Whole Foods CEO: ObamaCare “more like fascism”

posted at 2:31 pm on January 16, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Three years ago, John Mackey angered many of his Whole Foods consumer base by equating ObamaCare with socialism and arguing that health-care reform should use capitalism as a lever for real improvement.  Now, however, the CEO and co-founder of the health-food chain wants to clarify his earlier comments. Technically, ObamaCare is actually an example of another kind of government altogether:

What he doesn’t think is right is President Obama’s health overhaul and the new costs that coverage requirements will place on businesses.

When Inskeep asks him if he still thinks the health law is a form of socialism, as he’s said before, Mackey responds:

“Technically speaking, it’s more like fascism. Socialism is where the government owns the means of production. In fascism, the government doesn’t own the means of production, but they do control it — and that’s what’s happening with our health care programs and these reforms.”

The Hill has a helpful reminder of the short history of fascism:

The term “fascism” was first used to describe the right-wing regime of Italian leader Benito Mussolini, and was later applied to the Nazis and the authoritarian leadership of Francisco Franco in Spain.

I’m sure that the Obama administration and its supporters appreciate Mackey’s clarification.  Like most business owners, Mackey’s concern goes beyond the costs of the bill, but also to the ambiguity of those costs.  The Miami Herald reported yesterday that House and Senate committees have begun hearings on both costs and ambiguity, and that no one can accurately determine the impact ObamaCare will have on their businesses:

But the Senate select committee also heard concerns from employers about how coverage requirements and penalties in the law could drive up costs for businesses. The concerns center, at least in part, on small businesses that have struggled in recent years with increasing health-insurance premiums.

“I’ve got to tell you that I’m thoroughly confused,’’ said Kim Williams, president of Marpan Supply Co., a Tallahassee recycling business that has 74 employees. “I don’t know what it’s going to cost me next year.”

As for ambiguities, even HHS is having trouble figuring out what it’s supposed to do. This week, Kathleen Sebelius put off a deadline for determining the readiness of states to move forward with their exchanges, despite having no authority in the PPACA to do so:

The White House says it will give states more time to comply with the new health care law after finding that many states lag in setting up markets where millions of Americans are expected to buy subsidized private health insurance.

Under the law, the secretary of health and human services was supposed to determine “on or before Jan. 1, 2013,” whether states were prepared to operate the online markets, known as insurance exchanges.

But the secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, working with the White House, said she would waive or extend the deadline for any states that expressed interest in creating their own exchanges or regulating insurance sold through a federal exchange.

Only 17 states have received “conditional approval,” a status also not found in the law, according to a former Sebelius adviser:

Jay Angoff, a former administration official who served as a senior adviser to Ms. Sebelius, said: “There is no such thing as ‘conditional approval’ in the statute, nor is there a ‘partnership exchange’ in the statute. The federal government has the ultimate responsibility for making sure that an exchange is established in every state. So if a state that receives conditional approval is unable to do all the things it needs to do to establish an exchange by Oct. 1 — which is likely — then the federal government will run the exchange in that state.”

That will mean higher costs for ObamaCare than projected, and the potential for disruption of subsidies intended to cushion the impact of the PPACA on insurance premiums for working- and middle-class households.  In truth, nearly everything about ObamaCare is immersed in ambiguities and uncertainty on costs and regulation after almost three years — and we only have less than a year to go before full implementation.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

If government is going to be arbiter of fair and lawful competition, long as RICO, monopoly, and other LARGE laws aren’t being violated, then government is WAY too large.

Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:44 PM

The real question, of course, is why DC — and other cities like it — even have so much innovation- and freedom-crushing red tape

How else are the bureaucrats going to keep the bribe money coming?

malclave on May 21, 2013 at 8:48 PM

How else are the bureaucrats going to keep the bribe money coming?

malclave on May 21, 2013 at 8:48 PM

That pretty much covers the topic.

Liam on May 21, 2013 at 8:53 PM

How do you pronounce this: womp

Whoomp (as in Whoomp, there it is)? Wahmp (rhymes with pomp)? something else?

cptacek on May 21, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Uber is a FANTASTIC company… naturally, it and the innovation it represents would be antithetical to the current oppressive environment this crony-based government has spawned…

dpduq on May 21, 2013 at 9:03 PM

simply provide customers with the option of hailing a taxi with a smartphone app is being put through the ringer in the nation’s capitol, too.

I hate to throw the grammar Nazi flag, but the word I bolded above should be wringer.

Gator Country on May 21, 2013 at 9:13 PM

How do you pronounce this: womp

Whoomp (as in Whoomp, there it is)? Wahmp (rhymes with pomp)? something else?

cptacek on May 21, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Woah! Erika’s quite the womp rat!

KS Rex on May 21, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Wringer is a ringer for “ringer”

Now if you’ll excuse, I have clothes to dry.

wolly4321 on May 21, 2013 at 9:45 PM

The real question, of course, is why DC — and other cities like it — even have so much innovation- and freedom-crushing red tape

And then those cities wonder out loud why they continually suffer ‘brain drains’ when the best and brightest flee for greener pastures.

It’s not rocket surgery.

Myron Falwell on May 21, 2013 at 9:56 PM

The real question, of course, is why DC — and other cities like it — even have so much innovation- and freedom-crushing red tape that diverts so much of what could otherwise be everybody’s profitable time and resources into fighting for permission to operate and completely legitimate and highly efficient business that creates real jobs and improves people’s lives. You’d think that small businesses daring to threaten the established order were doing something illicit, what with all the hoops they have to jump through these days — and that is no way to grow any kind of economy, be it on a micro- or macro-level.

Just like the medieval guilds, the purpose is to protect the existing businesses from aggressive competition.

And yes, this undermines the whole free enterprise system. Fortunately, the startups just view it as one more obstacle to get past, and manage anyway. But it’s still a waste of time and money.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 22, 2013 at 10:26 AM

Had the opportunity to use Uber’s sedan service in L.A. a few weeks ago.

As soon as the service was ordered I knew that my car was 4 minutes away. I watched on the screen as it got closer and closer. When it hit 1 minute, I saw a black sedan on the opposite side of the street signaling to make a u-turn.

Contrast this with a year earlier when I called for a taxi in order to make the exact same trip. I was told that they were busy but they’d have someone there in 10 minutes. 15 minutes later I called and was told that someone would be there in 10 minutes. Another 15 minutes later I called and was told dispatch had sent someone and if they weren’t there in 5 minutes I should give them another call. 10 minutes after that I flagged down a passing cab and they got my business instead.

The Uber sedan service was $90 with tip. The taxi was $110 with tip.

If Uber wants to extend their business into the taxi realm (and they plan to keep the same level of service), it’s nothing but a boon to the residents of the cities they are operating in.

JadeNYU on May 22, 2013 at 11:02 AM

But Uber argues that the the taxi regulations issued last week, which go into effect June 1, would require it to link its payment system to the payment providers integrated into the new meters that taxis will begin installing this summer.

Wonder how much the preferred payment providers are paying DC?

unclesmrgol on May 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM