You are seriously misinformed on this, but so are many people.
Much of the Obamacare funding is done under MANDATORY spending which can’t be just stopped, and the rest is under discretionary spending—which can be put back by the senate (and would be). Any bill defunding Obamacare would then go to...Obama.
From openCongress:
“A Republican-led Congress would send Obama an appropriations bill minus the money for enacting the health care law and dare him to veto it. If he vetoes it, no funds are appropriated and unless Congress folds and sends it back with the health care money included, funding for the government would start to run out. Most of the health care funding would be contained in the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill, which funds a lot of the programs that get the most use, like public schools, low-income heating assistance, unemployment insurance, job training, and public broadcasting, so it would be a very high-stakes game.”
Yes, we know, YOU don’t care about all that, but watch what happens when the above scenario is enacted: it’s an old song, called ‘Bill Clinton’s Second Term.” This time sung by a president who’s dropping in he polls until we hand him his second term.
So Boehner didn’t put up a bill that would have no meaning? Big flippin’ deal.
Folks around here seem to think Boehner is a dictator who can simply wave his magic wand and make all our dreams come true. Maybe if we’d elected a few more senators we’d have a chance, but we didn’t. Boehner isn’t my idea of a great politician, but he’s facing a Democrat Senate and a Democrat White House. All the whining about betrayal won’t change that, and the facts of how spending happens in Washington, one bit.
Less name-calling and more facts will help you here.
Excuse me, how is it that ‘mandatory’ spending is untouchable? Congress can pull the plug on anything they decide to, even so called ‘mandatory’ spending.