[Jeff Chandler]

All he has to do is say that the omission of Federally-created exchanges from the section dealing with subsidies was a “scrivener’s error.”

That doesn't fly at all. It was not accidental omission. The language was clearly written to punish states which didn't get on board. It was specifically included on multiple versions.

[MUDDOG]

The language was clearly written to punish states which didn't get on board.

And the reason Congress had to do it that way is because the Supreme Court has the ruled that fedgov cannot "commandeer" states to do something.

So the Congress can't simply order a state to do something.

Thus, the carrot of subsidies to get the states to set up healthcare exchanges.

[Conscience of a Conservative]

You’re right that the “scrivener’s error” argument shouldn’t fly, but that wouldn’t stop the Supreme Court from relying on it. Again, if Roberts wanted to knock down Obamacare, it would have happened already.

[ballplayer]

Your right it was reprinted many times the exact same way,it was argued about during the debate to pass this monstrosity,the argument it was an accident,a typo,scrivners error are all attempts to once again prey on the ignorance of the American people,a Democrat staple.
The problem is getting some educated and capable individual to explain this on a mad scale,fat chance