Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $22,394
26%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 26% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: obamacare

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Obamacare’s Architect Agreed That Only State Exchanges Could Offer Subsidies

    07/25/2014 6:49:50 AM PDT · by grundle · 5 replies
    National Review ^ | July 25, 2014 | Veronique de Rugy
    "What’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits—but your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So you’re essentially saying [to] your citizens you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country. I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges. But, you know, once again the politics can...
  • ObamaCare Author: If A State Doesn't Set Up An Exchange, It's Citizens Don't Get Tax Credits

    07/25/2014 6:46:43 AM PDT · by grundle · 2 replies
    Forbes ^ | July 25, 2014 | Michael F. Cannon
    Full title: ObamaCare Architect Jonathan Gruber: "If You're A State And You Don't Set Up An Exchange, That Means Your Citizens Don't Get Their Tax Credits" Questioner: You mentioned the health-information Exchanges for the states, and it is my understanding that if states don’t provide them, then the federal government will provide them for the states. Gruber: Yeah, so these health-insurance Exchanges, you can go on ma.healthconnector.org and see ours in Massachusetts, will be these new shopping places and they’ll be the place that people go to get their subsidies for health insurance. In the law, it says if the...
  • On January 18, 2012, Obamacare author Jonathan Gruber said subsidies only apply to state exchanges

    07/25/2014 6:40:19 AM PDT · by grundle · 4 replies
    YouTube ^ | January 18, 2012 | Jonathan Gruber, Obamacare author
    On January 18, 2012, before the Halbig lawsuit was filed, Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who helped write the Affordable Care Act, said, "What’s important to remember politically about this is if you're a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don't get their tax credits." Link set to start video at 31:25, the relevant point. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtnEmPXEpr0&feature=youtu.be&t=31m25s
  • A big hole in the heart of Obamacare

    07/25/2014 4:13:35 AM PDT · by SteveH · 2 replies
    CNN ^ | July 24, 2014 | Ilya Shapiro
    ... After-the-fact rationalizations notwithstanding, the concession that Obamacare's designers didn't anticipate so many state vetoes doesn't retroactively rewrite the plain language of the law. The fault lies squarely with those drafters, not the lawyers who point out the IRS abuse or the judges who strike it down. The government will see rehearing by the entire D.C. Circuit; having stacked the court after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid eliminated filibusters of judicial nominations, President Obama figures he has a good chance to reverse Halbig. At the same time, Mike Carvin, the lawyer for the plaintiffs in both cases, will bypass the...
  • Supreme Court may not protect Obamacare this time

    07/25/2014 4:05:33 AM PDT · by SteveH · 16 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | July 24, 2014 | Ruth Marcus
    ... Certainly, Roberts zealously guards the court’s institutional standing against accusations of overreaching. But only to a point. The Voting Rights Act offers an example. In 2009, Roberts, as with the Affordable Care Act, demonstrated his willingness to stretch the language of the statute to save it — temporarily. Four years later, he wrote the majority ruling striking down the law’s key provision. Importantly, Roberts’s initial restraint in that case, as in his ruling upholding the Affordable Care Act, was based on constitutional considerations: the long-standing principle that the court, if possible, should avoid overturning the work of a co-equal...
  • If You're A State And You Don't Set Up An Exchange, Your Citizens Don't Get Their Tax Credits

    07/25/2014 3:48:52 AM PDT · by SteveH · 10 replies
    Forbes ^ | July 25, 2014 | Michael F. Cannon
    ... Gruber doesn’t just acknowledge the conditional feature of the PPACA’s tax credits. He also supplies a plausible purpose for that feature (there were people in Washington who either wanted to “squeeze the states to do it,” or saw the law as directing them to do so). He describes the mechanism by which this provision achieves that purpose (taxpayers will pressure their state officials to create Exchanges so they can receive tax credits). He acknowledges that the conditional nature of the tax credits sits perfectly well alongside the law’s requirement that the federal government establish an Exchange within states that...
  • The dueling Obamacare memes: Which one should you believe?

    07/25/2014 3:26:56 AM PDT · by SteveH · 9 replies
    The Los Angeles Times ^ | July 24, 2014 | Jon Healey
    ... It's inarguable that the process Democrats used to enact Obamacare was ugly. They passed the Affordable Care Act and the companion Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act without a smidgen of Republican support. Some provisions were inserted without public hearings and with little debate, and key versions of the bills were cobbled together behind closed doors. As a consequence, the legislation was vetted only by Democrats, which all but guarantees that it will say and do some things they didn't intend. Worse, only Democrats are now invested in its success. So they have no way to fix problems in...
  • The ObamaCare-IRS Nexus

    07/25/2014 3:15:05 AM PDT · by SteveH · 6 replies
    One of the big questions out of the IRS targeting scandal is this: How can an agency that engaged in such political misconduct be trusted to implement ObamaCare? This week's Halbig v. Burwell ruling reminded us of the answer. It can't. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Halbig that the administration had illegally provided ObamaCare subsidies in 36 insurance exchanges run by the federal government. Yet it wasn't the "administration" as a whole that issued the lawless subsidy gift. It was the administration acting through its new, favorite enforcer: the IRS. And it was entirely political. Democrats needed...
  • 2012 Video shows major Obamacare architect confirm subsidies were meant only for state exchange

    07/25/2014 1:39:19 AM PDT · by Cincinatus' Wife · 5 replies
    Red State ^ | July 24. 2014 | Moe Lane
    Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who helped design the Massachusetts health law that was the model for Obamacare, was a key influence on the creation of the law. He was widely quoted in the media. During the crafting of the law, the Obama administration brought him on for his expertise. He was paid almost $400,000 to consult with the administration on the law. And he has claimed to have written part of the legislation, the section dealing with small business tax credits. [Text and :59 video SNIP] PS: Possibly the most damning thing about this video is...
  • On Halbig and Statutory Interpretation

    07/25/2014 1:10:37 AM PDT · by SteveH · 6 replies
    Volokh Conspiracy via The Washington Post ^ | July 24, 2014 | Jonathan H. Adler
    ... When Congress wanted to use a shorthand for “exchange,” it did just that — and said “exchange.” The “established by the State” modifier was added at the Committee stage, and then again afterwards before final passage in the Senate. Adding it in was unnecessary unless it had some purpose — such as to distinguish exchanges “established by the State” from those “established” by HHS as required by Section 1321. Even if, as some argue, a Section 1321 federal exchange can stand in the place of a section 1311 exchange, the former is still not an exchange “established by the...
  • No, Halbig Did Not Gut Obamacare because of a Drafting Error

    07/25/2014 12:05:25 AM PDT · by SteveH · 6 replies
    The Federalist ^ | July 23, 2014 | Sean Davis
    ... Let’s take a step back to see how plausible that explanation is. There are two types of exchanges: state-established, and federally established. The statutory authority for state-based exchanges comes in section 1311 of Obamacare. The statutory authority for a federal exchange in the event that a state chose not to establish one comes from section 1321(c) of Obamacare. Right off the bat, we have two discrete sections pertaining to two discrete types of health exchange. Was that a “drafting error”? Then we have the specific construction of section 1321(c), which allows for the creation of a federal exchange. Nowhere...
  • [Video from January 18, 2012] Jonathon Gruber at Noblis

    VIDEO AT LINK (View starting at 31:30) ” . . . if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits.” Obama, Democrats lying about “ambiguous” text, intent of Congress January 2012 video proves they never intended subsidies for federal exchanges. Read more: http://www.headlineoftheday.com/#ixzz38SANlSDz
  • Watch Obamacare Architect Jonathan Gruber Admit in 2012 That Subsidies Were Limited to State-Run...

    07/24/2014 9:38:04 PM PDT · by ironman · 19 replies
    Reason ^ | 7/24/2014 | Peter Suderman
    Jonathan Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist who helped design the Massachusetts health law that was the model for Obamacare, was a key influence on the creation of the law. He was widely quoted in the media. During the crafting of the law, the Obama administration brought him on for his expertise. He was paid almost $400,000 to consult with the administration on the law. And he has claimed to have written part of the legislation, the section dealing with small business tax credits. After the law passed, in 2011 and throughout 2012, multiple states sought his expertise to...
  • Why the Halbig Decision Should Be Taken Seriously

    07/24/2014 9:22:24 PM PDT · by SteveH · 14 replies
    Real Clear Politics ^ | July 23, 2014 | Sean Trende
    ... “The Supreme Court simply isn't going to rip insurance from tens of millions of people in order to teach Congress a lesson about grammar. . . . For Halbig to unwind Obamacare, the Supreme Court would ultimately have to rule in the plaintiff's favor. And they're not going to do that. By the time SCOTUS even could rule on Halbig the law will have been in place for years.” This sort of reaction is a mistake, at least insofar as a pundit is trying to figure out what the Supreme Court might actually do, if and when the case...
  • Obamacare Busted in GAO Sting Operation: Nearly All Fake Insurance Applications Were Approved

    07/24/2014 6:32:19 PM PDT · by TurboZamboni · 5 replies
    Freedom Outpost ^ | 7-24-14 | Tim Brown
    Demonstrating more lawlessness by the Obama administration, the Government Accountability Office has issued a report in which it claims that it undertook a sting operation to see whether or not the Affordable Care Act's eligibility verification system actually works or not. Their conclusion was that the majority of fake insurance applications submitted were approved. According to testimony by Seto Bagdoyan, who directs GAO's Forensic Audits and Investigative Service, "The federal marketplace approved coverage for 11 of our 12 fictitious applicants who initially applied online, or by telephone." Of course, Americans will be relieved to know that six applications were blocked,...
  • IRS: Uninsured face fine of nearly $2,500

    07/24/2014 6:10:35 PM PDT · by TigerClaws · 44 replies
    The Internal Revenue Service said Thursday individuals who fail to get health insurance this year will be fined a maximum of $2,448 and families with five or more members can be fined up to $12,240. Under the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, people are either required to obtain health insurance or risk a tax penalty from the IRS Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/213308-uninsured-could-be-fined-almost-2500#ixzz38REt1dEt Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook
  • Progressives learn the hard way that the Constitution is obstructionist

    07/24/2014 5:54:25 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 5 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | July 23, 2014 | Charles Lane
    President Obama’s plan to transform the U.S. health-care market is once again in trouble. This time, two Republican-appointed judges on a federal appeals court have invalidated a key portion of the program. In other words, the U.S. constitutional system is functioning normally. That’s not to say that the majority of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit correctly struck down the issuance of tax credits through the federal health insurance exchanges in 36 states — though it is true, as the judges said, that the law only speaks of “Exchanges established by the State.”...
  • Why the DC Circuit’s interpretation of the ACA in Halbig v. Burwell is far from “absurd”

    07/24/2014 5:48:45 PM PDT · by SteveH · 3 replies
    Volokh Conspiracy via The Washington Post ^ | July 24, 2014 | Illya Somin
    ... There is indeed Supreme Court precedent stating that courts can sometimes refuse to enforce the plain meaning of a statute where doing so creates an absurd result. But, as Judge Griffith’s D.C. Circuit opinion emphasizes (quoting an earlier DC Circuit ruling), it is limited to cases where enforcement of the text would “render[ the] statute nonsensical or superfluous or . . . create an outcome so contrary to perceived social values that Congress could not have intended it.” In this case, however, the result is far from nonsensical. Indeed, the DC Circuit’s interpretation of the ACA reflects the sort...
  • Obamacare Tax Fine Caps Put in Place

    07/24/2014 5:26:47 PM PDT · by dignitasnews · 13 replies
    Dignitas News Service ^ | July 24, 2014 | Dignitas News Service Team
    Federal officials have announced the structure and methodology for the amount of tax fines to be levied to individuals in non-compliance of federal Obamacare mandates. Under the plan announced today, the maximum tax/penalty an individual can be charged for failing to comply with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) often referred to as "Obamacare" will be $2,448 per person, while a family of five could entail a levy of $12,240. The decision that was announced today would initially impose on the citizenry a first year additional tax fine of $95 per person and be raised as much as 1 percent of...
  • Big Insurance was supposed to be "punished" by Obamacare; Big Insurance was behind it all the time

    07/24/2014 4:18:12 PM PDT · by CharlesOConnell · 17 replies
    American Chesterton Society Blog ^ | 2-20-2012 | Dale Ahlquist
    G.K. Chesterton’s Prophetic Look at National Health Care Dale Ahlquist | 2-20-2012 | American Chesterton Society Blogweb.archive.org/web/20130811135205/http://www.chesterton.org/2012/02/a-prophetic-look-at-national-health-care-2/G.K. Chesterton considered himself a member of the Liberal Party until 1912. As he would later say, he did not leave the Liberal Party. It left him. He believed in something called liberty, the idea that people should be able to make most decisions for themselves, especially the most basic and most important decisions, and not have such decisions made for them by anyone else, especially by the government. He believed, as a liberal, that the State’s role was to preserve liberty, not take...
  • Obama administration says it plans opt-out alternative on mandate

    07/24/2014 1:44:07 PM PDT · by Welchie25 · 15 replies
    Catholic Review ^ | 7/24/14 | Catholic News Service
    The Obama administration has filed a brief with the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver indicating it plans to develop an alternative for Catholic and other religious nonprofit employers to opt out of providing federally mandated contraceptives they object to including in their employee health care coverage. Several media outlets, including AP, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post, reported July 23 that the administration said it would come up with a "work-around" that would be different than the accommodation it currently has available to such employers. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as part...
  • ObamaCare getaway: 5 US territories released from health care law

    07/24/2014 12:18:56 PM PDT · by cll · 17 replies
    Fox News ^ | 7/24/2014 | Barnini Chakraborty
    The Obama administration is coming under fire for once again making a unilateral change to ObamaCare -- this time, quietly exempting the five U.S. territories and their more than 4 million residents from virtually all major provisions of the health care law. The decision was made a week ago, and was a long time coming. For months, the territories have been complaining that the law was implemented so poorly in their regions that it destabilized their insurance markets. Until now, the Department of Health and Human Services claimed its hands were tied. But last Wednesday, the department reversed course. The...
  • Will John Roberts Decide a 'State' Is Not a 'State'?

    07/23/2014 2:00:14 AM PDT · by markomalley · 36 replies
    CNS News ^ | 7/23/2014 | Terence P. Jeffrey
    The Supreme Court may soon need to decide whether the federal government can be considered a "state" in our federal republic in the same sense that Iowa, Wyoming and Wisconsin are states. On the face of it, this question may seem absurd. In fact, given any level of reflection, it is absurd. The federal government is not one of the states. But this absurd question was at the heart of Halbig v. Burwell, decided this week by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and it could soon become a defining issue in American life. Section 1311...
  • The prophetic words of John Roberts

    07/24/2014 9:01:11 AM PDT · by Starman417 · 27 replies
    Flopping Aces ^ | 07-24-14 | DrJohn
    Today EJ Dionne wrote an article long on whining and short on logic about the conflicting decisions regarding Obamacare: By effectively gutting the Affordable Care Act on Tuesday, two members of a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals showed how far right-leaning jurists have strayed from such impartiality. We are confronted with a conservative judiciary that will use any argument it can muster to win ideological victories that elude their side in the elected branches of our government. Strayed from impartiality? Say what? Then Dionne jumps off the cliff: The extreme judicial activism here is obvious when...
  • ObamaCare Is Wide Open To Fraud: Audit

    07/24/2014 4:39:01 AM PDT · by IBD editorial writer · 10 replies
    Investor's Business Daily ^ | 07/23/2014 | IBD Staff
    Health Reform: An undercover operation disclosed on Wednesday shows just how easy it is to defraud ObamaCare. This is your health care on government. To test administration claims that it had strict controls in place to verify eligibility and subsidy amounts for ObamaCare applicants, the Government Accountability Office sent a dozen people out to try enrolling with made-up identities. All but one of the 12 succeeded in enrolling in a subsidized ObamaCare plan. [snip] The scale of the problem is potentially massive. According to the GAO, 4.3 million ObamaCare applications have known "inconsistencies" — most of which involve questions about...
  • John Roberts vs. Obamacare: Rock, Paper, Socialism Sucks!

    07/23/2014 3:46:45 PM PDT · by xuberalles · 17 replies
    Self | 1/23/14 | Me
    It’s not very often when one man, liable for the most destructive decision in a nation’s ideological history, is presented with an opportunity to eradicate his greatest transgression: empowering a socialist leviathan that became the greatest Trojan horse of excessive government in our history. The real question is, after an appeals court ruling struck down key components of the law and dealt John Roberts a temporary stay of stupidity, will he once again abandon 225 years of proven checks and balances, or will the Chief Justice inexplicably pardon Obamacare for a second time and reward those who lied about its...
  • Freep a poll! (Should the Obamacare law be enforced as written?)

    07/23/2014 1:51:45 PM PDT · by dynachrome · 11 replies
    http://www.headlineoftheday.com/ ^ | 7-23-14 | Headline of the day
    Should the Obamacare law be enforced as written? No, the IRS is allowed to change it. I don't know. Yes, and let the chips fall where they may.
  • Obamacare Rulings Have Consumers, Governors Worried

    07/23/2014 12:34:21 PM PDT · by PoloSec · 13 replies
    News Max ^ | July 23 2014 | John Blosser
    Two conflicting court decisions on tax credits for Obamacare have millions of consumers worried, along with some Republican governors who opted to let the federal government run their state programs. A decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals D.C. Circuit determined that only those enrolled in state-operated Obamacare exchanges are eligible for the tax subsidies that put the "affordable" in the Affordable Care Act, The Wall Street Journal reported. Should the ruling stand, Bloomberg News reports, customers in those 36 states could see their subsidies vanish, boosting their healthcare premiums by 76 percent, dealing a serious blow both to Obamacare...
  • MNsure failing to produce results

    07/23/2014 9:12:27 AM PDT · by TurboZamboni · 6 replies
    Quad Community Press ^ | 7-22-14 | Linda Runbeck
    It’s been almost one year since Minnesota rolled out its state version of Obamacare, called MNsure. How is this experiment with government-run health care working? Let’s start with the basic fact that Minnesota’s health care is second to none. Before MNsure, close to 97 percent of Minnesotans had health insurance coverage or were eligible to procure it at very low or no cost. This was among the highest percentage of insured people in the nation. Some $160 million in taxpayer money has been spent to launch MNsure, and we are no better off today. The state had two unique programs:...
  • White House giving up fight over Obamacare’s contraception mandate?

    07/23/2014 8:06:53 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 7 replies
    Hotair ^ | 07/23/2014 | Noah Rothman
    The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Hobby Lobby case was met with incandescent outrage from progressives. The overturning of a mandate never passed by Congress which had not existed prior to 2010 signaled, those who consider themselves members of a class of deliberative and reasoned thinkers said, evidence of a theocratic judiciary in the United States. Recognizing the indignation on their side of the aisle, the White House responded by reassuring their base supporters that this offense would not go unanswered. “Today’s decision jeopardizes the health of women who are employed by these companies,” White House Press Sec. Josh...
  • A ruling that could doom ObamaCare

    07/23/2014 7:16:34 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 14 replies
    New York Post ^ | 07/23/2014 | By Betsy McCaughey
    The nation’s No. 2 court on Tuesday slapped down the Obama administration in a 2-1 decision that could kill the president’s signature health-care law. A less-prestigious federal appeals court issued a contradictory opinion the same day, but if the Supreme Court upholds the DC Circuit’s ruling, it will force Congress back to the drawing board to design a health law that is genuinely affordable, not just falsely titled “Affordable Care Act.” The ruling in Halbig v. Burwell bars the federal government from handing out taxpayer-funded subsidies to people who buy ObamaCare plans in nearly two-thirds of the states — New...
  • The ACA Means What It Says: The DC Court Declines to Usurp the Role of Congress

    07/23/2014 7:14:21 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 18 replies
    National Review ^ | 07/23/2014 | The Editors
    It’s an odd world in which judges are accused of usurping the role of Congress for ruling that the executive branch must follow the text of a law Congress wrote. But that’s what has happened today. In Halbig v. Burwell, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Congress never gave the federal government power to provide subsidies and assess penalties under the Affordable Care Act in states that haven’t established their own health-insurance exchanges. President Obama and the Congress that passed the law assumed this wouldn’t be a problem: States were expected to go along and establish their own...
  • ObamaCare's Murky Future

    07/23/2014 6:30:14 AM PDT · by Sean_Anthony · 5 replies
    Canada Free Press ^ | 07/23/14 | Arnold Ahlert
    A pair of federal Appeals Court rulings have sown further confusion regarding ObamaCare, even as they illuminate stark differences in ideologically-inspired interpretations of the law. First, a three-judge panel from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that Americans are not entitled to subsidies for their healthcare premiums if they live in a state where the federal government set up a healthcare exchange.
  • DC Circuit Creates Obamacare Uncertainty

    07/23/2014 5:11:51 AM PDT · by LeoMcNeil · 3 replies
    The big news from yesterday is that the DC Court of Appeals ruled that Obamacare subsidies obtained on the Federal exchange are in violation of the law. The law states that subsidies are only available to people who buy Obamacare policies on a state exchange. Around 36 states don’t have exchanges, thus citizens in those states aren’t entitled to a subsidy according to the DC Circuit decision. This is significant because in order for employers to fall into the employer mandate an employee has to be eligible for a subsidy. In states without a state exchange, that’s no longer possible...
  • Oklahoma Man Struggles for Three Months to Cancel Obamacare Enrollment

    07/23/2014 4:22:08 AM PDT · by lowbridge · 14 replies
    freebeacon.com ^ | july 21, 2014
    The Obamacare woes continue as an Oklahoma man spent three agonizing months trying to cancel his health insurance plan. David Emanuel’s 65th birthday last April, when he became eligible for Medicare, spurred him to cancel his private health insurance plan. He called BlueCross BlueShield to terminate the plan and was met with resistance. “They said, ‘You can’t do anything until healthcare.gov tells us that you can drop it,’” he said. He phoned healthcare.gov, but no one answered. Emanuel showed KJRH-OK the call logs displaying how long he waited to speak to a representative from the health care exchange. The call logs show that Emanuel waited 131...
  • A stinging defeat for the government (Obamacare and Halbig v. Sebelius)

    07/22/2014 8:27:58 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 11 replies
    The Incidental Economist ^ | July 22, 2014 | Nicholas Bagley
    In a major setback for the Affordable Care Act, the D.C. Circuit just released a fractured opinion invalidating the IRS’s rule extending tax credits to federally facilitated exchanges. The case, Halbig v. Sebelius, centers on the portion of the ACA governing the calculation of tax credits. The statute specifies that tax credits are available to most people who purchase a health plan “through an Exchange established by the State under 1311.” (See my earlier posts for a more detailed recap.) About two-thirds of the states, however, declined to establish exchanges. In those states, the federal government stepped in and established...
  • Sen. Cruz: Halbig a 'repudiation of Obamacare and all the lawlessness that comes with it'

    07/22/2014 8:15:03 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 8 replies
    Senator Ted Cruz's Office ^ | July 22, 2014 | Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
    Statement regarding Halbig v. Burwell.July 22, 2014 | (202) 228-7561WASHINGTON, DC -- U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, today released the following statement regarding the Halbig v. Burwell decision: "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...
  • Conservatives get a big 2014 boost from ‘fatal blow’ to Obamacare

    07/22/2014 8:06:32 PM PDT · by 2ndDivisionVet · 25 replies
    Hot Air ^ | July 22, 2014 | Noah Rothman
    At first blush, a federal appeals court’s decision on Tuesday that dealt what many considered to be a near” fatal blow” to the Affordable Care Act could also appear to be a blow to Republicans’ hopes for retaking the Senate in November. Obamacare supporters are enraged. The decision in Halbig v. Burwell, which invalidated the federal government’s ability to provide subsidies for those Americans who purchased insurance through a federal health insurance exchange, could mean a major increase in premium rates for more than half of the 8 million who enrolled in ACA plans. The appeals court ruled that, as...
  • Federal undercover investigation signs up fake applicants for ACA coverage, subsidies

    07/22/2014 4:52:24 PM PDT · by Second Amendment First · 16 replies
    Washington Post ^ | July 22, 2014 | Amy Goldstein
    In undercover tests of the new federal health insurance marketplace, government investigators have been able to procure health plans and federal subsidies for fake applicants with fictitious documents, according to findings that will be disclosed to lawmakers on Wednesday. The results of the inquiry by the Government Accountability Office are evidence of still-imperfect work by specialists intended to assist new insurance customers and government contractors hired to verify that coverage and subsidies are legitimate. The GAO also pointed to flaws that linger in the marketplace’s Web site, HealthCare.gov. According to testimony to be delivered before a House Ways and Means...
  • Court Rulings Confirm That ObamaCare Is A Tangled Mess

    07/22/2014 4:31:16 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 12 replies
    Investors.com ^ | July 22, 2014 | IBD Editorial
    ObamaCare: A federal court has appropriately endangered the health of the Affordable Care Act — a "reform" that's turning out to be every bit the mess we feared. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a ruling Tuesday morning that said the federal government cannot provide health insurance subsidies for residents in the 36 states that have not set up their own ObamaCare exchanges. In Halbig v. Burwell, a three-judge panel declared 2-1, as it should have, that the law meant what it said when it plainly stated that subsidies were only available to those buying ObamaCare...
  • Halbig and the Rule of Law

    07/22/2014 4:26:26 PM PDT · by Servant of the Cross · 9 replies
    National Review ^ | 7/22/2014 | John Daniel Davidson
    A federal appellate court dealt a severe blow to Obamacare today, and in so doing scored a victory for the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the idea that words matter. A panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled 2–1 in Halbig v. Burwell that federal subsidies for health-insurance plans sold on the Obamacare exchanges can be disbursed only through exchanges created by states, not those created by the federal government. In a surprise twist, shortly after the Halbig decision came out, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued its...
  • When Obamacare loses in court, insurance companies lose, too

    07/22/2014 4:14:58 PM PDT · by SoFloFreeper · 15 replies
    Washington Examiner ^ | 7/22/14 | Timothy P Carney
    When the administration lost an Obamacare case in federal court Tuesday, the insurance companies lost as well... Subsidies were one of the many goodies Obamacare provided insurers. Obamacare also required individuals to buy insurance, compelled many business owners to insure employees, expanded Medicaid (which is often administered by private insurers) and supplied a bailout to struggling insurers in the form of “risk corridors.” The Halbig ruling is a triple threat to the insurers’ Obamacare favors. By stripping away tax credits, it reduces insurance companies transfers’ from the federal government. Halbig also reduces the impact of the law’s employer mandate and...
  • Circuits Split on Availability of ACA Exchange Subsidies

    07/22/2014 2:48:58 PM PDT · by ThethoughtsofGreg · 2 replies
    American Legislator ^ | 7-22-14 | Sean Riley
    This morning, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit invalidated a 2012 IRS rule allowing tax subsidies in federal insurance exchanges under the Affordable Care Act. Within hours, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a contrary ruling in a similar, but separate, case, allowing exchange subsidies in both state-based and federal exchanges. Though both decisions are still subject to further review and will have no immediate impact, such “circuit splits” are often considered strong evidence that a case will ultimately end up before the U.S. Supreme...
  • Split Rulings Over Obamacare Point to Another Supreme Court Showdown

    07/22/2014 11:28:18 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 54 replies
    Wall Street Journal ^ | 07/22/2014 | Jacob Gershman
    Less than an hour after an appeals court in Washington ordered the Obama administration to turn off the spigot of federal subsidies to consumers through U.S.-run health-care exchanges, an appeals court in Virginia ruled that the subsidies should be allowed to keep on flowing. With the future of Obamacare hanging in the balance, the back-to-back opinions raise the likelihood of another Supreme Court showdown over the the president’s marquee law. The two circuits split over an issue fundamental to the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. That is, whether the Internal Revenue Service had the authority under the statute passed...
  • On the other hand: Fourth Circuit upholds ObamaCare subsidies for federal exchange consumers

    07/22/2014 11:15:41 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 43 replies
    Hotair ^ | 07/22/2014 | AllahPundit
    Well, this is awkward.Unlike the D.C. Circuit, which split 2-1, the majority here was 3-0. Even so, the most noteworthy thing about the opinion is how tormented the court seems in trying to determine what Congress intended when it said that subsidies should be available only on “an exchange established by the State.” From page 20:Page 24:Page 28:If they can’t decide what the key phrase was designed to do, why don’t they follow the D.C. Circuit’s lead and stick with the plain text? In the first excerpt above, the court frankly admits that the language of the law seems...
  • White House To Ignore Court Ruling, Keep Handing Out Obamacare Subsidies

    07/22/2014 10:52:15 AM PDT · by Nachum · 44 replies
    The Daaily Caller ^ | 7/22/14 | Sarah Hurtubise
    The Obama administration will continue handing out Obamacare subsidies to federal exchange customers despite a federal court’s ruling Tuesday that the subsidies are illegal. A D.C. Court of Appeals panel ruled Tuesday morning that customers in the 36 states that didn’t establish their own exchange and use HealthCare.gov instead cannot be given premium tax credits, according to the text of the Affordable Care Act itself. (RELATED: Federal Court Takes Down Obamacare: Subsidies In Federal Exchange Are Illegal) But the White House said in response that it will continue handing out the billions of taxpayer dollars in subsidies. White House press...
  • Second court disagrees, upholds subsidies

    07/22/2014 10:32:52 AM PDT · by maggief · 29 replies
    The Hill ^ | July 22, 2014 | Elise Viebeck
    The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that ObamaCare subsidies issued through the federal exchanges are legal, contradicting a separate ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court on the same day. Fourth Circuit Judge Roger Gregory argued that because the statutory language of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is ambiguous, courts should defer to the interpretation of the Internal Revenue Service and allow the subsides to stand. "Applying deference to the IRS's determination … we uphold the rule as a permissible exercise of the agency's discretion," Gregory wrote. The decision came just hours after the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals...
  • Healthcare Premiums Would Absolutely Explode If Today's Obamacare Ruling Stands!

    07/22/2014 9:42:04 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 51 replies
    Business Insider ^ | 07/22/2014 | Brett LoGiurato
    A federal appeals court on Tuesday dealt a setback to the Affordable Care Act, ruling that premium subsidies provided through the federal health exchange in 36 states are invalid under the writing of the law.Here's the practical effect of the ruling, if it withstands the rest of the legal process: More than 5 million, generally low-income Americans who received tax credits through the federal exchange to purchase health insurance would see their premiums explode.Avalere Health, an independent healthcare firm, released an analysis last week showing that individuals who received premium subsidies for health insurance would see a premium hike of about...
  • GOP sees court ruling as major step toward unraveling of Obamacare

    07/22/2014 9:41:11 AM PDT · by maggief · 17 replies
    The Blaze ^ | July 22, 2014 | Pete Kasperowicz
    EXCERPT Republicans like Sen. Ted Cruz from Texas were quick to pounce on the decision as one that reveals the Obama administration’s ongoing attempts to implement the law in a way that exceeds the parameters set in the law that Democrats themselves devised and passed. Cruz called the ruling a “repudiation of Obamacare and all the lawlessness that has come with it.” “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,” Cruz said. “This decision restores power to Congress and...
  • Circuit Court invalidates Obamacare subsidies

    07/22/2014 9:28:16 AM PDT · by alloysteel · 17 replies
    American Thinker ^ | July 22, 2014 | Rick Moran
    A surprising ruling from the notoriously liberal DC Circuit Court. By a 2-1 vote, judges ruled that the subsidies received by purchasing insurance through healthcare.gov website are invalid. In a potentially crippling blow to Obamacare, a federal appeals court panel declared Tuesday that government subsidies worth billions of dollars that helped 4.7 million people buy insurance on HealthCare.gov are illegal. A judicial panel in a 2-1 ruling said such subsidies can be granted only to those people who bought insurance in an Obamacare exchange run by an individual state or the District of Columbia — not on the federally run...