WASHINGTON -- By a vote of 245-189, the House of Representatives voted to repeal the new healthcare reform law, a long-expected action that is seen as largely symbolic since leaders of the Democratic-controlled Senate have vowed to block repeal.

The vote was preceded by a day and a half of debate on the measure, known as the "Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act." The two-page bill would repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) -- signed by President Obama in March 2010 -- and all other laws changed by the reform law "as if such Act had never been enacted." It would also repeal the healthcare provisions in the companion bill, known as the reconciliation act, that altered some parts of the main law.

The rapid repeal movement is reminiscent of the fate of the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage legislation -- a plan that was championed by President Ronald Reagan as a needed fix for a broken Medicare system. Reagan signed the legislation, Medicare C, into law in July 1988. A little over a year later, the seminal law was repealed by both houses of Congress and President George H.W. Bush signed the repeal bill in November 1989. Medicare Part C eliminated copays for Medicare beneficiaries' lengthy hospital stays, and put an annual cap of $1,370 on copays for doctors' visits.

This time, however, there is no agreement between the House and Senate, and even the House debate on repeal of ACA was largely partisan, with Republicans lauding the measure and Democrats condemning it.

"I rise in support of repealing the job-destroying healthcare bill," said Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.). "This takeover of healthcare will give us more taxes, more mandates, and higher healthcare costs."

But Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) chided the repeal movement.

"The healthcare repeal act will hurt many people, especially seniors," she said. "It weakens Medicare and takes away your ability to [control] your own healthcare, and puts it back in the hands of the insurance company."

Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) brought up one of the Republicans' main criticisms of the ACA -- the "individual mandate," a portion of the law that requires all citizens to carry health insurance or pay a penalty.

"Never before in the history of this country has a tax been levied on people to do something that the government wants them to do," said Poe. "The individual mandate of the healthcare bill is unconstitutional."

The individual mandate is at the heart of several lawsuits filed by various state attorneys general, most of whom allege that the mandate is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which gives the federal government the right to regulate interstate commerce.

Critics of the law argue that the Commerce Clause was not meant to penalize citizens for not participating in a particular economic transaction, such as buying insurance; supporters of the law say that since everyone eventually will use some healthcare, choosing not to purchase insurance increases uncompensated care with the net result of driving up the cost of insurance for all. That, proponents argue, makes the Commerce Clause applicable.

Another bone of contention is whether the healthcare reform law will reduce the deficit. Democrats say that it will, citing a report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) which showed that repealing the reform law would cost $230 billion over the next 10 years because it would wipe away many of the savings included in the ACA.

"All the charts in the world can't wish away the CBO letter from Jan. 6 of this year, which says that premiums will go down in the employer market, that people on average will pay less in the individual market, and that [the ACA] will reduce the deficit and the debt over the next 20 years," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) during the repeal debate. "That is the call from the nonpartisan experts we have; we shouldn't be substituting our judgment for theirs."

House Republican leaders have consistently denounced the CBO's estimate, issuing their own report estimating that the ACA "will cost the nation $2.6 trillion when fully implemented, and add $701 billion to the deficit in its first ten years."

But opponents of repeal disagree with those assumptions. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal economic think tank, issued a paper debunking the Republicans' conclusions.

The center's executive director, Robert Greenstein, criticized the Republicans' actions during a Tuesday teleconference with reporters. "In the past, unfavorable CBO cost estimates often have led congressional leaders to revise their bills to eliminate what CBO has identified as deficit-increasing effects," he said. "But new House Republican leaders have taken a different course ... At a time when the nation faces serious long-term fiscal challenges, the notion of congressional leaders rejecting nonpartisan CBO estimates they find politically inconvenient and promoting their own partisan estimates instead has troubling implications."

While members of Congress argued over repealing the healthcare bill, the Justice Department filed an appeal in one of the lawsuits, Virginia v. Sebelius, challenging the ACA.

The Justice Department was responding to a December ruling in that case, in which Judge Henry Hudson declared the individual mandate unconstitutional -- the only ruling out of 15 so far that has struck down a portion of the ACA.

The plaintiff in the case, Virginia's Republican attorney general Ken Cuccinelli, immediately filed a cross-appeal. The case is now likely headed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.