According to a report by the Associated Press this afternoon, U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) appears to have come out against repealing-and-replacing President Obama’s health care bill – despite claiming on the campaign trail that he would have voted against it – and is instead taking aim at just one small part of it — a tax form filing requirement on businesses.

I would point out that this now represents at least the THIRD position that Joe Manchin has taken on ObamaCare.

First he was FOR it, then he was AGAINST it, and now he’s back to being FOR it – well, most of it.

CLICK HERE to watch a video recap of Joe Manchin’s repeated flip-flops on not just health care, but the stimulus and TARP bills as well – two other issues he initially claimed to support but then rejected as a Senate candidate.

In response to Senator Manchin’s latest position on ObamaCare, NRSC Communications Director Brian Walsh said:

“Just as Republicans predicted, once Joe Manchin got to Washington his position on President Obama’s health care bill has changed yet again. Taking aim at just one small part of this onerous legislation, while leaving untouched $500 billion in Medicare cuts and huge tax increases on West Virginia families, isn’t leadership – it’s trying to have it both ways. But as Senator Manchin prepares to face voters again next year, we look forward to hearing his defense of massive Medicare cuts, higher taxes on families, and government-mandated health care – all of which he apparently believes should be kept in law.”

BACKGROUND -

Repeal means that 7.4 million more seniors will participate in Medicare Advantage plans, according to the Medicare actuary, meaning these seniors will not have to give up health care plans they have and like. Repeal also means that seniors in Medicare Advantage will receive extra benefits, meaning senior beneficiaries in Medicare Advantage will not face an average increase of $873 per year in out-of-pocket costs between now and 2019. (The Heritage Foundation has a VERY helpful report indicating the impact of the health care law’s Medicare Advantage cuts, with details broken out district-by-district, that can be found here.)

Repeal means that individual health insurance premiums will not increase by the $2,100 per family currently projected as a result of the law. Candidate Obama promised to cut insurance premiums by an average of $2,500 per family, but in reality the legislation he signed into law will result in massive premium increases because of all the new mandates and federal regulations associated with it.

Repeal means that individuals will not be forced to buy government-defined health insurance – a massive and constitutionally dubious new intrusion by the federal government.

Repeal means that taxpayers will not face $569,200,000,000 in tax increases scheduled to take effect over the coming years – job-killing taxes that will harm an economy struggling to grow. Repeal also means that middle-class families will not face a new 40 percent tax on insurance policies the government will force them to buy, a tax that will hit more and more families over time, and could eventually generate more revenue than the federal income tax.

Repeal means that half of all employers – and as many as 80% of small businesses – will not be forced to give up their current coverage within the next two years. The Administration’s own estimates revealed that its onerous regulations will force most businesses to give up their current plans, thus subjecting them to costly new mandates that will increase premiums. What’s more, repeal will remove the perverse financial incentives that could encourage employers to drop health insurance for their employees; one study found that the law could lead 35 million individuals to lose their current, employer-based coverage.

Repeal means that the economy will not lose an estimated 750,000 jobs because the perverse incentives included in the health care law will discourage individuals from working. The Congressional Budget Office found that the law “will encourage some people to work fewer hours or to withdraw from the labor market,” and said that “on net, [the law] will reduce the amount of labor used in the economy. At a time when America faces ongoing economic difficulties, repeal will remove provisions that Speaker Pelosi claimed would allow people to “leave your work” and go “be creative and be a musician or whatever.”

Repeal means that states will not be forced to shoulder the burden of what a Democrat Governor called the “mother of all unfunded mandates” – another massive expansion of government-run Medicaid at a time when states cannot afford their existing Medicaid programs. Repealing this expansion also lessens the likelihood that states will have to implement new job-killing tax increases to fund this new unfunded Medicaid mandate.

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND…

In October 2010, Manchin Told ABC News He Would Have Been A “No” Vote On Health Care Reform. “Asked if he regrets not being more critical of the bill as it came together, Manchin said he would have been a ‘no’ vote on the bill if he had been in the Senate at the time.” (Jonathan Karl, “WV Gov. Manchin, Once Positive On Health Care Bill, Now Says He Would Have Been A ‘No,’” ABC News’ The Note Blog, www.abcnews.com, Posted 10/12/10)

Manchin Told Fox News He Would Have Voted Against Health Care Reform Now “Knowing The Existence As Far As How Reaching It Had Been, As Far As An Onerous, I Would Have.” WALLACE (FOX NEWS): “You’re saying now that if you’d known what was really in the bill, although last March you said you’d have voted for it, you now say you would have voted against it?” MANCHIN: “Correct. Now, knowing the existence as far as how reaching it had been, as far as an onerous, I would have. And I think many people didn’t know about the bill. It ends up, what, 2,000 pages or more? And the concept was great, as far as pre-existing conditions, how do we make sure more people have affordable insurance, how do we take care of children, people with pre-existing conditions, keeping children on insurances longer because of the market conditions — there’s a lot of good parts to it. Why won’t we fix what’s wrong with it and make it better?” (Fox News, “Fox News Sunday,” 10/24/10)