July 24, 2014

Pelosi's "pass it to see what's in it" so far.

Nancy Pelosi once informed Americans that it was necessary to pass the Affordable Care Act to see what was in it.

Well, apparently it's just a bag full of stupid. Thanks for that, Nancy.

Obama's former law professor had argued as much when he pointed out the law was not likely to survive the next legal challenge.

The law’s latest legal problem is that, as written, people who enroll in Obamacare through the federal exchange aren’t eligible for subsidies. The text of the law only provides subsidies for people enrolled through “an Exchange established by the State,” according to the text of the Affordable Care Act. Only 16 states decided to establish the exchanges.

The IRS issued a regulation expanding the pool of enrollees who qualify for the subsidies. Opponents of the law, such as the Cato Institute’s Michael Cannon and Jonathan Adler, argue that the IRS does not have the authority to make that change.
The Halbig v. Burwell case, the next big challenge mentioned above, was decided a few days ago. It didn't go in favor of Obamacare. 

Via Forbes:
...Halbig balked at the tax credits being extended to the feds, claiming that it was beyond the scope of the law...the plaintiffs in Halbig...all hail from states without exchanges.

...Clearly, extending the tax credits to those who purchase under the federal exchange means that more individuals and employers are subject to the mandate. That’s the result that IRS says Congress intended. The plaintiffs in Halbig argue that is the wrong result under the statute and the IRS does not have the authority to expand the scope of the credits.

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs, although as Circuit Judge Griffith wrote, they did so, “frankly, with reluctance.”

Reluctant or not, the decision could eventually affect millions of taxpayers. Here’s why: if the tax credits can’t be extended to coverage purchased under the federal exchange, then more individuals will fall outside of the net of affordable coverage. Those who don’t want to pay – or can’t pay – would be able to drop their coverage without fear of a fine/tax/penalty. Since the future of the health care act hinges on a critical mass of healthy and sick individuals being enrolled, that throws the entire future of the exchanges into flux.

All of those Obamacare repeal efforts? They couldn’t come close to bringing the Affordable Care Act down. But the failure to write in one word – federal – could.
Thanks for getting it passed Nancy, so we could see what was in it. This is what you get when you ram through 2700+ pages without due diligence: a bag full of stupid.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disagreement is always welcome. Please remain civil. Vulgar or disrespectful comments towards anyone will be removed.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Share This