Can Appropriations Bills Defund Obamacare? [Yes!]

Heritage Foundation ^ | Aug 14, 2013

[Jim Robinson]

• Some have argued that because much of Obamacare constitutes “mandatory” spending—namely, new entitlements such as the massive Medicaid expansion and exchange insurance subsidies—Congress is powerless to defund the entire law as part of its annual appropriations bills. These claims are false.

• Congress routinely enacts changes to mandatory spending programs as part of its annual appropriations process. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recognizes these changes when analyzing spending bills and scores them as CHiMPS—changes in mandatory program spending.

• In February 2011, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1—legislation intended to reduce federal spending by $100 billion, consistent with House Republicans’ “Pledge to America.” CBO found 23 pages’ worth of CHiMPS in the House-passed version of H.R. 1. These reductions in mandatory spending ran the gamut from $26 million in savings over one year, and $74 billion in savings over ten years, achieved by reducing the maximum Pell Grant award (Section 1831), to $30 million in savings achieved by reducing mandatory appropriations to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Section 1517).

• Congress has already defunded mandatory programs within Obamacare—and done so through appropriations measures. Section 1857 of the continuing resolution Congress enacted in April 2011 (P.L. 112-10) “permanently cancelled” $2.2 billion in mandatory funding to Obamacare’s co-op health insurance program.

• Congress has also defunded elements of health care entitlements for decades. Every year since 1976, Congress has enacted the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding of abortion. This provision, enacted as part of discretionary appropriations legislation, prohibits abortion coverage in the Medicaid entitlement program.

• Historically, Congress has used the “power of the purse” broadly to make key policy statements through defunding. For instance, in 1982 Congress acted to block the Reagan Administration’s policy for supporting the Contra forces opposing the Nicaraguan government. As part of Public Law 97-377, Congress prohibited both the Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency from furnishing military equipment and support to any group for the purpose of overthrowing the Nicaraguan government. Even though defense spending is not funded through mandatory appropriations, the example demonstrates that defunding has been—and remains—a powerful tool Congress can use to affect public policy.

• Given the examples above, and numerous others, it is beyond dispute that Congress can use its power of the purse to defund Obamacare—both its mandatory and discretionary spending—in appropriations legislation this fall. The lone remaining question is whether Congress can summon the political will to do so.

[Bikkuri]

Nevermind.. I found it (going through your posts in forum).. txrang has been as much a pain as Cherry.. wonder if it’s the same girl :/

[Norm Lenhart]

Same basic mentality. Anything to keep people voting GOP no matter the damage they do to America.

[RKBA Democrat]

True that. The gop is very deficient in having anyone worth looking at. Maybe they’ll tear a page out of the Italian playbook and start running porn stars for office?

[hoosiermama]

They are not in DC. Thats the capital switch board. We once had a link to all their offices. Don’t know even how to find it now. Thanks for that one. Will leave a message for my rep

[xzins]

The lone remaining question is whether Congress can summon the political will to do so

That's a simple one, Jim. No, they won't.

Not a peep out of the vast majority of them, conservatives included, on the last minute cushy deal to exempt themselves from ObamaCare.

That says that they are ALREADY GOING ALONG with the implementation of ObamaCare.

[txrangerette]

I’m not Cherry.

I’m not a pain.

What is this, the “good ol boys” club?

I call them as I see them.

That’s what we’re here for.

Next time you badmouth someone here, me, or anyone, have the manners per FR rules to ping the individual to your personal “hit” on them.

It’s no pain delivered to point out the truth. If everyone did as Norm Lenhart demands, Obama would have won every state in the Union.

Mitt was unfortunately nothing but a placeholder. As I stated, I would have just as soon Texas have gone to Elmer Fudd as have gone to Obama. There’s a couple of placeholders made for each other, eh? Romney and FUDD?

They are still better than letting your state go for Obama.

But of course we all know the answer is not to be found in placeholders.

Neither is it to be found in letting the open enemies of America as founded have it all while you splinter and split and splinter and split and moan and cry on the internet.

[Norm Lenhart]

You get the respect and courtesy all libs deserve from me. None.

[wita]

Well Tex, you and I agree that the republican party, it’s politicians and base, have left the reservation. It is now up to those who recognize a party platform as more than a piece of toilet tissue to recover the party and it’s values from those who ignore them, whether through ignorance or by choice.

[RedMDer]

Oops. Right!

[wita]

Your attitude brought us Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama on a silver platter, and the view that it doesn’t look recoverable. Why the public seems to be so divided on issues as well as character, is pure human nature something the Founders sought to overcome with the government they were so successful in implementing. Had we stuck to the Constitution, and been able to elect honest and uncompromising patriots to positions of power, maybe we wouldn’t be in this mess, but then the unknown factor of who actually runs things, speaking in a religious sense comes into play and we may only know after seeing film at 11. Meanwhile we have to do what each thinks best based on each persons individual Roulette wheel of life, “where she stops nobody knows”. In some cases, based on fact, faith, experience, and history, we know exactly where the wheel will stop.

[Norm Lenhart]

And logic shows that you do not regain the platform by electing people who hold it in contempt.

As Romney did. See his Reagan comments for all the proof needed. Simple math really.

[Norm Lenhart]

So I guess the founders telling us all the things about voting on principle was all crap huh?

When you can reconcile what they said clearly with electing people who hold their creation in disgust, get back to me.

[b4its2late]

Defund it and send it packing!

[jazusamo]

Special Ping!

If all of Us attend Town Halls and make our calls, obamacare can be KILLED!

[wita]

GOP plantation....”

How about the Platform rather than the plantation?

The voters keep electing people who are not GOP platform adherents but reservation jumpers who just love to “WORK” with the democrats to solve our problems, when in many if not most cases, it is both parties, their free spending governance, love of government for all the wrong reasons, and their tender loving care of constituents, that are the real problems.

[Norm Lenhart]

Am I in an alternate universe or are you. One of us is. Because you are giving people hell for not electing GOP while complaining that the GOP isn’t following the platform.

The people working with the libs are the GOP I and others rightly work to dethrone. So what is the issue here?

[Liz]

And don't forget lawsuits.

FR POSTED 8/13---OKLAHOMA WINS FIRST OCARE BATTLE: AG Pruitt--- Obamacare was meant to be so open-ended that it could mean anything. We are seeing thousands of pages of new rules being written, both by HHS and the IRS.

The open-ended interpretation of Obamacare enables this.....if the law doesn't contain a particular provision, no problem. They just make it up as they go along.

Such is the case that involves the winning Oklahoma lawsuit....... “The court rejected the federal government’s argument that Oklahoma lacked standing to challenge the law, allowing us to proceed with this pivotal case,” “We’re optimistic the court will recognize what states have known for months that the IRS disregarded the law by making the large employer mandate effective in Oklahoma or in any of the 33 other states without a state health care exchange.”

REFERENCE Oklahoma challenged implementation of the Affordable Care Act after the IRS finalized a rule that would allow the federal government to punish “large employers,” including local government, with millions of dollars in tax penalties in states without state health care exchanges, which is not allowed under the health care law.

“Congress provided a choice for Oklahoma and other states in implementation of the health care law, and the IRS is attempting to take that away by rule,” General Pruitt said.

“The administration miscalculated how many states would support this law, so now they’re using the IRS to push through provisions that Congress did not pass."

[Lancey Howard]

Good post.

[jazusamo]

BTTT!

[wita]

So I guess the founders telling us all the things about voting on principle was all crap huh?

When you can reconcile what they said clearly with electing people who hold their creation in disgust, get back to me.

You won’t find any of the crap in the two sentences you wrote in any of my comments. You brought up Romney, in a preceding comment and got your wish that Obama remain president instead of someone with principles, the direct opposite of the tyrannical dicktator still in charge. I don’t accept the wishful premise and no one with half a brain should or would that Mr Romney would have been anything like the present occupier of the White House. It is not logical to even leap to such a conclusion. The man had not been in public office for years, and he certainly didn’t get a chance to prove otherwise so in reality neither you statement or mine carry much weight.