Leftists quietly consider how to tinker with disaster known as ObamaCare [Darleen Click]
Fascism has its issues …
Robert Gibbs’ prediction that Obamacare’s employer mandate would — and perhaps should — be jettisoned shocked Democrats back in April.
By July, the former aide and longtime confidant of President Barack Obama had a lot more company. More and more liberal activists and policy experts who help shape Democratic thinking on health care have concluded that penalizing businesses if they don’t offer health insurance is an unnecessary element of the Affordable Care Act that may do more harm than good. Among them are experts at the Urban Institute and the Commonwealth Fund and prominent academics like legal scholar Tim Jost.
The employer mandate, Jost wrote in a Health Affairs post in June, “cries out for repair.” Repealing it “might not be such a bad idea,” if it’s replaced with something better for workers and businesses. […]
Chris Jennings, a longtime health policy hand who helped the White House during the final implementation push, says the employer mandate has become a “political irritant” — although he didn’t take a stance on whether it should stay, go or be replaced with some other Democrat-blessed way of helping cover workers. […]
The main downside to eliminating the mandate, from the Democratic perspective? Money.
Bovine excrement. It was and still remains about one thing for the Ruling Party – Power. ObamaCare was to deliver 17% of the American economy into their hands and allow unprecedented regulatory power to the head of HHS.
The SCOTUS decision in Sebelius v Hobby Lobby has clawed back some of that. Hence the out-of-all-proportion histrionics in response.
And nothing quite says “blow to political power” than the prospect of Democrats taking it on the chin, again, when their bribery of ObamaCare recipients is yanked out from under them.
The Halbig case challenges the massive federal subsidies in the form of tax credits made available to people with financial need who enroll in the program. In crafting the act, Congress created incentives for states to set up health insurance exchanges and disincentives for them to opt out. The law, for example, made the subsidies available only to those enrolled in insurance plans through exchanges “established by the state.”
But despite that carrot — and to the great surprise of the administration — some 34 states opted not to establish their own exchanges, leaving it to the federal government to do so. This left the White House with a dilemma: If only those enrollees in states that created exchanges were eligible for subsidies, a huge pool of people would be unable to afford coverage, and the entire program would be in danger of collapse.
h/t RS McCainTags: liberal fascism, obamacare