Questions on the House Vote to Tweak ObamaCare’s Employer Mandate

Cato Institute ^ | Jan 7, 2015 | Michael F. Cannon

[Ray76]

Tomorrow, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives will vote on a measure that would alter the definition of full-time work, for purposes of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate, from 30 hours per week to 40 hours per week.

I have a few questions about this supposed threat to ObamaCare:

1. This legislation would reduce the burden of ObamaCare’s employer mandatem but it would also increase government spending by making more workers eligible for health-insurance subsidies through ObamaCare’s Exchanges. How is that a policy victory?
2. The legislation would therefore shift part of ObamaCare’s cost from an organized and influential interest group (employers) to a disorganized and less-influential interest group (taxpayers). How is that strategically smart?
3. The legislation would make ObamaCare more tolerable for an organized and influential interest group (again, employers), thereby reducing their incentive to lobby for full repeal. How is that strategically smart?
4. House Republicans say they are committed to repealing ObamaCare entirely. If so, why is this bill, rather than a full-repeal bill, the first item on their agenda? 
5. House Republicans say this bill will show they can govern. But they also acknowledge the president will veto it. How is that governing?
6. (ed. omitted for space)
7. A King ruling could also invalidate Exchange subsidies in 36 states, thereby exposing millions of Americans to the full cost of ObamaCare’s hidden taxes. That would give Congress more leverage than ever before to reopen and repeal the law. With this legislation, House Republicans are playing small ball with no leverage. How is that strategically smart?
8. If enacted, this legislation would actually reduce the leverage a King ruling would give Congress to reopen and repeal ObamaCare. How is that strategically smart?
9. The president has said he would veto this legislation. Given the above, should Republicans believe him?

[Ray76]

Full title: Nine TEN! Questions on the House Vote to Tweak ObamaCare’s Employer Mandate

[dila813]

It is because of the red face idiot in charge of the house.

[Diogenesis]

The EXEMPT Congress will do NOTHING substantive to
remove ObamaCARE.
The EXEMPT will continue to protect their own EXEMPTIONS
from DeathCARE/RomneyCARE/ObamaCARE.

and From the “RUle of Law”
(from which they made/make themselves also exempt).

[Sirius Lee]

The GOP only intends to pass such legislation that the Chamber of Commies writes for it.

[shove_it]

In this case, Big Ears may be Brer Rabbit.

[Revel]

“7. A King ruling could also invalidate Exchange subsidies in 36 states, thereby exposing millions of Americans to the full cost of ObamaCare’s hidden taxes. That would give Congress more leverage than ever before to reopen and repeal the law. With this legislation, House Republicans are playing small ball with no leverage. How is that strategically smart?”

Bad assumption. Congress under Boehner has no intention of repealing anything. There is a one in million chance that the Supremes will follow the law and invalidate the subsidies in 36 states. But if they do then I expect the the republican controlled house to be sending Obama a Bill that he will sign. That will be a bill that changes the language of Obamacare so that those 36 states do get subsidies. Watch and see.

[tennmountainman]

Why take this vote so seriously Ray?

The house had a chance to defund this. Instead they funded it and amnesty
in the Cromibus bill.

Everything else that now follows is pure theatre. What part of that do u not understand Ray?

[Ray76]

I understand entirely, hence the post.

[tennmountainman]

I wonder why the Cato Institue takes this vote so seriously?

Every vote the GOP takes since they, along with the help of Rat votes
passed the Cromibus is nothing more than Kabuki dances, show votes
and grandstanding.

When the GOP was presented an opportunity to make a real difference
they folded like a cheap suit.

[Ray76]

Perhaps to illustrate the Kabuki

[BobL]

Nice to Cato doing this, rather than plotting to sell off our roads to private companies so they can toll us at MONOPOLY RATES (i.e. 20 to 50 cents per mile).

[Amendment10]

Thank you for referencing that article Ray76. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

”… will vote on a measure that would alter the definition of full-time work, for purposes of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate [emphases added], ..."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

As ranted in related threads, the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific powers to regulate either vote-winning intrastate minimum wage, or regulate, tax and spend for vote-winning intrastate healthcare purposes. So all that corrupt federal RINOs are doing, imo, is giving low-information voters a dog & pony show.

Note that the 10th Amendment is probably one of the best-kept secrets in Constitution-ignoring DC.

[InterceptPoint]

My analysis.

Currently at 30 hrs per week (full time) employers must provide Obamacare coverage.

So employees are hired to work 29 hrs a week to avoid the mandate.

Raise the work week to 40 hrs and employers will hire people for 39 hours.

That is all that is going on here.
Don’t over-analyze it.

[Ray76]

That is mentioned in the article.

[Amendment10]

Mea culpa. Regarding post 12 of this thread I should have indicated Congress wrongly defining the full-time work week instead of minimum wage.

But it remains that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to decide policy for either of these issues where intrastate commerce is concerned.

[Hardens Hollow]

“4.House Republicans say they are committed to repealing ObamaCare entirely. If so, why is this bill, rather than a full-repeal bill, the first item on their agenda? “

The Republicans have no intention of doing anything conservative. All this is for show. They voted to repeal Obamacare when there was no chance, and if there ever is a chance, they’ll sit on their hands.

JMO

Hope I’m wrong but I changed my party affiliation when cry baby got voted back in.

[Hardens Hollow]

“The house had a chance to defund this. Instead they funded it and amnesty in the Cromibus bill.”

I am so sick of the traitorous RINOs that I de-Republicaned myself when cry baby was reelected.

On the bright side, I am packing in a frenzy and will be in Tennessee shortly. 3 weeks I think.

It won’t change DC but I won’t be surrounded by liberals and Spanish. yeah!

[tennmountainman]

Hey, come on down! I think you said you were coming from CA.
You will love East Tennessee.

[jafojeffsurf]

REPEAL! PERIOD!