Posted on 09/23/2013 11:16:53 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
A slew of recent articles (Bloomberg, Washington Post, National Journal) explaining the effort to defund Obamacare have all pointed out an important fact: A government shutdown wouldn't defund Obamacare.
But these articles have all glossed over another important fact: Defunding Obamacare would defund Obamacare.
The bill to keep the government fully funded after Sept. 30 is called the "continuing resolution" or CR. If Congress fails to pass a CR by Sept. 30, then we get a "government shutdown." But, of course, many government functions will keep operating, just not most of those functions that require annual appropriations.
Guess what doesn't require annual appropriations? Almost all of Obamacare. So, yes, B-Berg, NatJo and WaPo — a government shutdown won't defund Obamacare.
But that's not the whole story. The House passed a CR numbered H.J. Res 59. This House CR, in addition to funding the government at current levels, also contains a "defund Obamacare" provision. This provision at least aims to defund Obamacare, and I think it does:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no Federal funds shall be made available to carry out any provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ...No entitlement to benefits under any provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ... shall remain in effect on and after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution, nor shall any payment be awarded, owed, or made to any State, District, or territory under any such provision.
Sure, there's some ambiguity as to whether the tax credits Obamacare created are affected, but the GOP staff who wrote the language argues that Obamacare is effectively moot if the House bill becomes law. From an aide to an appropriator:
"The defund provision of the CR prevents taxpayer dollars from being used to implement or enforce the law, including the individual mandate, employer mandates, subsidies, exchange operation, rules for insurance companies, etc."
So, it seems to be false when Ezra Klein writes that the " 'continuing resolution' that defunds Obamacare ... wouldn't actually stop Obamacare from being implemented."
Also misleading is the language coming from the Tea Partiers in the Senate.
Rand Paul says, "I will not vote for any CR that funds Obamacare." Heritage Action writes about battling "a CR that funds Obamacare."
But for the most part, no CR will fund Obamacare, even if Obama wrote it himself. You know what funds Obamacare? A bill called HR 3590, also known as the Affordable Care Act.
Obamacare funds Obamacare.
This is a point of contention between the Ted Cruz wing of the GOP and the rest of the GOP, because Cruz is now saying he will filibuster the House CR, which defunds Obamacare. He will block a motion to limit debate, because once debate is limited, Reid can strip the defund language with a simple majority vote.
But such a CR can't be called a "CR that funds Obamacare." It's really a "CR that doesn't defund Obamacare."
This is not merely semantics. This matters because Cruz's strategy involves a government shutdown. If Cruz kills the CR altogether, he's not blocking significant Obamacare funding — he's leaving Obamacare mostly alone, while cutting most other government funding.
In other words, Cruz and Heritage Action might want to justify filibustering the CR by claiming an amended CR "funds Obamacare" but that ignores the truth: Obamacare stays funded without a CR because, as stated at the beginning, a government shutdown doesn't defund Obamacare.
Absolutely correct.
As I understand the process though, the multi-year and no-year discretionary bills passed by a previous Congress remain in effect unless they expire by law or unless the current Congress explicitly changes (adjusts, suspends, repeals) them.
When challenged about the Democrats not having passed an annual budget since 2009, little Chuckie Schumer responded that they didn’t have to because the last Budget Control Act set spending for several years.
I like that statement.
Guess What Happened to This U.S. Rep’s Private Health Plan After He Opted Out of Obamacare
Experts Say Obamacare Pushes Menu Labeling, ‘Slush Fund’ for Health Propaganda
Senate Republicans Can Stop Reid from Funding Obamacare
How John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are Funding Obamacare
Could The GOP Actually Be About To Beat Obama?
Top Ten ObamaCare Horror Stories the Media Are Covering Up
Supreme Court to Consider New Obamacare Case
Bill Clinton begins Obamacare sales pitch: ‘It will empower people to have better life stories’
Ted Cruz withstands grilling by Chris Wallace on defunding Obamacare
Authors of Obamacare Will Get Rich Implementing It. The Rest of Us …?
It’s Finally Here: GOP’s Plan To Replace ObamaCare
The ObamaCare Disaster Finally Hits Front Page of New York Times
You were warned: Obama’s layoff bomb goes BOOM!
Sen. Rand Paul pushes bill to put Chief Justice John Roberts on Obamacare
Where Do the Funds Go If Obamacare Is Defunded?
Details, details, details: Obamacare still a fog
Does Obama’s Latest Illegal Act Exempt You From Obamacare?
Heritage Foundation Ad In Times Square: Obamacare Is Hazardous To Your Health
White House Warns ObamaCare Will Put Americans' Personal Info at Risk
Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.