The latest mortal threat to Obamacare’s full implementation next January resurfaced last Thursday in the form of a new lawsuit filed in federal district court in the District of Columbia. A diverse group of individuals and small business owners in six different states seek to overturn an Internal Revenue Service rule that illegally authorizes tax subsidies for health exchanges established by the federal government. Without access to those taxpayer dollars, Obamacare’s plan to impose coverage mandates on individuals and employers in the 33 states that have declined to establish their own state health exchanges, along with the ACA’s broader federal regulatory scheme for health insurance, would face two choices: Collapse into chaos or renegotiate an overdue rendezvous with reality.
Having barely survived near death experiences, Obamacare faces another legal challenge – Health – AEIMay 8, 2013
A group of individuals and businesses filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration’s healthcare overhaul on Thursday, hoping to stop the law in states that have not set up new insurance exchanges.
The complaint filed in the Washington federal court challenges federal rules issued in 2012 for implementing the president’s 2010 healthcare law which goes into full force in January 2014.
Amid signs of early snags in the federal health law, President Barack Obama on Tuesday acknowledged it could face a rocky rollout this fall but said officials are racing to get the new insurance system ready in time.
The main goal of the 2010 law is to bring health-insurance coverage to Americans who lack it, yet two of the measure’s key ways of doing this have hit obstacles.
More than half of the states are on track to sit out the law’s Medicaid-expansion goal initially—which means millions of low-income Americans won’t have access to health insurance through Medicaid as the law anticipated.
Meantime, 33 states have opted against running their own insurance exchanges, the websites where the law envisions consumers shopping for health policies and finding out whether they qualify for tax credits to help pay for them starting Oct. 1. While these residents will be able to use a federal exchange to buy policies, the federal government has had limited funding to set up the exchanges on behalf of the states and to provide consumer assistance for people trying to pick among insurance policies.
We propose a framework for health care reform that focuses on supporting person-centered care. With continued innovation toward more personalized care, this is the best way to improve care and health while also bending the curve of health care cost growth.
Our health care system holds great promise. As a result of fundamental breakthroughs in biomedical science, improvements in data systems and network capabilities, and continuing innovation in health care delivery, care is becoming increasingly individualized and prevention-oriented. The best treatment for a patient involves not just specific services covered under traditional approaches to health insurance financing, but also includes new technologies and new kinds of care and support at home and beyond traditional health care settings. These advances require health care providers to work with patients and their caregivers to target increasingly sophisticated treatments and to coordinate care effectively ways that works best for each patient.
In the years since the health care law’s passage, we’ve seen businesses and states seeking waivers from ill-conceived provisions of the health care law, business owners contemplating demoting full-time workers to part-time status to avoid fines, and recently, even a union calling for the law’s repeal. The reality is that the law puts many Americans in their own unique binds.
Perhaps OPM will find a way to resolve this particular issue facing members of Congress and their staffers. But it’s saying something that with all the senators, representatives, lawyers, legislative gurus and health care policy experts floating through Capitol Hill, there’s still utter confusion about what the proper application of this particular provision is. How are tens of millions of Americans and millions of businesses supposed to make sense of the law and determine how it will affect their special circumstances?
Congress, Fearing ‘Brain Drain,’ Seeks to Opt Out of Participating in Obamacare’s Exchanges – ForbesApril 26, 2013
As Obamacare was winding its way through the Senate in 2009, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) slipped in an amendment requiring that members of Congress, and their staff, enroll in Obamacare’s health insurance exchanges. The idea was simple: that if Congress was going to impose Obamacare upon the country, it should have to experience what it is imposing firsthand. But now, word comes that Congress is quietly seeking to rescind that provision of the law, because members fear that staffers who face higher insurance costs will leave the Hill. The news has sparked outrage from the right and left. Here’s the back story, and why this debate is crucial to the future of market-based health reform.
Democratic senators, at a caucus meeting with White House officials, expressed concerns on Thursday about how the Obama administration was carrying out the health care law they adopted three years ago.
Congress: ObamaCare for thee, but not for we; Update: Boehner: Only solution is “full repeal” « Hot AirApril 25, 2013
Remember in 1994 when we thought that Congress would finally be forced to live by the same laws they passed for the rest of us? Good times, good times. Members of both parties on Capitol Hill — you know, the one that hates ObamaCare entirely and the other that swears by its benefits — are working on a plan to exempt themselves and their staffs from the exchanges the rest of America will have to use. Politico calls this effort “extraordinarily sensitive”
Voice and Exit in Health Care Policy
What can we learn from the recent controversy
over mandated birth control coverage?
By M. Todd Henderson
If the ObamaCare Exchanges experience even a fraction of the excessive costs that the high-risk pools have seen, Congress will have no choice but to cut eligibility, provider payments, or subsidies.
The best thing that Congress can do right now is to delay the start of the Exchanges as more information becomes available about the costs, complications, and the administration’s experience with the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan.