Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal

CNBC.com ^ | July 22, 2014 | Dan Mangan

[gwjack]

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates. In a potentially crippling blow to Obamacare, a top federal appeals court Tuesday said that billions of dollars worth of government subsidies that helped 4.7 million people buy insurance on HealthCare.gov are not legal under the Affordable Care Act.

[Guenevere]

Thanks....my bad!

[Lorianne]

It could. But then Congress could just rule that the Federal exchanges can give the subsidies. Or perhaps another executive order would do the same. Even the head of HHS has the power, I believe, to change the wording of the law as she sees fit

[Foundahardheadedwoman]

I agree that the LIV’s voted for this bull and sucked in a lot of people who didn’t. But if the folks like you who did not want this had refused to purchase any health insurance it would have already failed.

Think of the refusal to purchase as a non-violent protest. It would have worked. Obama would have had to back off and figure another way to destroy our people.

[MeshugeMikey]

Thank you

Barry has dozens of these types lined up...waiting for thier big break

[upchuck]

Thank you Nikki Haley, Governor of South Carolina, et al for refusing the evil bribe money from nobama and refusing to create a state exchange in SC.

Nikki Haley Ping South Carolina Governor Send FReepmail to join or leave this list.

South Carolina Ping
Send FReepmail to join or leave this list.

Keep up with what our Congresscritters (House and Senate) are doing. Sign up for the free MegaVote email service here.

[Fantasywriter]

I just hope this doesn’t put a damper on Obama’s 16 day Vineyard vacation. If it does, he may have to schedule an immediate 17 day HI vacation, to make up for it.

[TomGuy]

Hey, Nancy,

Judges are reading the bill that you and your colleagues were too lazy to read and those judges are not liking what they are finding in the bill.

Maybe you SHOULD have read it to find out what is in it.

[LS]

Now we need to cut off the head and stuff the mouth with garlic. This thing needs to be permanently, totally killed.

[CodeToad]

That was $112 in 2004 and it covered everything at 90%. It was a great plan. I used it myself for several years, from about 2003 through 2007.

[12chachacha]

I wonder how this was initially scored by the CBO? Did the Democrats ask the CBO to score the health care law based on all of the states setting up their own exchanges? This would be solid evidence that they wrote the law this way on purpose.

[boilerfan]

I thought that was part of the deal for enticing states to setup exchanges the subsidies which the mandate.

This thing is so stupidly written it is next to impossible to understand.

[laplata]

Ted Cruz just issued this statement:

“The D.C. Circuit’s decision today in Halbig v. Burwell is a repudiation of Obamacare and all the lawlessness that has come with it,” said Sen. Cruz. “The Obama Administration, through the Internal Revenue Service, has attempted to dispense revenues to the states without proper congressional authorization, robbing Congress of its constitutionally-provided power of the purse. This decision restores power to Congress and to the people and if properly enforced, should shield citizens from Obamacare’s insidious penalties, mandates, and subsidies. This is a significant victory for the American people and the rule of law, but we must not rest. Americans will continue to lose jobs, pay higher premiums, and receive fewer healthcare choices because of this disastrous law. Every last word of Obamacare must be repealed to restore jobs, growth, and opportunity in our country.”

[kabar]

Congress has to amend the law period.

Even the head of HHS has the power, I believe, to change the wording of the law as she sees fit

Forbes contributor Jeffrey Dorman notes that a recent ruling in a case involving the Environmental Protection Agency could make it harder for Roberts to conclude that he has that wiggle room.

“The power of executing the laws necessarily includes both authority and responsibility to resolve some questions left open by Congress that arise during the law’s administration. But it does not include a power to revise clear statutory terms that turn out not to work in practice,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an opinion that Roberts joined in full.

[Jeff Chandler]

The full DC court will reverse this and it will be appealed to the Supreme Court. SCOTUS may or may not rule on the case. If it does, Roberts may declare the federal government to be a “state”, and that will be that.

[SCalGal]

Thanks, SCalGal. Another reason to be happy I never signed up.

You're welcome. Personally, I'd rather deal with the IRS over the penalty.

[gwgn02]

@AP: BREAKING: Obama administration says health care subsidies will keep flowing despite court decision.

[TomGuy]

10 years ago a Blue Cross plan was $112/month. Plenty affordable for everyone. Under OBamaCare, that plan is $380.

In many Obamacare plans the other burdens are the deductibles.

[gwgn02]

ROGUE. LAWLESS. DICTATOR.

[House Atreides]

“...Clearly the law was written sloppily, to have this major oversight in it. We know what the intention was with the subsidies. But, the court to their credit was reading and interpreting the actual text of what the law say...”
**************************************************************************************

Actually, the “INTENT” was to financially almost force the states to set up exchanges. Little did the dumb-ass democRATS who passed this law with zero Republican votes realize that many states would essentially rebel and NOT set up a state exchange.

And now the DemocRATS say that the clear and precise language in the law does not mean what it clearly says.

[Lorianne]

I hope he is right
But in crafting PPACA they were careful to give a lot of discretionary power to the director, a point Sebelius (now gone) was happy to chirp about. He successor presumably has the same power though is not so overt about it in public.