Obama Takes Revenge on States Rejecting Healthcare Exchanges


He’s proud of being THIS ONE! [Via Gateway Pundit]


President Obama said we’re voting for revenge and he meant every word of it.

His last week’s offer to “let” the Republicans remove the debt ceiling limit so he can spend without any constraints was his most humorous act of revenge.

Better yet is his latest effort to save his poorly-planned Obamacare health exchanges which enables him to exact revenge at the same time. What a deal.

For those states that have refused to set up healthcare exchanges, the insurance companies will be charged a 3.5% fine, fee, whatever, which will undoubtedly be passed down to the consumer in the form of higher premiums. They are fining insurance companies because the federal government now does whatever it wants. HHS might also change the user fees.

Before we had this law in place, before all the bribes and back room deals, Obama promised the premiums might go down as much as 3000%:

Seventeen states have refused to set up exchanges and for good reason. The exchanges appear to give all the work and cost to the states while the government makes all the decisions. The worst part of it all is that the states have been given absolutely no information as to how the exchanges will be implemented.

Jan Brewer, Governor of Arizona, gives a clear picture as to why her state, the 17th so far, is leaving the exchanges to the federal government:

In the case of states refusing to set them up, the federal government has to do it. I don’t think they know what they are doing and they sure don’t want to pay for them. The federal government has a deadline of 2014 to set them up – that should go well.

The states refusing to set them up are run by Republican Governors so the hint of payback by Obama is in the air and I don’t think that is too cynical a statement to make.

The exchanges are not going to be cost-effective. If the exchanges don’t attract enough users, and they won’t, the exchanges will be overburdened by unhealthy, expensive patients.

Obamacare could still be hoisted on its own petard. There are a number of upcoming lawsuits against it that can reach the Supreme Court of the United States.

Congress denied federal exchanges the power to distribute tax credits and subsidies in a literal interpretation of the law, in sections 1311, 1321, and 1401. They provide that people are eligible for tax credits and subsidies only if “enrolled … through an Exchange established by the state.” Seventeen and as many as twenty are not establishing state exchanges.

If subsidies and tax credits aren’t available in states with federally run exchanges, the individual mandate and the employer mandate are in jeopardy.

At least one state, Oklahoma, passed a rule to allow the subsidies to go to the federal government and to bypass the Obamacare law as written. The Governor disagrees that the rule is legitimate and has sent it to the district courts for review.

The medicaid expansion will be another hit to Obamacare if states refuse to expand, as the SCOTUS allows without penalty. It ends ACA in those states.

The Goldwater Institute is legally challenging the IPAB, the 15 member Independent Payment Advisory Board, which acts as a rogue government and tells Congress what payments will be cut to hospitals and doctors once a certain threshold in costs is reached in Medicare. Congress will have no say nor will patients, doctors and hospitals.

The IPAB also has the power to tax without representation or congressional approval. Better yet, the 15 members do not need any medical expertise. Sounds like patronage jobs to me. Who wouldn’t want them controlling healthcare for seniors and the handicapped? Fabulous!

There are over 35 lawsuits by religious institutions against the HHS mandate and another 20 by companies owned by religious owners who believe the HHS mandate violates their core values and religious beliefs.

Read more at  The Hill