If You Like Your Obamacare Subsidy...
You'd better hope you didn't get it via one of the federal exchanges.
Allahpundit writes at Hot Air that the Supreme Court will decide whether federal consumers -- those who bought their policies off federal instead of state exchanges -- will are eligible for the subsidy they were told they'd be getting.
Only if you bought your policy through an exchange created by a state are you eligible for help from Uncle Sam. That ruling is a nuclear bomb for the White House, obviously, because it would mean that the vast majority of new enrollees in O-Care would suddenly be on the hook for the full cost of their premiums. That would prove too expensive for many of those people, which would mean lots of dropped coverage and total chaos in the insurance industry.
More -- from law prof Abbe R. Gluck at ScotusBlog.
So if they got money they're not entitled to, then the IRS **WILL** try to claw it back.
I'm going to need a LOT of popcorn for this. . .
Keith Glass at November 7, 2014 11:19 AM
Well, first we have to pass this bill to see what's in it; now, we have to have the court rule on it to see what it can actually do.
Charles at November 7, 2014 12:12 PM
This is what happens when you farm the writing of a bill out to lobbyists and political cronies, stifle any and all debate on the bill, bribe or strong-arm reluctant political allies, and pass the bill with absolutely no support from across the aisle.
ACA (aka ObamaCare) was never anything more than a boondoggle for the Democratic Party and its allies. As such, it has been very successful.
As a healthcare management framework, however, it's unworkable.
As a result, ObamaCare is now like a bus going downhill with no brakes - there's gonna be a crash at the end, but at least we're making good time.
Conan the Grammarian at November 7, 2014 12:18 PM
Wouldn't you know this is going to be an issue in 2015? Everyone is going to forget about it in 2016.
Fayd at November 7, 2014 12:38 PM
I wouldn't be so sure Fayd. The bill clearly excludes subsidies for the federal exchange. But who knows how the supremes will rule? If they exclude subsidies for the federal exchange most of those policies will be unaffordable in 2016 as well as 2015.
And O-care is still not fully implemented. There are enough executive orders changing this and stopping that. So what happens when the man with the pen and the phone changes? O-care and the executive orders could be a major 2016 issue.
Ben at November 7, 2014 3:18 PM
I am not holding my breath on this pne. Remember, in an earlier SCotUS ruling the administration argued and the Court agreed that the `penalty` for not signing was actually a tax - which should have struck down the Act as only the House is authorized to initiate tax bills, not the Senate. So a ruling that the word "State" refers to any government with authority over smaller governments, county/province/parish/State/national/empire etcetera is possible.
John A at November 7, 2014 6:30 PM
I am pretty sure Scotus will figure out some way of saying it is ok. The feds where really like contractors hired by the state so for these purposes will be considered agents of the state so for these purposes they will be considered the state or some non-sense. Or maybe they will come up a sensible reason.
The Former Banker at November 7, 2014 8:26 PM
Obama will just talk to the Supremes, especially Roberts, and tell them to "Think about your legacy!", then have a veiled hint about drones being used on American citizens, and Voila! Obamacare is the most constitutionally sound ruling since Plessy vs. Ferguson.
spqr2008 at November 10, 2014 5:20 AM
Leave a comment