By Alan
Caruba
On Wednesday, March 4, the Supreme
Court will hear the King v. Burwell case. It is likely to deliver a
death blow to ObamaCare when the decision is announced in a few months. About
the only good thing ObamaCare demonstrated is that the federal government should
be kept from taking over sectors of the nation’s economy that are working just
fine without it.
Health care expert Edmund Haislmaier
and legal expert, both of The Heritage Foundation, provided an explanation of
the case. “The question before the Supreme Court is whether the Obama
administration overstepped its authority in issuing an IRS ruling that conflicts
with the ObamaCare statute. The statute allows payment of ObamaCare subsidies
only to individuals who obtain coverage ‘through an Exchange established by (a)
State.’”
ObamaCare got such a cold reception
nationwide that 34 States refused to set up an exchange, forcing the feds to do
it. Those exchanges distributed subsidies to individuals participating in them,
but the ObamaCare statute “seemingly did not authorize subsidies in such cases.”
Suffice to say that ObamaCare health insurance is considerably more costly than
what one could have previously purchased on one’s own; thus the need for the
subsidies gambit.
The February edition of Health Care News, published by The
Heartland Institute was filled with articles attesting to the failure of
ObamaCare. Here are a few excerpts from them.
Devon M. Herrick, Ph.D., a health
economist and senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, noted
“Obama touts the claim (that) millions more people are now covered under health
care insurance policies through employer plans. However, research has shown
exchange subsidies will cause employers to drop coverage…Mandatory benefits are
not free; workers bear the cost in the form of lower wages.”
Dr. Herrick added, “Obama said (in his
State of the Union speech that) ‘in the past year alone about ten million
uninsured Americans finally gained the security of health coverage,’ but he
neglected to mention roughly 6 million were coverage through Medicaid expansion
and many of them were finding it difficult to find doctors willing to work for
the paltry fees state Medicaid programs pay doctors for
treatment.”
An article by Matthew Glans, a
Heartland senior policy analyst, noted that “The Health and Welfare Committee of
the Tennessee Senate voted on February 5 to reject a bill that would have
allowed Gov. Bill Haslam to expanded Medicare under the Affordable Care
Act.”
Kenneth Artz reported that “A new
study by the Office of Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human
Services found half of all providers listed in Medicaid managed-care plans are
not available to new Medicaid patients, either because they are not at the
listed location or aren’t accepting new Medicaid patients.” Feeling ill? “For
doctors who are accepting new Medicaid patients, the average wait time to get an
appointment is two weeks, with close to 25% of patient having waits of one month
or longer.”
Tom Steward, writing for the Minnesota
Bureau of Watchdog.org, contributed to Health Care News noted that “In a
significant victory for religious liberty and economic freedom, the American
Manufacturing Company received a permanent federal exemption from provisions of
the Affordable Care Act that contradict the owner’s religious
convictions.”
Sean Parnell, the managing editor of
Health Care News, reported that “Rhode Island officials predicted up to 100,000
residents would use the state-created exchange established under the Affordable
Care Act to buy health insurance in 2014. Data from the state show only 27,961
people enrolled during the 2014 open-enrollment period, a number that declined
throughout the year as many enrollees failed to pay their first premium or later
dropped coverage.”
ObamaCare is on critical care because
it could die at any time. Not surprisingly, three Republicans, John Kline, Paul
Ryan, and Fred Upton, chairmen respectively of the House Committee on Education
and Workforce, Ways and Means, and Energy and Commerce, have put together a plan
to address the likelihood that the Supreme Court decision will put an end to
ObamaCare.
As they said in a recent Wall
Street Journal commentary, “If the court rules against the administration,
as any fair reading of the law would demand, millions of individuals and
families will hit a major roadblock. They’ll be stuck with health insurance
designed by Washington, D.C., that they can’t
afford.”
“What we propose is the off-ramp out
of ObamaCare toward patient-centered health care. It has two parts: First, make
insurance more affordable by ending Washington mandates and giving choice back
to the states, individuals and families. And, second, support Americans in
purchasing the coverage of their choosing.”
What a unique idea! Let people choose
the health care plan they want and that they can afford. That’s the way it used
to be before the Affordable Care Act was passed entirely by Democrat votes
because the GOP would not support it. That’s why Congress is controlled by the
GOP these days. And that’s why this nation will return to the free
marketplace.
© Alan Caruba, 2015
4 comments:
What makes ANYONE think the court will rule against Obamacare? Between Ginsburg, who wasn't even sober for the SOTU, Kagan, who helped write Obamacare, Sotomayor, and Breyer, you have four guaranteed votes without even hearing the case. Add Roberts, who wants to "keep" the court "non-partisan" and the Brown Clown wins. REGARDLESS of whether Kennedy has any honor left at all.
The stench is overwhelming.
You also need to reform the pre obamacare Heath system by breaking many of the medical monopolies and barriers between States.
@MM: Sadly I have to agree with you. Comments reportedly made by Justice Kennedy during oral arguments suggest his swing vote is being swayed by considerations of the possible "inconvenience" and "chaos" that would ensue if the Court voted to strike down the subsidies, despite what the law might actually say. I fear Kennedy's swing vote is going to make the final tally 5-4 in favor of the administration. The Roberts Court will then go down as the most highly politicized court in memory, and Roberts will be regarded in infamy as the CJ who helped Obama shred the Constitution.
Which just means, Iapetus, that they shall ALSO do the Mussolini dance once their Praetorian Guard are burning in hell.
Post a Comment