Democrat vs. Republican

Democrat
Republican

This comparison examines the differences between the policies and political positions of the Democratic and Republican parties on major issues such as taxes, the role of government, entitlements (Social Security, Medicare), gun control, immigration, healthcare, abortion and gay rights. These two parties dominate America's political landscape but differ greatly in their philosophies and ideals.

Democratic Party vs Republican Party redirects here.

Comparison chart

Edit this comparison chart

Democrat

User Rating (10283):

Republican

User Rating (10122):
Philosophy Liberal, left-leaning. Conservative, right-leaning.
Economic Ideas Minimum wages and progressive taxation, i.e., higher tax rates for higher income brackets. Born out of anti-federalist ideals but evolved over time to favor more government regulation. Believe taxes shouldn't be increased for anyone (including the wealthy) and that wages should be set by the free market.
Social and human ideas Based on community and social responsibility Based on individual rights and justice
Traditionally strong in states California, Massachusetts Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas
Symbol Donkey Elephant
Color Blue Red
Founded in 1824 1854
Website www.democrats.org www.gop.com
Senate Leader Harry Reid Mitch McConnell
Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz Reince Priebus
Famous Presidents Franklin Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Woodrow Wilson, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Richard Nixon

Contents: Democrat vs Republican

edit Origin of the Democratic and Republican parties

The Democratic Party traces its origins to the anti-federalist factions around the time of America’s independence from British rule. These factions were organized into the Democrat – Republican party by Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and other influential opponents of the Federalists in 1792.

The Republican party is the younger of the two parties. Founded in 1854 by anti-slavery expansion activists and modernizers, the Republican Party rose to prominence with the election of Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president.

edit History

Since the division of the Republican Party in the election of 1912, the Democratic party has consistently positioned itself to the left of the Republican Party in economic as well as social matters. The economically left-leaning activist philosophy of Franklin D. Roosevelt, which has strongly influenced American liberalism, has shaped much of the party's economic agenda since 1932. Roosevelt's New Deal coalition usually controlled the national government until 1964.

The Republican Party was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery expansion activists and modernizers, it rose to prominence with the election of Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president. The party presided over the American Civil War and Reconstruction and was harried by internal factions and scandals towards the end of the 19th century. Today, the Republican Party supports a pro-business platform, with further foundations in economic libertarianism and a brand of social conservatism increasingly based on the viewpoints of the Religious Right.

edit Differences in Philosophy

While there may be several differences in opinion between individual Democrats and Republicans on certain issues, what follows is a generalization of their stand on several of these issues. A Democrat is typically known as a supporter of a broader range of social services in America than those advocated by Republicans. Republican philosophy is based on a limited influence of government and a dominant foreign policy.

Republicans are considered on the "right" end of the political spectrum while Democrats are on the "left." The far right generally is pro-religion, anti-bureaucracy, pro-military, pro-business and pro-personal responsibility.

Republicans, are usually considered conservative (fiscally as well as socially), maybe a little pious, pro-business and against the bureaucracy often associated with big government. They see big governments as wasteful and an obstacle to getting things done. Their approach is Darwinian in that the strong shall survive, cream rises to the top, etc.

To the far left of the spectrum are the extreme liberal, or the most extreme democrats. Democrats are considered more liberal. Democrats tend to favor an active role for government in society and believe that such involvement – be it environmental regulations against polluting or anti-discrimination laws – can improve the quality of people’s lives and help achieve the larger goals of opportunity and equality. On the other hand, Republicans tend to favor a limited role for government in society and believe that such reliance on the private sector (businesses and individuals) – be it avoiding unnecessary environmental regulations or heavy-handed anti-discrimination laws – can improve economic productivity and help achieve the larger goals of freedom and self-reliance

edit Individual and Community

Republican philosophy leans more towards individual freedoms, rights and responsibilities. In contrast, Democrats attach greater importance to equality and social/community responsibility.

edit Democratic vs Republican stand on controversial issues

The Democrats and Republicans have varying ideas on many issues, some of which are listed below. These are broadly generalized opinions; it must be noted that there are many politicians in each party who have different and more nuanced positions on these issues.

edit Military

Republicans: Prefer increasing military spending and have a more hard line stance against countries like Iran, with a higher tendency to deploy the military option.

Democrats: Prefer lower increases in military spending and are comparatively more reluctant to using military force against countries like Iran, Syria and Libya.

edit Gun control laws

Democrats favor more gun control laws e.g. oppose the right to carry concealed weapons in public places. Republicans oppose gun control laws and are strong supporters of the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms) as well as the right to carry concealed weapons.

edit Abortion

Democrats support abortion rights and keeping elective abortions legal. Republicans believe abortions should not be legal and that Roe v. Wade should be overturned. Some Republicans go so far as to oppose the contraception mandate i.e. requiring employer-paid health insurance plans to cover contraception.

A related point of divergence is embryonic stem cell research - Democrats support it while Republicans do not.

edit Gay rights

Democrats tend to favor equal rights for gay and lesbian couples e.g. the right to get married and adopt children. Republicans believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman so they do not support gay marriage or allowing them to adopt children.

edit Death Penalty

Opponents of the death penalty form a much higher fraction of the Democratic Party when compared to the GOP.

edit Taxes

Democrats support progressive taxes i.e. they want high-income individuals to pay taxes at a higher rate. They support higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for public programs. Republicans support tax cuts for everyone (rich and poor alike). They consider higher tax rates on the rich a form of class warfare.

edit Minimum Wage

Democrats favor increase in the minimum wage to help workers. Republicans oppose raising the minimum wage because it hurts businesses.

edit Role of Government

One of the fundamental differences between Democratic and Republican party ideals is around the role of government. Republicans favor a small government — both in terms of the number of people employed by the government and in terms of the roles and responsibilities of government in society. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is a government agency that many Republican presidential candidates love to deride as an example of "useless" government agencies that they would shut down.

Another example is the food stamps program. Republicans in Congress are demanding cuts in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (or SNAP), while Democrats want to expand this program. Democrats argue that with unemployment rate high in the economy, many families need the assistance provided by the program. Republicans argue that there is a lot of fraud in the program that is wasting taxpayer dollars. They also want to institute clauses that force beneficiaries of the program to take more personal responsibility through measures such as mandatory drug testing, and looking for a job.[1]

edit Civil Rights

Abraham Lincoln belonged to the Republican Party, so the roots of the party are in individual freedom and the abolition of slavery. Indeed, 82% of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate voted in favor of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 while only 69% of Democrats did. The Southern wing of the Democratic party was vehemently opposed to civil rights legislation.

However, after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, there was a sort of role reversal. Todd Purdum, author of An Idea Whose Time Has Come, a book about the legislative maneuvering behind the passage of the Civil Rights Act, says this in an interview with NPR:

SIEGEL: How much of the Republican Party in Congress supported the civil rights bill as it still was? And how many voted for cloture to break the filibuster?

PURDUM: Well, the final vote in the Senate for the bill was 73 to 27, with 27 out of 33 Republican votes. So in proportional terms, the Republicans supported this bill much more than the Democrats did in both houses.

SIEGEL: A few weeks after Lyndon Johnson signed that bill into law, as we heard at the beginning, the Republicans go and they nominate Barry Goldwater for president, a Republican who had voted against civil rights. And their legacy is jettisoned at that moment.

PURDUM: In some important way that was the beginning of changing the Republican Party from the party of Lincoln into the party of white backlash which is, frankly, reputation that in the South particularly endures to this day, and has hurt the Republican Party as a national brand in presidential elections.

Republicans believe that Purdum's point of view is misleading because Goldwater supported previous attempts at passing a Civil Rights act, and desegregation, but did not like the 1964 Act because he felt it infringed on States' rights.

In any case, the present dynamic is that minorities like African Americans and Hispanics are more likely to vote Democratic than Republican. However, there are prominent African American Republicans like Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Herman Cain, Clarence Thomas, Michael Steele and Alan West, as well as Hispanics like Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Alberto Gonzales and Brian Sandoval.

edit Voter ID laws

Civil liberties groups like the ACLU criticize the GOP for pushing for voter ID laws — Republicans believe these laws are necessary to prevent voter fraud while Democrats claim that voter fraud is virtually non-existent and that these laws disenfranchise black and Hispanic voters who tend to be poorer and unable to obtain ID cards.

edit Logos of the Democratic and Republican parties

Republican Party (GOP) logo
Republican Party (GOP) logo
Democratic Party logo
Democratic Party logo

edit Red states and Blue states list

Due to the TV coverage during some of the presidential elections in the past, the color Red has become associated with the Republicans (as in Red states – the states where the Republican presidential nominee wins) and Blue is associated with the Democrats.

The Democratic Party, once dominant in the Southeastern United States, is now strongest in the Northeast (Mid-Atlantic and New England), Great Lakes Region, as well as along the Pacific Coast (especially Coastal California), including Hawaii. The Democrats are also strongest in major cities. Recently, Democratic candidates have been faring better in some southern states, such as Virginia, Arkansas, and Florida, and in the Rocky Mountain states, especially Colorado, Montana, Nevada, and New Mexico.

Since 1980, geographically the Republican "base" ("red states") is strongest in the South and West, and weakest in the Northeast and the Pacific Coast. The Republican Party's strongest focus of political influence lies in the Great Plains states, particularly Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska, and in the western states of Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah.

edit Famous Republican vs Democratic Presidents

Republicans have controlled the White House for 28 of the last 43 years since Richard Nixon became president. Famous Democrat Presidents have been Franklin Roosevelt, who pioneered the New Deal in America and stood for 4 terms, John F. Kennedy, who presided over the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban missile crisis, and was assassinated in Office; Bill Clinton, who was impeached by the House of Representatives; and Nobel Peace Prize winners Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter.

Famous Republican Presidents include Abraham Lincoln, who abolished slavery; Teddy Roosevelt, known for the Panama Canal; Ronald Reagan, credited for ending the Cold War with Gorbachev; and the two Bush family Presidents of recent times. Republican President Richard Nixon was forced to resign over the Watergate scandal.

edit Control of the White House

This graphic shows which party controlled the White House since 1901. You can find the list of Presidents on Wikipedia.

U.S. Presidents by political party since 1901

edit References

Share this comparison:

If you read this far, you should follow us on:

"Democrat vs Republican." Diffen.com. Diffen LLC, n.d. Web. 20 Sep 2014. < http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democrat_vs_Republican >

Stay informed Related Comparisons
Follow Diffen
Make Diffen Smarter.

Log in to edit comparisons or create new comparisons in your area of expertise!

Sign up »
Top 5 Comparisons Recently Compared

Comments: Democrat vs Republican

Comments via Facebook

Anonymous comments (40)

December 18, 2013, 2:34am

The Stimulus Package should not have been put into effect. If a company can't survive, then it should not survive. It's like not putting down an injured dog.

— 64.✗.✗.202
8

September 20, 2012, 11:39am

I am republican, and I am not wealthy nor have extra cash sitting around. I don't use credit cards to help stay out of debt yet I pay on a mortgage and a car. I go to college on my dime when I can get a class here and there and work full time. I do not want what I do earn after taxes to get taxed more to go to someone else's pocket because I simply earn more than them. I didn't run off to college and take a student loan or take a break after graduating high school years ago. I have started at the bottom, making minimum wage. As time went on, I gained experience in my job field. As I gained more experience in my job field, I became more valuable to employers. As I became more valuable to my employers, I began to earn higher wages. I feel I have earned where I am at, and I am still going further. I feel I took a legit path to becoming financially secure. Why should I have to surrender a portion of what I earn to someone that says it should be entitled to them as well? Everyone starts somewhere, and most of the time it's from the bottom.

— 63.✗.✗.11
8

May 10, 2013, 8:02pm

Debty is Bushes fault? ya right. Obama TRIPLED it in 2 years!
how? ya right. you say.... Google "Obama Stimulus"

— 98.✗.✗.147
4

April 8, 2014, 2:28am

A) I strongly agree and disagree with both parties Ideology.
B) I believe that because of how polarized American politics is today, people can't agree on anything even if both sides like the idea.
C) George Washington warned against political parties.
D) Political parties cause divisions in American people even during our revolution.
E) Abraham Lincoln said that "a House divided cannot stand." The Civil was fought over the political issue of slavery.
F) The political parties evolve and change over time.
G ) Every time a new issue comes up the parties fight over the side that will gain them votes, because their current ideologies don't contain anything related to the issue
H) Examples include: Slavery, Civil Rights, The Populist Party, the Progressive Party/Bull Moose, etc...
I) The parties today may be classified as conservative or liberal, but America really invented these classifications, and really both party are just a collection of standpoints bouncing around the whole spectrum of ideology, ethics, and logic.

— 98.✗.✗.250
3

October 21, 2013, 10:55pm

I need more information!!!

— 24.✗.✗.206
3

January 15, 2013, 3:50pm

Basically you should have to pass a test to vote. Nothing really hard. Basic stuff. How many Senators does your state have? Um, 2. Roughly how much is the national debt? 16 .4 trillion and climbing fast. Who is the Vice President? Joe Biden. Nothing tricky. But just enough to show that you have a clue. I mean should total clueless idiots be able to influence elections?

— 69.✗.✗.15
2

October 18, 2012, 5:25pm

Lets not forget the lobbyists. Get rid of them, and congressman and politicians wouldn't know what to do with themselves

— 63.✗.✗.242
2

September 27, 2012, 5:16pm

Being informed and aware of your surroundings, Obama isn't a Democrat but a Socialist. And a Socialist is just a step away from Communist. Ask yourself whether you need the government to make personal decisions for you on a daily basis or not.

— 69.✗.✗.3
2

March 23, 2014, 1:28am

The republican party of Lincoln was a progressive party that disappeared by the 1880s. It was composed of NE abolitionists who opposed slavery on moral grounds, and poor white laborers who opposed slavery because they saw slave labor as an economic threat. The party that formed after it was an entirely different party. They retained the "republican" name, but their agenda was a corporate/plutocratic one. You're providing the history of a name, when you should be providing a history of a platform, or set of core values. Names are arbitrary and meaningless. Values are the defining characteristic of a party and the coherent thread you trace back through time.

— 76.✗.✗.223
1

July 19, 2013, 12:02am

Some of this doesn't entirely make sense - it gives the impression that Democrats and Republicans represent the left and right poles of the political spectrum, for instance, while the modern Democratic party is more centre-left than leftist. (Compare the progressiveness of the tax rates in the 1950s with those of the 2010s, for instance. Or compare Obamacare with the Gingrich, Dole, and Romney health plans.) Most modern Republican politicians stop short of Ayn Rand's extreme-right economics, and very few modern Democrats advocate raising taxes on the
rich to the level they were in the 1960s or 1950s.

The notion that higher taxes on the rich are always class warfare is an extreme right position - not shared universally in the Republican party.

Lumping contraception in as a subcategory of abortion doesn't make sense - while abortion can be considered a form of contraception, anyone who knows anything about human biology knows that contraception is not a form of abortion.

The characterisation of Republicans as favouring limited government intervention
is inaccurate. Drug prohibition, the surveillance net, contraceptive restrictions, abortion laws, and anti-homosexuality legislation all extend government into people's private lives. While a few Republicans do think the government should scale back its power, this is not a majority belief among Republican legislators.

— 66.✗.✗.183
1

May 23, 2013, 2:39am

First I'd like to point out that A. Much of Obama's spending was in a stimulus package that helped the economy and B.It's hard to get things done when Congress can get nothing done do to conflicting majorities.

— 173.✗.✗.24
1

February 19, 2013, 9:13am

good site

— 2.✗.✗.141
1

January 25, 2013, 8:58am

Quit blaming the President. ( whoever it may be this time or next, or previously) The problems are the fault of the people WE voted on to represent us. Republican or Democrat. Who cares? When we ALL start acting like AMERICANS, maybe just maybe we will see some "change".

— 209.✗.✗.129
1

April 5, 2014, 12:01pm

Very clear you want to be slave vote Democrat
Freedom vote Republican
I will NEVER BE AGREE 100% but I like and love fredom I running away from a country very democratic like so I chose To be a REPUBLICAN also depends on the candidate. But hate to depend from the government things always end like my country where I came from Honduras one of the most poor and dangerous country thanks to a democratic ideas.
I vote Republican.

— 108.✗.✗.166
0

January 5, 2014, 7:22am

Nicely put. Thanks.

— 27.✗.✗.139
0

November 5, 2013, 7:48pm

Wow..never ending!

— 67.✗.✗.15
0

October 25, 2013, 9:41am

The best comments are short & snappy, and hopefully bridge towards a thoughtful discussion. Think poetry. If you write more that a few lines, you'd better be really interesting- otherwise, you are boring and people are skiping your posts! Do you really think your specific opinion is so valid? Try to find things in common and quit looking to disagree.

— 207.✗.✗.221
0

July 1, 2013, 6:17pm

This entry was obviously written by a democrat. All the examples for democrat are positive but republican examples are mostly negative. Someone was very clever to write this

— 12.✗.✗.133
0

January 2, 2013, 5:18am

The Basics:
What is ObamaCare?
It's the short name for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a controversial act which proposes a significant updates to the U.S. healthcare system.
In its current form, ObamaCare requires insurance companies to cover all applicants and offer the same rates regardless of pre-existing conditions or gender.
It is a 15 part plan which will be rolled out in stages. 8 stages are complete as of mid-2012, and 7 stages will complete over the next eight years.

Healthcare for all sounds great! But I know you can't get something for nothing. How's the program paid for?
A penalty will be required from a small portion of the population.
[See the Social Section below for more details.]

Penalty is sort of a harsh word. Later, we should look into calling it something else. Who all is in that small portion of the population?
The small portion of the population which will pay the penalty consists of all US citizens who pay their taxes legally.
[See the Economics Section below for more details.]

Wait....what? Why am I being taxed for this?
Put simply, tax payers are the only option. If this is a law, it's federally mandated. If it's federally mandated, the government is required to pay.
The only source of money coming into to the US government is taxes derived from US citizens with jobs.
The logical answer therefore is to have the country's hard working, law abiding tax payers pay for this program which may primarily end up helping non-US citizens and the those who do not work.
[See the Social Section below for more details.]

This doesn't sound right or fair. But I don't know much about it, since I haven't done the research. So, what do my neighbors think?
Polls over the last two decades show Americans don't want Obamacare (FYI - it's been in many forms, with many names over the years)
Recent polls from 2012 show that 61% of Americans are opposed to the Government requiring all US residents to own health insurance.
[See the Social Section below for more details.]

So I don't like it, and the Jones don't like it? How did it become law? Did I vote for this on accident? Was it hidden somewhere on the ballot?
You did not vote on this at all. The government is mandating this of you. You weren't part of the decision making party.
[See the Social Section below for more details.]

The government is creating a law to tell me what to buy? Has the government ever done this before?
No, never.
[See the Political Section below for more details.]

How can the government make me buy something I don't want to buy now?
While technically they cannot, in this instance a legal loophole is being exploited after reclassifying the penalty as a tax.
[See the Political Section below for more details.]

So because of a legal loop hole and some political word games, my taxes will be increased to buy health care for illegal aliens and the jobless?
Yes. Even though Obama has stated many times that this is not a tax. In a satirical and ironic twist, Obama himself is contradicting the legal loophole being used.

So, making me pay a penalty is illegal, but by calling it a tax, that Obama himself says isn't a tax, this entire plan suddenly becomes legal?
No, this act cannot be called a tax legally, as it does not conform with any US tax code. US tax law is extensive because it is very specific, and no tax law has the scope to allow what's being done here.
Exceeds the Scope of the Commerce Clause
ObamaCare imposes a financial penalty on those that fail to purchase health insurance.
The Constitution does not grant Congress independent power to tax for the general welfare
The Constitution allow Congress to use taxation as a means to regulate activity, unless that regulation is authorized by the Constitution
This "tax" does not satisfy any of the three types of Constitutionally valid tax types: income, excise, or direct
The penalty is not assessed on income so it is not a valid income tax.
The penalty is not assessed uniformly and is triggered by economic inactivity so it is not a valid excise tax.
ObamaCare fails to apportion the tax among the states by population, and therefore is not a valid direct tax.
Ironically, the US Supreme Court review of ObamaCare stated this same fact.
Even if everyone suddenly agreed it could be considered a tax (which it can't), the approval of the bill would be a violation of the US legal code, and at the same time create conflict with existing US law.
Bill's creation does not meet all legal requirements which all tax law creation must abide by
The Constitution's "Origination" clause provides that "all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives"
Since hypothetically ObamaCare would impose a tax, it would fall under this provision's set of requirements.
100% of all legal tax law creations and revisions have been first raised in the House of Representatives, as required by law.
ObamaCare was introduced in the upper chamber by Senate by Harry Reid, not the House of Representatives as required for tax law.
Constitutionally speaking, this cannot be both tax law and considered to have been created legally. Meaning of course it's either a penalty or it was created illegally.
Threatens the Notion of Limited Government
The government has never before required its citizens to buy something, tax or otherwise.
Imperils Religious Liberty
Forces religious institutions and individuals who have conflicting beliefs to purchase services which violate their faith.
Rewrites Contract Law
The individual mandate makes purchase of health insurance compulsory.
For centuries, a US contract is valid only if all parties voluntarily and mutually assent to its terms.
If you do not mutually assent to the terms of ObamaCare, you will be penalized for not paying the original penalty.

And this is all Obama's fault?
No, not "all".
Obama did not create Obamacare, therefore he cannot be blamed for everything.
He did however leverage his position as POTUS to push ObamaCare forward with no legal precedence, and outside United States law.
While Obama has the largest portion of the fault, he doesn't have all of it.

I think I got it - not legal as a penalty, not legal as a tax. I'm at a loss for words. Is there anything else I should know?
Yes, there is. And this is even more important than the controversy surrounding whether it's a legal bill or not. Strategically speaking, the 3 larger issue at hand are:
Elimination of freedom of choice for US citizens
Self-imposed governmental power expansion
Requiring hardworking folks to pay for the others.
The strategic effects of the 3 wars being waged under the covers is in the micro-transactions, bringing us ever-closer to a Utopian variant or Democratic variant of Socialism
Historically, any form of Socialism serves as a temporary placeholder on a migration from Capitalism to Communism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopian_socialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism
The US was founded on choice. Removing America's choice is tantamount to killing America's culture.

Detailed Economic Impact Analysis
Will the financial impact be large?
Florida spends over a quarter of its budget on Medicaid today. That will expand by at least 50% under Obamacare as some 1.3 million new people enroll.
Those benefits, and the burden of setting up the new exchanges, will cost Florida $149 million in 2014 and $1.05 billion annually by 2018
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704896104575140063408610580.html
A report by the Congressional Budget Office projected ObamaCare will require more than $1.7 trillion in gross federal spending over the period 2012-2022.
Net spending of more than $1.2 trillion for the insurance portion of the bill.
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43080
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43104

But there are savings to Medicare right? Doesn't Obamacare pay for itself?
A report by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that by 2019, Obamacare will cost $40 billion more annually, than just Medicare alone.
http://heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/27696.pdf

Detailed Social Impact Analysis
Isn't being uninsured related to being unemployeed? Shouldn't we be addressing the root issue here instead of a symptom?
It is not just related, it is directly linked at a correlation rate almost exactly 100%.
http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7850.pdf
http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/Brief-Policy-Analysis.pdf
Fix unemployment, and you fix uninsured.
http://media.photobucket.com/image/recent/LadyLiberty1885/TheArticles/Job-Gains-By-Presidential-Tenure-Large.jpg
http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa402/LadyLiberty1885/TheArticles/Job-Gains-By-Presidential-Tenure-Large.jpg
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001?output_view=net_1mth
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/100226-annual-report-middle-class.pdf

Who is projected to benefit from ObamaCare?
Illegal immigrants - estimated 11.2 - 21.6 million
http://www.ciab.com/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2189
Already occuring:
http://www.examiner.com/article/illegal-alien-relax-you-re-covered
http://www.alipac.us/f12/undocumented-latinos-praise-obamacare-260333/
US Citizens - estimated 35 million
http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/chart-graph/number-uninsured-under-ppaca
Unemployeed
Citizens not enrolled in Medicaid despite being eligible.
Citizens not otherwise covered and opting to pay the annual penalty instead of purchasing insurance - mostly younger and single Americans.
Citizens whose insurance coverage would cost more than 8% of household income and are exempt from paying the annual penalty.
Citizens who live in states that opt out of the Medicaid expansion and who qualify for neither existing Medicaid coverage nor subsidized coverage through the states' new insurance exchanges.
So, 25% - 33% of those covered are illegal immagrants
And 66% - 75% of those covered are unemployeed or won't pay in to a healthcare system today

The majority of general public does not want federally mandated health care
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/24/us-usa-campaign-healthcare-idUSBRE85N01M20120624
56% of Americans overall were against the law
61% opposed requiring all U.S. residents to own health insurance
Additional Public Polls
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/as-health-care-laws-trial-approaches-two-thirds-say-ditch-individual-mandate/
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/06/09/healthcare.pdf

Voters have put into place blocks on individual mandates
In 2010, voters in 3 (maybe more) states enacted ballot measures to block the individual mandate. In effect, they laid the foundation for future legal challenges.
Oklahoma approved an opt-out ballot initiative by a 2-to-1 margin.
Proposition 106 in Arizona gained 55 percent of the vote.
Missouri voters approved a similar measure, Proposition C, with 71 percent support on a primary ballot in August.
Ohio joined this group in 2011 after the issue appeared on the ballot in Ohio.
67% of registered voters opposed when asked "if they agree with a mandate that they obtain coverage or face fines". 29% did support.
Subsequent reports showed 66% of voters rejected the mandate.

Detailed Political Impact Analysis
Is it consitutional for the government to make me buy something?
No, it's not. Fining individuals for failing to buy insurance is not within the scope of Congress's taxing powers.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/15010
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/48xx/doc4816/doc38.pdf
During another health care debate in 1994, the Congressional Budget Office issued a report describing an individual mandate as "an unprecedented form of federal action."
The agency also wrote, "The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States."
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1680392&http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CBgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpapers.ssrn.com%2Fsol3%2FDelivery.cfm%2FSSRN_ID1680392_code238438.pdf%3Fabstractid%3D1680392%26mirid%3D1&rct=j&q=commandeering%20the%20People%3A%20Why%20the%20Individual%20Health%20Insurance%20Mandate%20is%20Unconstitutional&ei=02_TTPLEJIO8sQO3mbX7BQ&usg=AFQjCNE1CnMtC6sLUzQQYMYSniZHCm2qhQ
Randy Barnett of Georgetown University Law Center argues that the mandate is unconstitutional under the doctrine of the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses, and that enforcing it is equivalent to "commandeering the people."

Why doesn't someone do something?
Many group, organizations, and even states are battling the legislature now.
28 states have filed individual lawsuits with the federal goverment. 26 of those states also filed jointly.
Research this for more info: National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius

Who else is fighting for US Citizens?
The Wall Street Journal
"If the insurance mandate stands, then why can't Congress insist that Americans buy GM cars, or that obese Americans eat their vegetables or pay a fat tax penalty?"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704896104575140063408610580.html
Many more. I'm sleepy. :-)

How is this legal at all?
In 2010, in order to make the tax-payer penalty legal, the transaction was re-classified as a tax on commerce.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/28/explaining-the-supreme-court-ruling-on-obamacare.html
In 2012, the Supreme Courtr agreed that if classified as a tax, then ObamaCare would be legal.
In a hypocritical finding, the Supreme Court also agreed that ObamaCare could be considered or protected under the commerce clause.
So if not commerce, how is it considered a tax?? Since that point was not specifically challenged, it was not delivered as a final ruling
Ironically, it was recorded in the report's findings that 5 of the 9 justices would have immediately ruled Obamacare not a tax it had been required.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf

So Obama called it a tax all along?
No. Obama and his administration have emphatically reiterated that this is not a tax. They've gone into great detail to make sure everyone knew this was not a tax.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/06/obama-in-2009-its-not-a-tax/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/jul/5/obama-camp-mandate-penalty-not-tax/

Sources of U.S. income tax laws
United States income tax law comes from 9 sources, grouped into 3 seperate teirs for manageability.

Where conflicts exist between various sources of tax authority, an authority in Tier 1 outweighs an authority in Tier 2 or 3. Similarly, an authority in Tier 2 outweighs an authority in Tier 3.

Where conflicts exist between two authorities in the same tier, the "last-in-time rule" is applied. As the name implies, the "last-in-time rule" states that the authority that was issued later in time is controlling.

Tier 1
United States Constitution
Internal Revenue Code (IRC) (legislative authority, written by the United States Congress through legislation)
Treasury regulations
Federal court opinions (judicial authority, written by courts as interpretation of legislation)
Treaties (executive authority, written in conjunction with other countries)
Tier 2
Agency interpretative regulations (executive authority, written by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Department of the Treasury), including:
Final, Temporary and Proposed Regulations promulgated under IRC § 7805;
Treasury Notices and Announcements;
Public Administrative Rulings (IRS Revenue Rulings, which provide informal guidance on specific questions and are binding on all taxpayers)
Tier 3
Legislative History
Private Administrative Rulings (private parties may approach the IRS directly and ask for a Private Letter Ruling on a specific issue - these rulings are binding only on the requesting taxpayer).

Accurate and provocative summary by Donald Trump
Let me get this straight.....

We're going to be "GIFTED" with a health care paln we are FORCED TO PURCHASE and FINED if we don't,
which purportedly covers a least TEN MILLION MORE PEOPLE,
without adding a single new doctor,
but provides for 16,000 NEW IRS AGENTS,
written by a committe whose chairman says he DOESN'T UNDERSTAND IT,
PASSED by a Congress THAT DIDN'T READ IT but EXEMPTED themselves from it,
and was signed by a President who SMOKES,
with FUNDING administered by a treasury chief who DIDN'T PAY HIS TAXES,
for which we will be TAXED FOR FOUR YEARS BEFORE ANY BENEFITS TAKE EFFECT,
by a government which has ALREADY BANKRUPTED SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE,
all to be overseen by a surgeon general who is OBESE,
and FINANCED by a country that's BROKE!!!

IS THERE SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

— 213.✗.✗.208
0

December 30, 2012, 8:58pm

My state Illinois is pretty much a democratic states. Stricter gun laws, abortion is legal, death penalty is illegal, democratic politicians.

— 99.✗.✗.205
0

December 10, 2012, 4:51pm

Obama deserves another chance. He came into his presidency with a terrible economy and he has helped improve it very much so over the years. I agree with the Democratic views. Liberal. Gays should have rights. You love who you love. The military is spending a lot of excess money on unnecessary things. Some of you people need to open your eyes and see how Obama is helping us. Romney couldn't make up his mind about anything, that is why he didn't win the election.

— 75.✗.✗.145
0

November 18, 2012, 10:01pm

I am republican all the way baby! Obama is ruining our country! Wonder what all his supporters will have to say in 4 years when things are even worse than now? Of course they'll keep blaming Bush. Lord help the president that has to clean up Obama's mess! My poor children's futures are not looking to good with this fool running our country :(. Watched Obama 2016 and it just confirms that he DOES NOT support this country!

— 66.✗.✗.63
0

November 15, 2012, 3:33pm

You do realize in the constatution we have the right to over throw the government if they try taking away our rights. But people are to lazy to try. they give the government all the power and then complain like children

— 168.✗.✗.80
0

November 10, 2012, 12:54am

Ahhhhhhh stupid mainstream liberals!!!

— 142.✗.✗.147
0

November 9, 2012, 5:21pm

I Think anyone working in the White House and its affiliates on payroll, should be paid according to their performance. Example (If you suck at being president... your pay should suck). I'd bet things would look a lot different if my example was put in place.

— 99.✗.✗.3
0

November 9, 2012, 5:37am

There's an error in the first paragraph in "Famous Presidents" it should refer to democrat, not to republican

— 144.✗.✗.65
0

November 6, 2012, 8:07pm

To all, whatever party you vote for, you got to know that it's all an hoax! The decision is already made by the Elite groups!! This voting poll is just a charade, a game this Elite group has come up with in order for the people to think they are in control, but no average citizen has any say as we are merely a pawn in their game called 'Mind Control'You may think this i am just another extremist, but whatever party You voted for in the past, ask yourselves, "As my life changed at all?" I dare say your lives would have changed in the negative more than the positive! It is not this elected canditates that make the laws, they are also pawns in their game, they are held on a string and being dictate to just as we are!! When i say the Elite group i mean the Rothschild family (not jewish but german bloodline and the name means Red shield, the founders of salvation army, always collecting money for the needy, yet the needy keep needing, surprise surprise!), Rockefellers, Kinsingers etc. They are who are deciding the outcome of the elections anywhere in the world as they own the big Banks. If you think you have a say in this election, then you are very dillusional!! Do yourselves a favour, read "The protocols of Zion" and maybe then you might understand the rules of the Game...

— 124.✗.✗.53
0

November 6, 2012, 7:21pm

im for sure pro life pro guns and pro sanity so lets not fight and choose the smart coice romneys the way

— 164.✗.✗.66
0

November 6, 2012, 4:44pm

Everyone needs to re-elect Obama. I haven't worked in years and under his watch I am going to get even better health care than I have now. Why work? Just kick back and enjoy the free house, free cable TV, free health care, free groceries. Life is good. Republicans keep working hard so I dont lose my entitlements.. Yes you owe me so support Obama. I would hate to have to go back to work and support myself and my family.

— 12.✗.✗.100
0

November 6, 2012, 4:38pm

Sadly they are both out for themselves. If having to pick between the two, I have no choice but to vote for Romney. America cannot afford another 4 years of Obama. I can barely afford the gas for my car now and inflation as a whole has spiraled out of control under his watch. I cannot think of one good thing Obama has done in 4 years and no he did not capture any terrorists, our military did and they would have been just as successful regardless of who is sitting in the White House.

— 12.✗.✗.100
0

November 5, 2012, 3:59pm

seriously people you can't expect Obama to fix al the damage caused in a few short years, no one can. Give it time. People will never be happy with who won. They will always be wrong a few months after being elected. Grow up.

— 41.✗.✗.212
0

November 2, 2012, 6:14pm

NEITHER ROMNEY OR OBAMA ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO BE PRESIDENT

— 165.✗.✗.22
0

October 31, 2012, 10:20pm

Romney is an empty out of touch suit who will say anything to get your vote. Lie after lie. He had a terrible record as governer while his state was 47th in job growth. All the republicans can do is point fingers at Obama for the mess republicans got us in to begin with.

Against all odds Obama has still done great things for our country. He has led with integrity and always done what was right for everybody. I believe he will be remembered as one of our greatest presidents in history after his second term.

Even with a republican house that admitted their priority was to make Obama fail, he still has not failed. Do you really want to go back to 2008 and worse? Republicans played politics at our expense for the last four years and yet still Obama has managed to get some great things done.

Obama 2012 !

— 99.✗.✗.36
0

October 31, 2012, 10:15pm

If you are planning to vote this year based on partisinship or traditional core values please consider that modern political parties are no longer applicable to the original values or beliefs in which they were founded on.

In contrast, they tend to exploit the core values within the political spectrum to the extreme which then counteracts the original concept.

Something to think about:

Modern Liberals support ideas such as free and fair elections, civil rights, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, free trade, and a right to life, liberty, and property.

Liberalism means freedom. Conservatism means control.

The modern GOP goes against individual liberty, democracy, prosperity, and civilization. Whether conservatism is imposed by the extremist or is practiced in different forms in various parts of the world: Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, South East Asia, or in the United States, conservatism is a destructive political and social-economic system of inequality and prejudice that is often founded on deception and intimidation.

— 99.✗.✗.36
0

October 29, 2012, 5:52pm

abortion IS murder because the babies are in the process of forming therefore its murder

— 163.✗.✗.206
0

October 26, 2012, 7:22pm

Stopping the cells from gathering? What if they're already gathered? What if they've gone from cells to a fetus? Saying that a fetus is just a gathering of 'cells' is wrong. Scientifically, all you are is a 'gathering of cells,' and, therefore, by your logic, you're not a human being with the right to live.
A fetus is NOT a bunch of tissue. A fetus CAN feel pain and distress. A fetus CAN sense when something isn't right -- heart rates rise, limbs flail, attempts to escape from the danger -- all have been documented on ultrasound of a live abortion.

— 64.✗.✗.8
0

October 22, 2012, 8:35pm

No second term obamas had his chance.

— 156.✗.✗.19
0

October 20, 2012, 9:40pm

No- one position asks people accepts responsibility for their actions. The other doesn't.

— 64.✗.✗.159
0

October 18, 2012, 5:17am

So those of you who support abortion, do you also believe that its okay for a woman to kill her own children? I am a woman and I agree that a woman should not be forced to be a mother, but I dont see the necessity in killing the unborn child. It is healthier for the mother to have the baby and give it up for adoption so it could have a chance, but dont kill it. When slavery was still around, the only people who supported it were not slaves. Now, the only people who support abortion are those who were born...

— 96.✗.✗.208
0

October 17, 2012, 6:36pm

I am a women making less than $40,000. I am a republican. I work hard to make my money just like everyone should... unles medically disabled or age. Obama is just feeding into the poor, I thought this was an qual country? I am also apro marriage, pro guns, pro religion and pro country. PRO ROMNEY!

— 216.✗.✗.194
0

share

Up next

Left Wing vs. Right Wing