Watching Conservatives Like WSJ Columnist Kimberly Strassel Twist and Turn

That's Entertainment

In their zeal to take health care away from tens of millions the conservatives who rule the GOP are willing to abandon everything they say they stand for. Chief among these turncoats is the Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel who explains why Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski should vote to kill ACA.

First of all according to Kim ACA is dying in Alaska.

Health-insurance premiums have soared more than 200% and are now the highest in the country. All but one insurer has fled the state’s individual market. People are dropping policies. Doctors are refusing to take the flood of new Medicaid patients.

Wow, the states Governor must be livid and at the forefront of getting rid of ACA. Oh, maybe not. The Governor opposes the Graham Cassidy plan.

So why should Sen. Murkowski support repeal? It's because Alaska would get huge federal benefits. And Strassel says Alaska should be punished if its independently minded Senator votes against repealing ACA.

Alaska lives or dies on federal largess. It routinely tops the list of federal funding per capita. It receives billions in annual federal grants and billions more in defense spending. Federal money supports an estimated one-third of all the jobs and household income in the state.

Some of these funds come from mandatory entitlement programs, but the money that really matters is discretionary. It’s the Denali Commission. It’s the Essential Air Service, which subsidizes flights in rural Alaska. It’s grants for weatherization, and village water projects, and salmon recovery. It’s wildlife refuge payments and bridges to nowhere. It’s upgrades for military bases.. . .

But why should the nation continue to send outsize taxpayer funds to a state that is single-handedly condemning Americans to ObamaCare? Somewhere on Ms. Murkowski’s calculator is a button that reads “Trump Grudge”—and it adds a lot of zeros.

Wonder what the word is for this? Try extortion. Yep that sounds right.



But on the reward side another word comes up. Bribery.

By contrast, what would Ms. Murkowski get with a “yes” vote? She would earn the support of conservative groups, which will matter most in any re-election bids. She would get to keep open the Alaska money tap and even gain leverage for new projects.

Some people will say this is conservatives giving up their integrity. That is not correct. There never was any integrity in people at the WSJ editorial pages.