The waiver fiasco presents a significant problem for ObamaCare’s supporters in that while many Americans are still largely unaware of many of its most burdensome provisions, as they become aware, more and more turn against it.
Last month I was in Brooklyn asking the constituents of Congressman Anthony Weiner, who once said “the bill and I are one”, what they thought of his recent request for a waiver for New York City. Almost every person I spoke with didn’t know what a waiver was, or that Rep. Weiner asked for one.
But when I explained it to them, they were none too happy. Beyond this anecdotal evidence, a Pulse Opinion Research conducted a survey of 1,000 likely voters for my organization Let Freedom Ring that found significant public opposition to how waivers are being doled out by the Obama Administration.
Specifically, 62% of those surveyed, including 50% of self-identified Democrats, believe average Americans should be permitted to apply for similar waivers from the law's provisions. They are currently restricted from doing so, as our Health and Human Services Secretary has arbitrarily decided that only businesses and states can apply for waivers.
In the land of equal protection under the law, shouldn’t we all be protected by ObamaCare’s damage or none should? The majority of the public apparently thinks so.
We also asked respondents whether unelected Executive Branch officials, like Secretary Sebelius, should have the power to grant waivers from a law, or whether this should be the sole responsibility of an elected Congress. 67% of those surveyed, including 60% of Democrats, responded that the Congress should be the entity that issues waivers from one of its laws, not political appointees or bureaucrats.
Voters can hold an elected Congress directly responsible at the ballot box for their actions and, as our survey demonstrates, they aren’t keen on the questionable actions of powerful, unelected bureaucrats escaping their purview, such as the present waiver fiasco.