# GOP Obstructionism and the Constitution and SCOTUS **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 19, 2013, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202 "2013-09-19T03:27:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/121 "2013-09-25T16:42:24Z")
> [@Rhythmdvl](#): > > The Navigators and Assisters should be going through the exact same process that every other government field worker (with any access to social security numbers and address information) goes through. Reading through the opinion piece based on a report by that stalwart of truth, Issa, should make people shake! > (with laughter) They absolutely should be going through that process. Why aren’t they? Then there’s the security of the data hub. [http://medcitynews.com/2013/09/attorneys-general-raise-aca-security-concerns-ask-delay-implementation/](http://medcitynews.com/2013/09/attorneys-general-raise-aca-security-concerns-ask-delay-implementation/) Democrats acknowledge the problem, but say, “We want solutions, not roadblocks!” Oh, okay, so if there’s no solution by Oct. 1, just open the exchanges anyway? Brilliant. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/122 "2013-09-25T16:51:48Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Hard to get around this big fat whopper: 'If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period. If you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. Period. No one will take it away. No matter what." > > I’d say that lie is bigger and more significant to the public than anything Republicans said. No, and that is because as usual you do not include all the ones that have no doctor. The big lie is for Republican leaders to tell all Americans that they are not fighting for the current “feudal” lords and to continue to seed FUD. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/123 "2013-09-25T16:58:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > They absolutely should be going through that process. Why aren’t they? …and that process is? This is GD, so it’s reasonable to expect that you have a \*credible \* cite of the process that every single government worker with potential access to SSN and other biographical information goes through? Notwithstanding the marketing piece you linked to, I assume this is broken down by requirements and procedures for state and federal workers. And the cite shoudl be clear that it’s not just _some_ workers with access to sensitive information, but that **all** do, and Obamacare is the anomaly. Or is it possible that wide swathes of government workers with similar levels of access _don’t_ go through extensive background checks and this is just another piece of shitty, bullshit hand-wringing put out by the Republican Marketing Machine? ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/124 "2013-09-25T17:00:38Z")
If it’s not normal for government workers handling confidential information to go through background checks(and I concede it’s possible), then that would mean the government is far less trustworthy than private corporations, almost all of whom do background checks even if you aren’t handling personal information of customers. It’s good to know that my employer cares more about confidentiality than my government. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/125 "2013-09-25T17:40:57Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > They absolutely should be going through that process. Why aren’t they? > > Then there’s the security of the data hub. > > [http://medcitynews.com/2013/09/attorneys-general-raise-aca-security-concerns-ask-delay-implementation/](http://medcitynews.com/2013/09/attorneys-general-raise-aca-security-concerns-ask-delay-implementation/) > > Democrats acknowledge the problem, but say, “We want solutions, not roadblocks!” Oh, okay, so if there’s no solution by Oct. 1, just open the exchanges anyway? Brilliant. Eventually trial and error has to be done, BTW affirming that it is not perfect or that problems are likely does not mean that we should dump a program that has already a successful pilot in Massachusetts. That would be reckless. It would be like ignoring that programs that are so beneficial that even the Southerners that opposed it for racist reasons support now, like the GI bill, had no problems that were eventually solved. [http://www.uic.edu/depts/uichistory/gibill.html](http://www.uic.edu/depts/uichistory/gibill.html) > [@](#): > > However, by the fall of 1946, just one year after the war ended, almost a million veterans were enrolled in college classes across the nation. At the University of Illinois, more than 23,000 students hoped to register. This represented an 80 percent increase in enrollment from the previous year and 8,000 more than the Urbana campus could accommodate. A committee examining student admissions reported: > > These facts (the anticipated enrollment at Urbana) describe the most serious situation which has ever been faced by the University of Illinois. . . . The problem is not temporary. . . . After the last war the demand for higher education was increased by more than 40 percent. A further increase came after the Great Depression. . . . This is both an emergency and a permanent problem of supreme importance. > > State and U of I officials scoured the region for housing for these new students. They found 75 ready-built houses in Indiana and moved these to Illinois, setting them up in nice, neat rows in a field near campus. The University also agreed to build additional classrooms and residence facilities, including installing dormitories in Memorial Stadium. It quickly became clear, however, that even these efforts would not be sufficient. Lawmakers subsequently offered their solutions to the enrollment crisis. State Senator Everett R. Peters proposed legislation to set up a statewide public junior (community) college system which would offer schooling for freshmen and sophomores near their homes (Senate Bill No. 153, 1945). Others, including then State Senator Richard J. Daley, introduced legislation calling for the creation of a new branch of the University in Chicago (Senate Bill No. 388, 1945). Neither bill passed the General Assembly. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/126 "2013-09-25T17:42:48Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If it’s not normal for government workers handling confidential information to go through background checks(and I concede it’s possible), then that would mean the government is far less trustworthy than private corporations, almost all of whom do background checks even if you aren’t handling personal information of customers. > > It’s good to know that my employer cares more about confidentiality than my government. I’ve been a contract consultant to the State of Florida for about 16 years now. Every time I get a job, I go though a background check and most of my clients don’t keep “identity theft” information - nor would I have access to it, if they did. Still have to go through background. Recently made mandatory for all executive agency employees (including retroactive checks on current employees). ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/127 "2013-09-25T17:48:22Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If it’s not normal for government workers handling confidential information to go through background checks(and I concede it’s possible), then that would mean the government is far less trustworthy than private corporations, almost all of whom do background checks even if you aren’t handling personal information of customers. > > It’s good to know that my employer cares more about confidentiality than my government. By personal experience and by looking at good information I can tell you that you are wrong once again, any government agency I did work for did do background checks and even fingerprint checks when private information was going to be part of the job. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2013, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202/128 "2013-09-25T23:48:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Four Republican criticisms are coming true: > > . . . . > > 1. The law is too complicated. That’s not a Republican criticism, but a Republican feature. If Congress was all Democrats (and I’m not saying that would be good), the simpler [Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_National_Health_Care_Act) would have passed. And with a few less Republicans – something I do favor – we would have a national health exchange rather than the confusing situation where in a single media market like Philadelphia, media has to explain different policies and plans in Pennsylvania (worst, due to a highly obstructionist governor), New Jersey (better, due to a moderately obstructionist governor) and Delaware (best, due to state-federal cooperation). One problem with debating this is that the relevant web sites will not open until next week. When they do, we’ll have more concrete opportunities for proponents to advocate and critics to cavil. And next year, when Affordable Care is reality, with its great benefits and lesser drawbacks, debate will, I hope, be more realistic. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gop-obstructionism-and-the-constitution-and-scotus/669202.md?page=6)