Obama admin attempting another Congressional end-around on ObamaCare defect

posted at 1:55 pm on November 16, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Under ObamaCare, the IRS becomes the arbiter of health-insurance acceptability.  Now Barack Obama needs the IRS to rescue ObamaCare entirely, thanks to a massive legislative defect that the President has no hope of rectifying in the new Congress.  Thanks to sloppy legislative work, the PPACA’s subsidies to taxpayers won’t apply in states that refuse to create exchanges — which means that the states have a clear mechanism to block ObamaCare’s implementation.

That is, unless the IRS just bypasses Congress and corrects the law:

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act offers “premium assistance”—tax credits and subsidies—to households purchasing coverage through new health-insurance exchanges. This assistance was designed to hide a portion of the law’s cost to individuals by reducing the premium hikes that individuals will face after ObamaCare goes into effect in 2014. (If consumers face the law’s full cost, support for repeal will grow.)

The law encourages states to create health-insurance exchanges, but it permits Washington to create them if states decline. So far, only 17 states have passed legislation to create an exchange.

This is where the glitch comes in: ObamaCare authorizes premium assistance in state-run exchanges (Section 1311) but not federal ones (Section 1321). In other words, states that refuse to create an exchange can block much of ObamaCare’s spending and practically force Congress to reopen the law for revisions.

The Obama administration wants to avoid that legislative debacle, so this summer it proposed an IRS rule to offer premium assistance in all exchanges “whether established under section 1311 or 1321.” On Nov. 17 the IRS will hold a public hearing on that proposal. According to a Treasury Department spokeswoman, the administration is “confident” that offering premium assistance where Congress has not authorized it “is consistent with the intent of the law and our ability to interpret and implement it.”

Such confidence is misplaced. The text of the law is perfectly clear. And without congressional authorization, the IRS lacks the power to dispense tax credits or spend money.

Unfortunately for Obama, federal agencies can create rules — but they cannot amend statutes.  Neither can executive orders.  If the statute does not authorize premium assistance in federal exchanges, then it would require an act of Congress to amend the statute to allow it.

The chances of the Republican House fixing a fatal defect in ObamaCare is about the same as the Indianapolis Colts winning the Super Bowl this season — and the odds might not be much better in the Senate, where Democrats in red states will want to distance themselves from the unpopular legislation.  The Obama administration will probably still try to push for this “rule” to fix the defect, but a court challenge will toss it out forthwith (see the essay to find out how that would work), and the last thing Obama needs is another court ruling against ObamaCare.

The other option, though, would be to let the law take effect with the defect.  That might end up putting more pressure on states to enact the exchanges, as the mandates would still kick in (assuming they survive the Supreme Court this term) and people would be forced to buy insurance even if the premium assistance doesn’t get delivered.  As unpopular as ObamaCare is, that may end up generating so much anger among the unsubsidized that it will force states into full compliance with the PPACA.  Don’t be too surprised if the White House ends up seeing this as a feature rather than a bug.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

When I run for Prez, the first agency I will get rid of is the IRS!

ConservativePartyNow on November 16, 2011 at 1:58 PM

This is a standard tactic for Obama. Just like his Occupy Army in the streets, Obama ignores law, and dares anyone to stop him.

Skandia Recluse on November 16, 2011 at 2:00 PM

The other option, though, would be to let the law take effect with the defect. That might end up putting more pressure on states to enact the exchanges, as the mandates would still kick in (assuming they survive the Supreme Court this term) and people would be forced to buy insurance even if the premium assistance doesn’t get delivered. As unpopular as ObamaCare is, that may end up generating so much anger among the unsubsidized that it will force states into full compliance with the PPACA.

Or you know, they could just repeal the whole damn monstrosity.

Doughboy on November 16, 2011 at 2:01 PM

The chances of the Republican House fixing a fatal defect in ObamaCare is about the same as the Indianapolis Colts winning the Super Bowl this season

Totally OT, but in the history of the NFL has 1 single player ever meant so much to his team as Peyton Manning?

lorien1973 on November 16, 2011 at 2:01 PM

We had to pass it to find out what was in it….

notropis on November 16, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Incompetence reigns…no surprise.

neoavatara on November 16, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Thanks to sloppy legislative work

blame gop
-dems & dear leader…

cmsinaz on November 16, 2011 at 2:02 PM

As unpopular as ObamaCare is, that may end up generating so much anger among the unsubsidized that it will force states into full compliance with the PPACA. Don’t be too surprised if the White House ends up seeing this as a feature rather than a bug.

Ed, BHO and the Princess didn’t sell this thing as a ‘STATE’ funded thingy, they convinced the sheeples that the ‘gubmint’, as in ‘The Central Planners’, were picking up the tab. The only anger you are going to hear is how the pols inside the beltway shoved this down our throats, dry. It will only strengthen the cause for repeal because the sheeples aren’t smart enough to discern the difference between gubmints.

belad on November 16, 2011 at 2:06 PM

According to Rumsfeld there are knowns, unknowns and things we don’t even know we aren’t aware of.

OTOH, there are several current examples that show where socialism leads. The dems really hate this country don’t they?

DanMan on November 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM

“Unfortunately for Obama, federal agencies can create rules — but they cannot amend statutes. Neither can executive orders.”

Picture a spoiled rotten six year old throwing a temper tantrum and hussy-fit to the point of hysterics…

Seven Percent Solution on November 16, 2011 at 2:07 PM

The chances of the Republican House fixing a fatal defect in ObamaCare is about the same as the Indianapolis Colts winning the Super Bowl this season

Hey, waddya know, Dear Liar has just proclaimed the Colts winners of the 2012 Super Bowl!

I guess this is the “fundamental transformation” he was talking about — transforming our nation from a government of 3 co-equal branches where the executive branch has to work with the legislative branch, to one where there’s a dictator who can rule by a whim.

rbj on November 16, 2011 at 2:08 PM

Totally OT, but in the history of the NFL has 1 single player ever meant so much to his team as Peyton Manning?

lorien1973 on November 16, 2011 at 2:01 PM

The Texans are about to find out. Shaub out for the season.

DanMan on November 16, 2011 at 2:08 PM

The Texans are about to find out. Shaub out for the season.

DanMan on November 16, 2011 at 2:08 PM

ARGH!!! Don’t remind me. I think we’ll be ok though at least through the rest of the regular season since the schedule is so weak and Schaub ain’t exactly a Pro Bowl QB to begin with. But I swear the Texans can’t catch a break(the figurative kind anyway).

Doughboy on November 16, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Question for independents: Do you really want four more years of this kind of sh*t where you have no idea what your government is doing?

BuckeyeSam on November 16, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Aw, Ed, why you gotta rub salt in the wound of us Colts fans? That’s just mean.

(I never expected it would be this bad without #18. Wow.)

Back to the topic at hand, I would not be surprised to see Democrats decide to leave the law as is, seeing the federal/state exchange thing as a feature to force state-level exchanges. Anything to keep that sweet, sweet government crack going.

Andy in Colorado on November 16, 2011 at 2:15 PM

And actually, about the Colts–it’s unacceptable for them to be this bad, to the point they don’t even bother to compete, without Peyton Manning. That part of it is on the coaching staff through and through.

Andy in Colorado on November 16, 2011 at 2:16 PM

The chances of the Republican House fixing a fatal defect in ObamaCare is about the same as the Indianapolis Colts winning the Super Bowl this season

…….or the Detroit Lions going 13-3. but don’t tell that to NotCoach….:)

Rovin on November 16, 2011 at 2:18 PM

It is all about timing. We do not want to shot all of our ammo (metaphorically speaking, of course) now, but there must be ads explaining these flaws in Obamacare. If public opinion pushes 65 percent or more against Obamacare, it will be very difficult for BO to reelected or not impossible.

mwbri on November 16, 2011 at 2:22 PM

http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=32138 Opps!

Mr. Joe on November 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM

The Hussein Louie thugocracy will do whatever Herr Obama wants. The American people themselves elected this jackass to the office he holds. Hussein Louie knows better than anyone what a complete and total fraud he is; he looks at his face every day in the mirror. Why should he show any respect for Americans and their constitution and laws when he knows, deep down, what a bunch of schmucks Americans must be for coronating him King of the Universe. Americans deserve every sick thing they get for their abject lunacy of elevating this monster and his gaggle of gangsters and fascists in 2008.

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on November 16, 2011 at 2:23 PM

“This assistance was designed to hide a portion of the law’s cost to individuals”

WRONG.

If you are an “individual” (like me), single, unmarried and self-employed, you get ZERO.

Only married folks (with or without kids) and who work for an employer gets the subsides. Guys like me will get the shaft and get hosed by a premium 300% higher than I currently pay now through the private market.

Kaiser has a calculator that proves this.

Opposite Day on November 16, 2011 at 2:29 PM

as the mandates would still kick in (assuming they survive the Supreme Court this term) and people would be forced to buy insurance even if the premium assistance doesn’t get delivered.

Wouldn’t they be more likely to just not purchase health insurance at all since, without the subsidy, most people won’t be able to afford it once all those ludicrous mandates take effect? That would mean states without exchanges would have higher numbers of uninsureds than ever, which would put an even bigger strain on those states’ hospitals as they will still be legally required to treat all comers, regardless of insurance status, ability to pay, citizenship status, etc.

AZCoyote on November 16, 2011 at 2:32 PM

Or you know, they could just repeal the whole damn monstrosity.

Doughboy on November 16, 2011 at 2:01 PM

Of curse this will never happen. In the unlikely chance that the Republicans will have super-majorities on both houses plus the WH, the liberal courts would somehow keep it alive.
I am also doubting the Republicans have much will to fight Obamacare anymore. When was the last time you heard a republican talking about the thousands of waivers for Obama’s cronies, for example? The Dems knew the outrage would subside with time and that’s why they passed it at the expense of a couple of elections. Now they just need to keep building on it a bit at a time, just like they did with the education system, the dumbing of America and the control of the press.
Am I sounding a little negative today?

neuquenguy on November 16, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Maybe Nancy-poo should have READ the law BEFORE she got it passed.

GarandFan on November 16, 2011 at 2:51 PM

If you are an “individual” (like me), single, unmarried and self-employed, you get ZERO.

Only married folks (with or without kids) and who work for an employer gets the subsides. Guys like me will get the shaft and get hosed by a premium 300% higher than I currently pay now through the private market.

Kaiser has a calculator that proves this.

Opposite Day on November 16, 2011 at 2:29 PM

True, until you calculate for the fact that most employers will no longer offer plans, but instead pay the penalty. Once that happens, anyone making over $89k pays out the whazoo. Personally, I love this newly revealed “flaw”. I’m tired of subsidizing the masses. And, the Kaiser calculator is great.

txhsmom on November 16, 2011 at 2:55 PM

. And, the Kaiser calculator is great.

txhsmom on November 16, 2011 at 2:55 PM

They calculate my 2014 premiums as costing 17% of my pre-tax 2014 income, and I’m not going to be eligible for any subsidies. Nothing unreasonable about that, right? In order to afford health insurance, I’ll just have to give up a few other little extravagances . . . like food.

And if you think you’re not still going to be subsidizing the masses (both ours and Mexico’s), I have some lovely beachfront property here that I’m sure you’ll be interested in . . . .

AZCoyote on November 16, 2011 at 3:50 PM

The other option, though, would be to let the law take effect with the defect. That might end up putting more pressure on states to enact the exchanges, as the mandates would still kick in (assuming they survive the Supreme Court this term) and people would be forced to buy insurance even if the premium assistance doesn’t get delivered. As unpopular as ObamaCare is, that may end up generating so much anger among the unsubsidized that it will force states into full compliance with the PPACA. Don’t be too surprised if the White House ends up seeing this as a feature rather than a bug.

Or…they just get even MORE angry about Obamacare. Given they already want it appealed which is more likely? Right. Blame Obamacare. That’s a bug, not a feature, if you’re Obama. D.GOOCH

DGOOCH on November 16, 2011 at 4:46 PM