Posted on 04/13/2017 6:45:17 AM PDT by Helicondelta
President Donald Trump has not given up on the holy grail of repealing Obamacare, and on Wednesday he revealed his next move, threatening to use health insurance subsidies as a weapon to get Democrats to negotiate on reform.
Trump said his administration may not have the legal authority to make cost-sharing reduction payments, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. So-called CSR subsidies reduce out-of-pocket costs for low-income Affordable Care Act enrollees, but Republicans in Congress sued the Obama administration, saying they expenditures were not authorized under the ACA.
The president is clearly aware of the impact it would have to stop making CSR payments. After urging congressional leaders to pull the vote on the GOP health reform bill last month, Trump exclaimed that the best thing for Republicans is to "let Obamacare explode."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Your source is older than mine. I watched the interview when Trump talked about this a few days ago.
Congress needs to appropriate the funds and the Freedom Caucus needs to vote for it. Not likely to ever happen.
Maybe. I was never trump, voted for him over Hillary....and I’ll say the first couple of weeks I was kicking myself for ever being never trump. I don’t know. Rush says today it’s just a negotiating ploy... start off with the most outlandish request and then move to the middle. Some of those “outlandish” requests were things that weren’t “outlandish” to a lot of people. I dunno. We’ll see where he lands.
well that sounds like good news then, at least unless the republicans and trump panic and stampede...
Republicans have spines like well boiled linguine.
And though they may be useless, like a race horse that stumbles before crossing the finish line, they are at least not always dangerous and power mad the way the DNC is.
No sure about the rules here on the NYT but a judge has already ruled that the subsidies were not allowed and is under appeal by the Government to allow them to continue.
Here is an article about it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/us/politics/affordable-care-act-trump-subsidies.html?_r=0
Below is link that is embedded in the above
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/us/politics/health-law-obama.html
No sure about the rules here on the NYT but a judge has already ruled that the subsidies were not allowed and is under appeal by the Government to allow them to continue.
Here is an article about it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/us/politics/affordable-care-act-trump-subsidies.html?_r=0
Below is link that is embedded in the above
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/us/politics/health-law-obama.html
So, instead of doing what’s right we’re going to cower in FEAR?
I’ll have you to understand that THAT inclination is a primary product of our demented ‘public education’ system.
You might read up on it:
https://archive.lewrockwell.com/gatto/gatto-uhae-pre.html
So, instead of doing what’s right we’re going to cower in FEAR?
Bankrupting folks dumped on the exchanges by their companies is not “the right thing do”. It’s also political suicide.
But then the virtue signalling conservatives in the Kamikaze Caucus and their dupes have proven they have no interest in governing.
Well prepare to stay home or vote for the dems because it will not go away.
The Republicans want ObamaCare in some form or we wouldn't have it.
Bankrupting? Really?
As if all these people were bankrupt BEFORE those subsidies existed?
As if the cost of insurances hadn’t been driven through the roof by government in the few years prior to the inception of O’Care so as to create an artificial impetus to institute those subsidies?
Frankly, the answer isn’t just to undo O’Care; it’s to roll the entire healthcare insurance marketplace back to about 2009, destroy barriers to all insurers offering plans nationwide, perhaps outlaw the practice of employers who offer healthcare insurance as a company-paid benefit limiting their employees’ choices to just a few plans from 2 or 3 companies with the stroke of the HR Director’s pen...get government out of the picture to the most extreme extent possible, prevent employers from limiting employee choices in the matter, and relax the regulatory throttle on the national marketplace.
If the ONLY thing the GOP did was to kill O’Care...I’d agree with you. That’s a formula for political disaster. But I don’t see killing O’Care as happening as a solo event in a vacuum of other salient measures being taken.
Yes, just let insurance companies (or co-opts) compete for business even though Obamacare is still law, it would just die faster especially if the subsidies go away.
If Obama can ignore immigration law can ‘t Trump ignore Obamacare law? Open the damn market!
Go around the damn uniparty plantation owners.
>
Here’s hoping he does.
It’s a 10th Amendment thing.
LOL. Surest way for GOP to lose Congress in 2018 is cutting these subsidies. Not going to happen.
>
10th? Let’s try A1S8, 5th & 13th....Shame Congress won’t be losing any seats because of the failure to abide by the Constitution.
My first thought as well. The media was already screaming about “he’s threatening to withhold money from the poor who need it most.......”
Negotiating leverage. Watch the maestro at work.
Which is exactly why I won't vote for them ever again. I'd rather vote dummycrat, and watch as the Country collapses, and then vote with another box, than I would vote for a rotten, filthy, lowdown, wretched, backstabbing, traitorous bunch.
Add to that the fact that they are, per Roberts, levying a “tax” on not complying with a Regulation .... something that should be properly called a “fine”, not a tax, and for which due process should be guaranteed!
I guess cities should start calling fines for speeding “taxes” rather than “fines” and eliminate all that expensive giving due process guff, huh?
What’s to negotiate. He’s the prez. Just do it.
What is the alternative to reelecting the Republican congress? I will never vote Democrat, no matter what Trump does. I suppose people might just stay home and let the idiots vote in the dims again.
>
Add to that the fact that they are, per Roberts, levying a “tax” on not complying with a Regulation .... something that should be properly called a “fine”, not a tax, and for which due process should be guaranteed!
I guess cities should start calling fines for speeding “taxes” rather than “fines” and eliminate all that expensive giving due process guff, huh?
>
Po-ta-toe v. po-tat-oe.
When govt can take EVERYTHING one owns/has/will and NOT call that slavery, but *legal* and “paying your fair share”; when ‘rules\regs’ of from the non-elected have the authority, force and punishment of Law...
As you suggest, all they need to do if flip the meaning of a word and it’s *poof* magically (more) legal...just add more ‘legalize’.
Don’t give ‘em any more hints, though, will ya? /s
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.