Decision Imminent in Case Challenging Obamacare Subsidies

[DigitalDrifter]

Decision may come down today.

In what could be another blow to the Affordable Care Act following the Hobby Lobby ruling last week, a little-known court case threatens to further unravel President Barack Obama’s health care reform law. A federal appeals court for the D.C. Circuit will soon rule on Halbig v. Sebelius, a case that seeks to block Obamacare subsidies already obtained by more than 5 million people in order to afford the insurance plans they got through Healthcare.gov. A decision could be made in the case by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as early as Tuesday, CNBC reports.

The heart of the problem lies in the legality of the subsidies. Several catastrophic attempts at state exchanges (like Nevada’s)—as well as the failure by some states to even set up their own exchanges—meant the federal government had to step in and take over. The plaintiffs argue that the tax credits were legal only for people who bought insurance through state-based exchanges, not the federal exchange. Considering that nearly 90 percent of the federal exchange’s insurance enrollees were eligible for subsidies because of low or moderate incomes, there is the potential for an enormous setback that could send millions back into the ranks of the uninsured. Without those subsidies, health insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act could very well become unaffordable.

Other potential consequences include the “death spiral,” where premium rates threaten to skyrocket because of a dearth of young, healthy enrollees and too many sick ones, and the possibility that businesses in some affected states won’t be required to provide coverage for their employees.

Ultimately, the argument comes down to language. As Newsweek’s Pema Levy wrote earlier this year:

“
At issue are the federal subsidies for individuals buying insurance in their state’s health care exchanges. The law stipulates that those subsidies should be allotted for plans purchased “through an Exchange established by the State under Section 1311” (italics added), a reference to the section of the law that establishes state-run exchanges.
”
So if the federal government isn’t a state, it technically is not allowed to provide subsidies for insurance plans through its own exchange, the plaintiffs argue.

If the decision does strike down the federal exchange subsidies, at least the effect won’t be felt for a while, according to Simon Lazarus, senior counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center. He said that the Department of Justice would immediately ask to review the case in an en banc decision—a decision in a particularly high-stakes case reached by all the appeals court judges, in jurisdictions where there is more than one three- or four-judge panel, like the District of Columbia. “In terms of actual impact, it’s not likely to have any impact for quite some time,” Lazarus said.

But ultimately, if those Affordable Care Act tax credits and subsidies are available only from state-based exchanges, “the impact would be vast,” Lazarus said. With approximately 5 million people currently using the subsidies, and 10 million eligible for them, this means a significant number of Americans would suddenly be left, once again, without insurance.

“It doesn’t really stop there. Taking those people out of the health insurance market would…radically increase the cost of all people who don’t have group insurance,” Lazarus said.

Then there’s the matter of the individual mandate, where all Americans are required to have health insurance by 2014 or face a penalty. Halbig v. Sebelius throws this completely off-kilter.

“The individual mandate becomes completely unworkable without tax credits and subsidies,” Lazarus said, adding that most people who risk losing them would qualify for a hardship exemption and wouldn’t have to pay the penalty, because health insurance would then make up more than 8 percent of their income. Still, while it’s important to stress that no decision has been made yet, the potential for disaster hangs in the air.

“It would literally blow these markets up,” Lazarus said.

http://www.newsweek.com/decision-case-could-destroy-obamacare-expected-imminentl-257561

 

[Geaux4it]

Its a marathon, not a sprint to undo the damage Obama has done to this great nation

-Geaux

 

[Claudette]

Marathon is right and I feel for the next POTUS. He's going to have to try and undo the damage the current fuck in the WH will be leaving.

Affordable Care Act my ass. The only winners in that clusterfuck are those the rest of us will be "subsidizing."

 

[Geaux4it]

Marathon is right and I feel for the next POTUS. He's going to have to try and undo the damage the current fuck in the WH will be leaving.

Affordable Care Act my ass. The only winners in that clusterfuck are those the rest of us will be "subsidizing."

it is truly astounding the bodies left in the wake when Obama's 'work' is done. Why in the hell do we fight wars abroad to sustain the American way but we ALLOWED the enemy in the Oval Office.

Obama is killing us from within

-Geaux

 

[daveman]

Decision may come down today.

In what could be another blow to the Affordable Care Act following the Hobby Lobby ruling last week, a little-known court case threatens to further unravel President Barack Obama’s health care reform law. A federal appeals court for the D.C. Circuit will soon rule on Halbig v. Sebelius, a case that seeks to block Obamacare subsidies already obtained by more than 5 million people in order to afford the insurance plans they got through Healthcare.gov. A decision could be made in the case by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as early as Tuesday, CNBC reports.

The heart of the problem lies in the legality of the subsidies. Several catastrophic attempts at state exchanges (like Nevada’s)—as well as the failure by some states to even set up their own exchanges—meant the federal government had to step in and take over. The plaintiffs argue that the tax credits were legal only for people who bought insurance through state-based exchanges, not the federal exchange. Considering that nearly 90 percent of the federal exchange’s insurance enrollees were eligible for subsidies because of low or moderate incomes, there is the potential for an enormous setback that could send millions back into the ranks of the uninsured. Without those subsidies, health insurance plans under the Affordable Care Act could very well become unaffordable.

Other potential consequences include the “death spiral,” where premium rates threaten to skyrocket because of a dearth of young, healthy enrollees and too many sick ones, and the possibility that businesses in some affected states won’t be required to provide coverage for their employees.

Ultimately, the argument comes down to language. As Newsweek’s Pema Levy wrote earlier this year:

“
At issue are the federal subsidies for individuals buying insurance in their state’s health care exchanges. The law stipulates that those subsidies should be allotted for plans purchased “through an Exchange established by the State under Section 1311” (italics added), a reference to the section of the law that establishes state-run exchanges.
”
So if the federal government isn’t a state, it technically is not allowed to provide subsidies for insurance plans through its own exchange, the plaintiffs argue.

If the decision does strike down the federal exchange subsidies, at least the effect won’t be felt for a while, according to Simon Lazarus, senior counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center. He said that the Department of Justice would immediately ask to review the case in an en banc decision—a decision in a particularly high-stakes case reached by all the appeals court judges, in jurisdictions where there is more than one three- or four-judge panel, like the District of Columbia. “In terms of actual impact, it’s not likely to have any impact for quite some time,” Lazarus said.

But ultimately, if those Affordable Care Act tax credits and subsidies are available only from state-based exchanges, “the impact would be vast,” Lazarus said. With approximately 5 million people currently using the subsidies, and 10 million eligible for them, this means a significant number of Americans would suddenly be left, once again, without insurance.

“It doesn’t really stop there. Taking those people out of the health insurance market would…radically increase the cost of all people who don’t have group insurance,” Lazarus said.

Then there’s the matter of the individual mandate, where all Americans are required to have health insurance by 2014 or face a penalty. Halbig v. Sebelius throws this completely off-kilter.

“The individual mandate becomes completely unworkable without tax credits and subsidies,” Lazarus said, adding that most people who risk losing them would qualify for a hardship exemption and wouldn’t have to pay the penalty, because health insurance would then make up more than 8 percent of their income. Still, while it’s important to stress that no decision has been made yet, the potential for disaster hangs in the air.

“It would literally blow these markets up,” Lazarus said.

http://www.newsweek.com/decision-case-could-destroy-obamacare-expected-imminentl-257561

Highlights yet again the utter incompetence of the idiots that wrote this piece of shit law.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

I remember when this suit was first filed, but there has been little if any coverage of it lately.

 

[B. Kidd]

If this decision goes against ACA, it'll be big,...... making Hobby Lobby decision look like a pimple on a liberals ass.

 

[Freewill]

Hey if there are those who get free phones then where is my free phone?

Hey if there are those who get subsidized by the government for HC where are my subsidizes?

Hey if the government is handing out food where is my food?

What right does anyone have to get this stuff and I don't have the same right?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

 

[Siete]

Its a marathon, not a sprint to undo the damage Obama has done to this great nation

-Geaux

maybe the House can pass another 55 proposals to defund ACA and keep the marathon going

 

[B. Kidd]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

Do you mean civil war?........

 

[martybegan]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

 

[B. Kidd]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

Yup! He'd get off seeing dead people in waiting rooms.

 

[Freewill]

If this decision goes against ACA, it'll be big,...... making Hobby Lobby decision look like a pimple on a liberals ass.

The game is that the liberals were crying like little girls over a ruling that means almost nothing to anyone. Kennedy threw a dog a gone. The liberals, on que, screamed cried and whined so that when the bigger issues like this one gets decided in the way they think right they can do as they always do and say tough shit.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

We won't be that good for some time. Rome wasn't built in a day.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Sorry, but the Supremes already rewrote Obamacare from the bench when they flatly stated the individual-mandate penalty was unconstitutional... and then declared it was suddenly a "tax" instead.

They won't have any problem doing the same thing again, declaring that "exchanges set up by the states" really means "exchanges set up by the states or Federal govt".

This one was a lost cause as soon as the individual-mandate decision came down.

I'd LOVE to be wrong about this one, but I'm afraid I'm not.

 

[MACAULAY]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

-------------------------------------

PaintMy House is a candidate for our sympathy...because he appears to be dealing with a cornucopia of personality disorders. But, he is also a pompous turd who is easy to hate.

Sympathy or contempt?

I solved the issue by putting him on ignore. He never said a damn thing anyway.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Decision may come down today.

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

And based on his username, he probably has some sort of house painting business, which explains why he is an illegal alien lover, he needs the slave labor.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

-------------------------------------

PaintMy House is a candidate for our sympathy...because he appears to be dealing with a cornucopia of personality disorders. But, he is also a pompous turd who is easy to hate.

Sympathy or contempt?

I solved the issue by putting him on ignore. He never said a damn thing anyway.

My only disorder is I get a kick out of being on here with people unworthy of cleaning up after my dog...

 

[Little-Acorn]

The faster this whole game falls apart, the sooner we go to what other nations like us already have. Carry on...

PaintMyHouse is one of those people that craves DMV style efficiency for our healthcare system.

-------------------------------------

PaintMy House is a candidate for our sympathy...because he appears to be dealing with a cornucopia of personality disorders. But, he is also a pompous turd who is easy to hate.

Sympathy or contempt?

I solved the issue by putting him on ignore. He never said a damn thing anyway.

Little housepainter is a paid shill, sent here to support the extreme-leftist line and socialist agenda. He's been here some five months, and has already put up more than 6,000 posts. He was averaging 100 posts per day, 24/7, for his first few months. That's basically a record of spending 10-12 hours/day, seven days a week, doing nothing but posting to this board.

Now he's settled down to "only" fifty-some posts per day, most of them quickie one-liners that are easily debunked. He seeks to overwhelm normal people with the sheer volume of his posts, rather than saying anything that makes sense.