- Obama not worried about Ebola at upcoming African summit in D.C.
- Obama: ‘We tortured some folks’ after 9/11
- Obama administration asked whole D.C. Circuit to take on major Obamacare case
- Mark Levin: Topple GOP leadership or country will ‘unravel’
- Massachusetts to let police chief deny gun buys to those deemed unfit
- John Kerry condemns attack on Israeli soldiers, kidnapping
- U.S. starts to evacuate American Ebola patients from West Africa: Report
- Geraldo slammed as ‘dummy’ for backing Clinton’s bin Laden claim
- Israeli spokesman: No need to debate who broke the cease-fire
- 35 Palestinians killed; Israeli officer missing
PENNY: Obamacare’s ‘omnishambles’
A British term aptly describes America’s health care disaster
Question of the Day
I suggest it is time to import to America a newly minted term from the world of British politics. The word? Omnishambles.
Omnishambles is a neologism drawn from the Latin prefix “omni,” meaning “all,” and the word “shambles,” meaning “a situation of total disorder.” If you are looking for a synonym, think Obamacare — technically, but also euphemistically, known as the Affordable Care Act.
If there is any aspect of Obamacare that is working as intended, it is as hard to find as a moderate legislator in today’s Congress. In fact, the lack of a sensible center in Congress may well explain why Obamacare was poorly designed and why it remains unpopular.
Passed on a party-line vote, Obamacare represents a break with historic precedent. It stands as a rare example of a major policy enactment that lacked any support from the minority party.
In previous decades, significant legislation has almost always carried bipartisan support. For example, the National Defense Highway System during Dwight Eisenhower’s presidency; civil rights, voting rights and Medicare during Lyndon Johnson’s years; and immigration and tax reform during the Ronald Reagan era. In sum, big policies and programs are typically strengthened when crafted with bipartisan input, and public acceptance of these laws is similarly enhanced by that bipartisanship.
Shambles appropriately describes the “disorder” that accompanied passage of Obamacare in 2010. Regular legislative procedures were bent and stretched to the breaking point, while side deals like the “Louisiana Purchase” and the Nebraska “Cornhusker Kickback” were crafted in an effort to secure just enough Democratic votes — while also destroying any prospect of bipartisan cooperation.
Creative political terms such as omnishambles have frequently found their way into common usage. Some remain in use today, while others have faded from use over time.
“Gerrymandering” is one of the lasting terms. The word emerged in the early 1800s when Gov. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts presided over the artful drawing of legislative boundaries designed to benefit his political party. One of those legislative districts ended up with the shape of a salamander, hence the gerrymander.
With the advent of computer technology, drawing legislative-district boundaries is now an easy process — and using electoral data to gerrymander for partisan advantage has also become easier. As a result, today there are very few districts that are truly competitive, resulting in a Congress dominated by hyperpartisans.
Later in the 19th century, the term “mugwump” came into use. Mugwump refers to Republicans who bolted their party to support the presidential candidacy of Democrat Grover Cleveland. Subsequently, mugwumps were derided as fence-sitters who had no political integrity, as in, “their mug sits on one side of the fence with their wump on the other.”
We no longer use the term mugwump. Activists in both of the major parties, though, continue to deplore those who do not toe the line, often denying these moderate candidates party endorsement and interest-group support. Accordingly, and not surprisingly, this is another reason the moderate middle is hard to find in today’s Congress.
The political term “filibuster” is assigned to the senatorial privilege of talking nonstop as a way of delaying a vote on an issue. The phrase “talk an issue to death” is an apt description of the purpose of a filibuster.
Just a few decades ago, fewer than 10 percent of major issues were subject to the filibuster. Today, that number has escalated to 70 percent, and gridlock is the result.
That brings to mind another word — though not one that has a political etymology; namely, “balderdash.” Balderdash is defined as “stupid or illogical talk” (which may, in fact, make it synonymous with filibuster).
Four years after the implementation of Obamacare, we are now witnessing the omnishambles surrounding the law. As we all know, the Obamacare website launch was a shambles of the highest order — despite three years in the making and nearly $400 million in expenses. Disorder persists in both the federal and state exchanges as enrollment falls well short of goals and technology glitches continue.
TWT Video Picks
By Isaac Orr
New carbon-dioxide rules would put America in the dark
Get Breaking Alerts
- House GOP resurrects border bill, predicts successful Friday vote
- U.N. condemns Israel, U.S. for not sharing Iron Dome with Hamas
- Border agents cleared of civil rights complaints from illegal immigrant children
- Ben Carson takes major step toward presidential campaign
- Obama military strategy too weak for future security, panel reports
- Porn-surfing feds blame boredom, lack of work for misbehavior
- Feds raid S.C. home to seize Land Rover in EPA emission-control crackdown
- CRUZ: A tale of two hospitals: One in Israel, one in Gaza
- ON THE RUN: Competition for Redskins backup running back is heating up
- Ted Nugent slams 'lying freaks' at liberal media: I'm 'doing God's work'