07-22-2014, 08:42
|
#1
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,086
|
D.C. Circuit court of appeals rules against Obamacare subsidies.
If upheld, this will greatly impact exchange policy pricing for next year. Look for millions more to stop paying or not renew.
LINK
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit delivered a huge blow to Obamacare this morning, ruling that the insurance subsidies granted through the federally run health exchange, which covered 36 states for the first open enrollment period, are not allowed by the law. The highly anticipated opinion in the case of Jacqueline Halbig v. Sylvia Mathews Burwell reversed a lower court ruling finding that the federally run exchange did have the authority to disburse subsidies. Today's ruling vacates the IRS regulation allowing the federal exchange to give subsidies. The large majority of individuals, about 86 percent, in the federal exchange received subsidies, and in those cases the subsidies covered about 76 percent of the premium on average.
The court's ruling agreed with the appellants that the plain language of the law, which limits subsidies and credits to any "Exchange established by the State," does not allow subsidies to be disbursed in exchanges where a state declined to establish its own exchange and is instead run by the federal government.
Read the complete decision here.
__________________
Daniel
GM1 USNR (RET)
Si vis pacem, para bellum
|
Streck-Fu is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 08:46
|
#2
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,511
|
Methinks Harry Ried is going to blow a gasket. How dare the courts not toe the line.....
|
ddoering is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 08:49
|
#3
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sneaking back and forth across the Border
Posts: 6,627
|
This is going to be fun to watch the Spin they try to put on it in the coming days.
|
SF_BHT is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 08:50
|
#4
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,086
|
I only wonder if Justice Roberts has started to draft his opinion that the subsidies are OK, because it's a tax credit....
__________________
Daniel
GM1 USNR (RET)
Si vis pacem, para bellum
|
Streck-Fu is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 08:56
|
#5
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,086
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_BHT
This is going to be fun to watch the Spin they try to put on it in the coming days.
|
Que the dreidel ... LINK
Quote:
In a 2-1 vote, a panel of judges on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected the Obama administration's argument that the problem was triggered by imprecise language in the complex law and that Congress had always intended to offer the subsidies nationwide to low- and middle-income people who bought insurance through one of the state or federal health exchanges created under the law.
As written, the law states that subsidies should be paid to those who purchase insurance through an "exchange established by the state."
That would seem to leave out the 36 states in which the exchanges are operated by the federal government.
Lawyers and congressional staffers who worked on the 2010 law have described the problem as a classic wording glitch in a long and complicated piece of legislation.
One part of the law says that states, which normally regulate insurance, could create exchanges that would help consumers and small businesses shop for coverage. The law also said that if a state failed to establish an exchange, the federal government could step in and run one in its place.
A second part of the law described the subsidies that could be offered to low- and middle-income people to cover the cost of the insurance. This part of the law said these subsidies -- or tax credits -- would be offered for insurance bought on an exchange "established by the state."
|
Gotta love the blame Republicans language....
Quote:
Apparently no one noticed the problem until the law was passed. Then, because of fierce political opposition and the 2010 Republican takeover of the House, supporters of the law could not fix the wording through an amendment. Moreover, the administration did not anticipate that most Republican-led states would refuse to create an insurance exchange for their residents.
|
Remember that judges are non-partisan neutral interpreters of the rule of law. Oh, wait:
Quote:
The administration is expected to appeal the panel’s decision to the full 11-member appeals court. In the last year, Obama has added four judges to the D.C. Circuit court, giving Democratic appointees a majority for the first time since the mid-1980s.
If that effort should fail, the administration could appeal to the Supreme Court.
|
__________________
Daniel
GM1 USNR (RET)
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Last edited by Streck-Fu; 07-22-2014 at 09:01.
|
Streck-Fu is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 15:17
|
#6
|
Asset
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Metro St Louis area
Posts: 22
|
|
Tango three is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 15:44
|
#7
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In transit somewhere
Posts: 4,044
|
Subsidies? While I was unemployed, I could not afford the AHCA insurance, it was ridiculously expensive... it was cheaper to pay the fine for the period I was unemployed... But then again, I wasn't collecting all of the other benefits, I got my UI, and was actively searching for equal work... and using my savings to fill in the gaps...
__________________
In the business of war, there is no invariable stategic advantage (shih) which can be relied upon at all times.
Sun-Tzu, "The Art of Warfare"
Hearing, I forget. Seeing, I remember. Writing (doing), I understand. Chinese Proverb
Too many people are looking for a magic bullet. As always, shot placement is the key. ~TR
|
x SF med is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 16:51
|
#8
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 7,107
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by x SF med
Subsidies? While I was unemployed, I could not afford the AHCA insurance, it was ridiculously expensive... it was cheaper to pay the fine for the period I was unemployed... But then again, I wasn't collecting all of the other benefits, I got my UI, and was actively searching for equal work... and using my savings to fill in the gaps...
|
Ditto. I figure they can't hurt me too badly, I was only out of work about 2 months. I took some extra time off...
Started the new job today, when I inquired originally about who their insurance provider was they said it was Blue Cross Blue Shield. What they neglected to tell me? It is a HSA with super high deductibles.
__________________
My Heroes wear camouflage.
|
Gypsy is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 19:09
|
#9
|
Guerrilla Chief
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 502
|
Quote:
Apparently no one noticed the problem until the law was passed.
|
"We have to pass it to find out what's in it" -- Nancy Pelosi
Seriously though, the Republicans will take the hit for this. It's going to end up in the Supreme Court regardless of how the full 11 member appellate decides (they'll decide along party lines and overturn the panel's decision). Then it will go to the SCOTUS.
When it does, if SCOTUS upholds the ruling that subsidies only apply to state created exchanges, the administration and MSM will tell the sheeple that "you would have the subsidies if the Republicans running your state had created an exchange like they were supposed to. It's THEIR fault you can't afford insurance.".
If the SCOTUS decides that the subsidies can be paid to enrollees on the federally created exchanges, the story will be "this is just another attack by the Republicans on Obamacare."
Personally, I hope the decision doesn't come before the mid terms. Right now Republicans have momentum and the "1000 scandals of Obama" to work with for campaign messaging. If the decision is made before mid terms, it will hurt Republicans' chance to take the Senate and possibly lose them the House.
|
(1VB)compforce is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 20:44
|
#10
|
Area Commander
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cochise Co., AZ
Posts: 6,175
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by (1VB)compforce
"We have to pass it to find out what's in it" -- Nancy Pelosi
Seriously though, the Republicans will take the hit for this. It's going to end up in the Supreme Court regardless of how the full 11 member appellate decides (they'll decide along party lines and overturn the panel's decision). Then it will go to the SCOTUS.
When it does, if SCOTUS upholds the ruling that subsidies only apply to state created exchanges, the administration and MSM will tell the sheeple that "you would have the subsidies if the Republicans running your state had created an exchange like they were supposed to. It's THEIR fault you can't afford insurance.".
If the SCOTUS decides that the subsidies can be paid to enrollees on the federally created exchanges, the story will be "this is just another attack by the Republicans on Obamacare."
Personally, I hope the decision doesn't come before the mid terms. Right now Republicans have momentum and the "1000 scandals of Obama" to work with for campaign messaging. If the decision is made before mid terms, it will hurt Republicans' chance to take the Senate and possibly lose them the House.
|
Hard to take the hit when no Rs voted for it and the voters voted the Rs into (or, more to the point, the Dems who voted for it out of) power in the House before Roberts re-wrote it.
Republicans control most of the states. The whole idea was for this to fail and to be able to blame it on the Rs and push for single payer. But, the Repubs didn't play along. The Dems screwed us and themselves. And, the first chance we get, Roberts needs to be impeached for re-writing a law.
Oops, my humble opinion seems to have slipped out again.
Pat
__________________
"Hector Lives!"
"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." -- Frederick Douglass
"The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." -- Dennis Prager
"The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it." --H.L. Mencken
|
PSM is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 21:11
|
#11
|
Guerrilla Chief
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 502
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSM
Hard to take the hit when no Rs voted for it and the voters voted the Rs into (or, more to the point, the Dems who voted for it out of) power in the House before Roberts re-wrote it.
Republicans control most of the states. The whole idea was for this to fail and to be able to blame it on the Rs and push for single payer. But, the Repubs didn't play along. The Dems screwed us and themselves. And, the first chance we get, Roberts needs to be impeached for re-writing a law.
Oops, my humble opinion seems to have slipped out again.
Pat
|
The problem with your argument is that it is factual and based on the true history. Unfortunately, perception is reality and the perception will be shaped by the MSM.
|
(1VB)compforce is offline
|
|
07-22-2014, 23:42
|
#12
|
Quiet Professional
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 534
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brush Okie
Perhaps they should have read it before they signed it. Oh well, what does it matter now.
|
or you could say "What difference, at this point, does it make?"
__________________
"I know a lot of good tricks"
American on the inside, useful on the outside
|
cat in the hat is offline
|
|
07-25-2014, 07:05
|
#13
|
Guerrilla Chief
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 502
|
This was found and published today. It's the Obamacare architect, Dr. John Gruber addressing Nobilis and speaking about health care reform in 2012.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtnEmPXEpr0#t=1940
The relevant part to this thread starts at 31:28. A woman asks if the states that do not set up exchanges will receive subsidies and Dr. Gruber states unequivocally that the way the subsidies are set up are designed to put pressure on the states. If a state chooses not to create an exchange, then their citizens will not receive subsidies although they would still be taxed. This is the bombshell that, if admitted in court, has the best chance to derail the entire law.
|
(1VB)compforce is offline
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 18:58.
|
|
|