting for Predisdent in 1992?”

              • Doug Grammer says:

                In 1992, the GOP nominee for Congress in the Ninth was Dan Becker, current head of Georgia Right to Life. Do you stand by that statement?

                • ACCmoderate says:

                  I was saying that I could have made a better decision about who to support for President in 1992.

                  I’ll stand by your statement of my statement. I could have made a better choice than Nathan Deal. Heck, even though I was just a kid, I would have been a much more effective Congressman.

                  • Doug Grammer says:

                    Ummm OK. You don’t know who he voted for in the general, but you could have made a better choice. Got it.

  2. NoTeabagging says:

    Health Care Reform is a classic battle of Us against Them. Even the media did not educate the public on what was in the bill, so we would have a chance to contact our representatives. Instead they focused coverage on keeping score, vote counting, and various offense/defense moves of the day.
    Dems and Reps meanwhile, kept tossing out contradictory cost figures, and talking points, so much we could could not believe either party.

    I wanted a bill that actually made “Health Insurance” reform. Instead we got a bill that gives incentives to insurance companies to raise premiums, not lower them. I would think Republicans would love this, since they love big business SO much.

  3. John Konop says:

    Agree or not with Clinton-care it at least attempted to bend the cost curve. The problem with Obama-care it did not take on the cost issue head on. Both parties keep promising the senior population unlimited Medicare when we take in 1 dollar for every 3 dollars we spend.

    The Democrats want to add more people to a system going bankrupt and the Republicans yell death panel if we attempt any real reform. I am not sure what position is more irrational but both are a race to the bottom.

    The real problem is voters want services they cannot afford and politicians are scared to tell them the truth.

      • John Konop says:

        Kasim Reed and Chris Christie are the only two politicians I know of having the guts to take on entitlement spending. Real fiscal conservatives should be rallying behind their efforts.

      • kyleinatl says:

        Exactly, the tea party is one of the biggest con jobs in recent memory.

        “Taking our country back”? More like taking our country back to 2004. I look forward to the extra years of debating over ethical issues. What a shame.

        • John Konop says:

          I do think many in the Tea Party are frustrated with the system. The problem is fiscal restraint is great for many people as long as it does affect them. Also the Tea Party should not become an arm of the GOP it will end up exploiting the message for political gain like this issue. The last time we saw real fiscal reform was Ross Perot. And he made both parties feel very uncomfortable as an independent upsetting both sides. If he would have been a PR tool for one party I really do not think we would of seen the reform.

    • ZazaPachulia says:

      Great points John…
      Seen the Frontline special on the healthcare reform battle? The President actually had some decent ideas going in to the whole thing, but Congress (both parties) completely screwed it up.

  4. What is Barnes thinking? He’s not going to get Republican whackaloon votes no matter what he says, and he’s not going to get independents’ votes by bashing a healthcare plan that actually helps them. All he’s doing is ticking off his base and giving them a good reason not to show up for him in November. This guy could win it, but he’s working hard to lose it.

    • AnyoneElse2010 says:

      I think that you are absolutely wrong. Most independents do not like the health care plan. Polls and this election cycle are going to be the indicator of that. Most independents I know subscribe to a certain thought: Leave me and my money alone!!! They don’t care about abortion or gay rights. It doesn’t effect them therefore it doesn’t concern them.

      Those independents who you talk off that get “helped” by the health care plan are heavily leaning democrats who have never had to create a business or manage a business.

        • Doug Grammer says:

          Sounds reasonable to me. People want a job, not billions of spending for no reason that they will have to pay back. $700,000 for a joke telling machine is not funny.

            • Doug Grammer says:

              You know we spent that much money on a machine that is supposed to tell jokes. VP Biden is just as funny.

            • ACCmoderate says:

              Dubya wasn’t a joke telling machine… he was just a joke.

              You know you’re an idiot when the Onion can make up headlines about you that sound entirely plausible.

          • polisavvy says:

            That’s true, Doug. People care about jobs and they also care about the heaping debt that is running up on this country. Something has to give. I think that people will be sending those messages loud and clear in about 56 days.

            • John Konop says:


              I agree but healthcare is tied to jobs. The cost is rising faster than employers can absorb ie less hiring, less raises or further push down of cost to employees. All three kill consumer spending that helps create jobs. We as an economy most push down the cost of healthcare or it will further hurt the job market.

              That is why voters should mad at both sides on this issue

              • polisavvy says:

                Agreed, John. Both sides share responsibility. Too bad that they will never admit it. What do you think of the proposed new “stimulus” or “economic recovery” thoughts being thrown about?

                • John Konop says:

                  I am all for spending on reducing foreign oil which will help with out trade deficit, foreign dependency on oil and jobs if done right this will more than pay for itself. . I do not like the idea of creating a government bank and I am not sure the money is targeted in the right areas. I do like the R and D tax credit idea.

                  • polisavvy says:

                    The whole government bank idea needs some serious work — not a fan of this either. I just wonder if the jobs will be created correctly. At this point, we have been told or promised so many different things, it’s kind of hard to believe that anything good will come to fruition. I guess I do sound a little cynical; however, you have to admit that for some reason things aren’t always as they seem. I’ve heard a lot of shallow promises and even more shallow ideas. Just don’t know what to believe or think about this administration anymore.

                    • John Konop says:

                      The problem as I see it is we must produce things that we sell to other countries or buy things we were buying from other countries here ie trade defect. No country has ever been able to sustain itself consuming way more than it produces.

                      This seems to be the topic both parties do want to talk about. . . ,

                    • polisavvy says:

                      True. Both sides want to talk about it; however, I really haven’t heard either side saying as much as I’d like to hear. Outsourcing has killed this country’s economy, too.

                    • John Konop says:


                      Very good article, I have made the point to many of my Democratic friends asking why Obama did not first focus on this easy lay-up to get the economy moving over healthcare first. And this would have forced the hand of both parties since getting off foreign oil is widely supported by independents as well as many in the GOP. If the GOP pushed a stimulus package energy related if they take over the HOUSE it would be very smart move.

  5. slyram says:

    I think I voted for Roy Barnes every time I could but Barnes v. Obama is a deal breaker or a Deal (Governor) maker. At a great cookout in Albany Sunday, it was surprising to learn the number of Morehouse Men and Omega Psi Phi fraternity members who don’t know that John Monds is in the race. Monds making a decent showing would be a source of pride for his fraternity members and they are among the most influential groups in my community.

    A combination of slamming Obama and not letting Monds debate could end the governor’s race with a quickness by eroding the Dem base—be careful.

Comments are closed.