Boehner: Is Obama’s “administrative fix” to ObamaCare even legal?

posted at 2:11 pm on November 14, 2013 by Allahpundit

Is it? I feel weird asking the question because O-Care already entered a, shall we say, “post-legal phase” after Obama decided he had the power to unilaterally delay the employer mandate based on nothin’ more than his own good, ass-covering intentions. If King Barack wants to issue a proclamation declaring that insurers can bring back canceled plans, well, there you go. He’s certainly got a better case for executive authority here than he did in suspending the employer mandate: One of the damning facts about the millions of cancellations is that they were compelled by regulations written by Obama’s own HHS, not passed as part of the statute by Congress when the law was enacted in 2010. HHS wrote the regs narrowly because it wanted mass cancellations — that was a key way to force middle-class healthy people with cheap coverage into the more expensive exchanges. If the president wants to relax those rules, even though it’s a total clusterfark for the insurance industry, hey. That’s what they get for trying to do business with this harebrained chump.

Here’s what they’re looking at now, thanks to Obama’s and his party’s cowardly refusal to stand by the new insurance regime they’ve created. Bob Laszewski:

This means that the insurance companies have 32 days to reprogram their computer systems for policies, rates, and eligibility, send notices to the policyholders via US Mail, send a very complex letter that describes just what the differences are between specific policies and Obamacare compliant plans, ask the consumer for their decision–and give them a reasonable time to make that decision–and then enter those decisions back into their systems without creating massive billing, claim payment, and provider eligibility list mistakes.

All by January 1.

And if they don’t get it done, Democrats will run to the podium to claim that they did everything they to bring back canceled plans but the bloodsuckers in the industry who helped make their dream of a giant insurance boondoggle come true failed America at the last minute. The more I think about it, though, the more I think Philip Klein’s right: It’s really too late to pass the buck on this, isn’t it? Even if people buy this bogus attempt to scapegoat insurers, there’s no getting around the fact that the new regime is a Democratic production from stem to stern and that it’s a giant cock-up, even if some segment of the cancellations are undone. That’s the political significance of the website: If that was running smoothly there’d still be agita over the cancellations, but it’d be much easier to claim that insurers are the weak link in the ObamaCare chain. If people were enrolling en masse, O might even feel sufficiently emboldened to tell those with cancellations that he feels their pain but that the robust, healthy risk pool on the new exchanges means that premiums might very well drop next year. He can’t do any of that now; the stink of incompetence from Healthcare.gov is too foul for him to play this off as some insurance-industry conspiracy. And in fairness to him, he didn’t press too hard on it at today’s trainwreck press conference. “That’s on me,” he said of the cancellations. There you go, RNC ad team.

Update: Via the Standard, skepticism over O’s legal authority for the fix is now bipartisan.


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

Comment pages: 1 2

The American People Finally Learn What’s In the Obama AFA Pie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fgub5zkBVk

cww on November 14, 2013 at 2:13 PM

As Homer Simpson said, that’s for the courts to decide.

Socratease on November 14, 2013 at 2:13 PM

No – and you should be able to answer that question for yourself Beener boy.
Why aren’t you DOING something about it?

dentarthurdent on November 14, 2013 at 2:13 PM

What does Obama do that is legal? How about we start with that question.

besser tot als rot on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

“When the president does it, it’s not illegal.”

myiq2xu on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

The Return the Toothpaste to the Tube Act-2013.

hillsoftx on November 14, 2013 at 2:16 PM

For healthcare overreach, the Congress must impeach.
.
In ObamaLand, you can not keep your plan.

ExpressoBold on November 14, 2013 at 2:17 PM

I think Billy Jeff and Dr. Dean are already campaigning for Hillary. And she’ll just stay above the fray.

jdpaz on November 14, 2013 at 2:17 PM

I liked the part where he spoke laws into existence.

Murphy9 on November 14, 2013 at 2:17 PM

Yeah. But what are you going to do about Johnny? Cry?

oldroy on November 14, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Of course the Lying Sack of the United States’ actions are not legal. This guy is defying the Congress and anyone else to stand up to him. Let’s be blunt,his ace in the hole is a large, mostly urban, violence prone demographic group that will run amok if anyone is seen as “dissing” him. This guy is really playing with fire.

Mason on November 14, 2013 at 2:19 PM

It’s a little late to be questioning O’Bumbles administrative authority. But, since you asked John, no it isn’t legal.

You see we have this little thing called the “vesting clause” in Article One.

MTF on November 14, 2013 at 2:19 PM

Answer is simple…..NO!

Delsa on November 14, 2013 at 2:20 PM

No, but when has he ever let that stop him?

Crybaby Boehner, maybe you should focus on that, instead of trying to purge conservatives from the GOP.

Ward Cleaver on November 14, 2013 at 2:20 PM

Insurance companies can throw it back into Obama’s lap by telling their cancelled customers: “The President has allowed us to reinstate your plan. You may re-enroll at healthcare.gov or select one of our new plans. Thank you.”

Let them choke on it.

SPCOlympics on November 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

Forget the Upton bill. Good grief the GOP is just as tone deaf and divorced from reality as Obama.

lowandslow on November 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

I liked the part where he spoke laws into existence.

Murphy9 on November 14, 2013 at 2:17 PM

Was that before, or after, his staff turned into a serpent?

Ward Cleaver on November 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

Introduce a bill to suspend the implementation of this law now. Or gp to court to do the same. Or resign your speakership.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

My thing is Mary Laundreu (family runs LA-LA) is going around saying she was lied to as well.
B!tch, you voted for it! Did you not READ it?
I know, rhetorical.

HornetSting on November 14, 2013 at 2:22 PM

Like people have said, this only takes effect until the next election and Obama won’t care about the Democratic Party after that. He just threw Clinton under the bus when the same thing happens in 2015.
What will happen during tax time? Are people still going to be penalized for not having insurance? If so, people will be upset. If not, can they fix the system to meet the April 15th deadline? I have seen articles that the government pushed back the start date by two weeks.

djaymick on November 14, 2013 at 2:22 PM

…O-Care already entered a, shall we say, “post-legal phase”

Yeah, better late than never? Heck, “high crimes and misdemeanors” seems like a good phrase to learn, Mr. Boehner.

The charge of high crimes and misdemeanors covers allegations of misconduct peculiar to officials, such as perjury of oath, abuse of authority, bribery, intimidation

Pick one.

Fallon on November 14, 2013 at 2:23 PM

REPEAL NOW!
Time for another vote to repeal!
Put the Democrats on record once again.
Grow a pair mr speaker

Delsa on November 14, 2013 at 2:23 PM

Well, since there is no legal grounds for Obamacare in the Constitution it’s all illegal.

Oil Can on November 14, 2013 at 2:24 PM

At this rate Republicans don’t even have to repeal the law…soon enough there will be no piece of the law left standing after all these decrees.

On my local AZ news site one moron is doing his best to continue to parrot lines that even some Dems don’t stand behind anymore. “Junk Plans”, “Millions paying less”, “Insurance companies are greedy”, “Website works”, “Always fixes when something rolls out”, “Website is just glitches”.

They are losing this battle…no way around it at this point. Obama is trying to bail out the Titanic with dixie cups!

nextgen_repub on November 14, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Obama said that the cancelled policies can be brought back? That’s no more feasible than bringing back the old cars that were turned in during Cash for Clunkers.

86 on November 14, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Thanks Roberts….

sandee on November 14, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Let’s wait until next week to see how many cancelled policies get reinstated.
Why would an insurance company that is now getting higher premiums and higher deductibles go back to a less expensive policy considering that they were told to do that by law…?

It’s like yelling at the painters you hate that color and to change it. They then repaint the entire room for you and you come back and say you want the old color back and by the way you are not paying for the second paint job.

NeoKong on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

What if the 106,000 people who have “enrolled” want to now “un-enroll”? How does that work?

fbcmusicman on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

Introduce a bill to suspend the implementation of this law now. Or gp to court to do the same. Or resign your speakership.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

How about begin impeachment hearings?

cajunpatriot on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

Obama has just thrown a lit match into the Fireworks factory!

fbcmusicman on November 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Obama doesn’t like law ‘duly passed’ by Congress; makes pen and ink changes.

BobMbx on November 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Well gee Johnny, 0bamacare was unconstitutional from the very beginning. How can anything done now be legal?

http://nationalreview.com/article/360460/obamacares-unconstitutional-origins-andrew-c-mccarthy

Lest we forget

Our dispute over Obamacare spending in the 2013 CR, however, has no bearing on the Origination Clause analysis of the 2010 Obamacare law itself. The Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court has held, was a straightforward tax. No theorizing about spending is necessary. Everyone agrees that tax-raising measures must originate in the House.

Obamacare originated in the Senate.

It was introduced in Congress in 2009 by Senate majority leader Harry Reid, who called it the “Senate health care bill” (a description still touted long afterwards on Reid’s website). Employing the chicanery that marked the legislation through and through, the Democrat-controlled Senate turned its 3,000-page mega-proposal into a Senate amendment. The Senate attached its amendment to a nondescript, uncontroversial House bill (the “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009”) that had unanimously passed (416–0) in the lower chamber.

Thanks to the Supreme Court, it is now undeniable that Obamacare was tax legislation. It was also, by its own proclamation, a bill for raising revenue. Democrats maintained that the Senate proposal would reduce the federal budget deficit by $130 billion. More to the point, the bill contained 17 explicit “Revenue Provisions” — none of which was remotely related to the House bill to which the Senate proposal was attached.

Therefore, Obamacare is revenue-raising tax legislation, originated in the Senate in violation of the Constitution.

Brat on November 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

As performed by middle school students.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 2:28 PM

Be sure not to ask chief communist enforcer / apparatchik Sleazy Eric Holder….

…. he’s too busy making sure ghetto scholars are denied school vouchers.

Be sure not to ask Chief JustUs Benedict Roberts….

…. he’s too busy smirking about how he pulled a robed fast one on The Constitution and The People.

viking01 on November 14, 2013 at 2:28 PM

Boehner: Is Obama’s “administrative fix” to ObamaCare even legal?

“Legal” is for the the little people.

The Crown cannot be concerned with such trifling piffle.

Get with the damn program, AP.

Sheesh.

Bruno Strozek on November 14, 2013 at 2:29 PM

Introduce a bill to suspend the implementation of this law now. Or gp to court to do the same. Or resign your speakership.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 2:21 PM

How about begin impeachment hearings?

cajunpatriot on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

That too.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 2:29 PM

So how does he explain re-authorizing “sub-standard plans” purchased my “misinformed consumers”? He now wants them to go bankrupt? Epicclusterdebaclenado!

hillsoftx on November 14, 2013 at 2:30 PM

Is Obama’s “administrative fix” to ObamaCare even legal?

Hey whatever keeps marxists in their cushy jobs….to hell with the American people .
As for the legality, there is always Julia Roberts to justicify stuff:)

burrata on November 14, 2013 at 2:30 PM

What if the 106,000 people who have “enrolled” want to now “un-enroll”? How does that work?

fbcmusicman on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

♫ You can check in any time you like…

…. but you can never leave…♫

viking01 on November 14, 2013 at 2:30 PM

Time for the states and the insurance industry to sue Obama.

Let John Roberts get another whack at it to redeem his miserable RINO self.

redguy on November 14, 2013 at 2:32 PM

STOP ASKING! It’s obviously illegal so just say so! Spineless!!!!!

jawkneemusic on November 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM

Obama said that the cancelled policies can be brought back? That’s no more feasible than bringing back the old cars that were turned in during Cash for Clunkers.

86 on November 14, 2013 at 2:25 PM

I prefer to think of them as zombie insurance policies. You think that they’re dead and suddenly BAM! there they are again, looking a little different than before, but wanting to embrace you once again.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM

And if they don’t get it done, Democrats will run to the podium to claim that they did everything they to bring back canceled plans but the bloodsuckers in the industry who helped make their dream of a giant insurance boondoggle come true failed America at the last minute. The more I think about it, though, the more I think Philip Klein’s right: It’s really too late to pass the buck on this, isn’t it? Even if people buy this bogus attempt to scapegoat insurers, there’s no getting around the fact that the new regime is a Democratic production from stem to stern and that it’s a giant cock-up, even if some segment of the cancellations are undone.

This is the crux. The President, and his supporters, are basically trying to throw whatever they can onto the wall to see what possibly might stick. The problem is that it’s just too damn late for any of these things to really make a difference for anyone other than the navigators / sycophants who would support this clusterfark simply because it’s from Obama / Democrats.

They’ve already tried 2 weeks ago to blame the rash of cancellations on the private insurance companies – and that imploded once people read the June 17,2010 Federal Register and saw that when HHS wrote the regulations ending the grandfathering of existing policies, they estimated 93 million consumers would lose their plan.

Everyone knows that Obamacare passed without a single GOP vote, rammed through on the basis of sleazy backroom deals, lies, and reconciliation. They know that the GOP tried about 43 times to defund or delay the ACA – to the point that they shut the government down in order to try to get the President / Democrat caucus to defund or delay this clusterfark. Everyone also knows that when it came to ‘selling’ Obamacare, the primary pitches were blatant lies that the President knew were lies when he uttered them.

The Democrats are in the position where the only viable course left for them is a strategic retreat. But like Hitler in his bunker ordering around phantom armies, Barack Obama just issues a ‘do no retreat’ order and hopes phantom fixes bail out his collapsing legacy.

Athos on November 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM

Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm, Barack Hussein Obama
Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm, He needs no legal authori-tay
Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm, Barack Hussein Obama
Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm, He changes laws on a whim

smfic on November 14, 2013 at 2:34 PM

What Obama is doing is no different than if he blew up a building and then said, well if you liked your building then I will let the construction who built it 20 years ago, just re-build it….simple.

redguy on November 14, 2013 at 2:34 PM

So , any troll wants to explain what the meaning of “keep” is ?????

burrata on November 14, 2013 at 2:35 PM

It’s like yelling at the painters you hate that color and to change it. They then repaint the entire room for you and you come back and say you want the old color back and by the way you are not paying for the second paint job.

NeoKong on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

Yeah…kinda like asking the barber to give you a trim, then deciding after he gives you the trim to get a crew cut. Then after he gives you the crew cut, you want him to change it back to a trim.

Maybe the barber can’t do it, but Obama can simply decree it and it will be done. Easy peesy.

timberline on November 14, 2013 at 2:36 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

I think its more like a game of 3 card monty.

dentarthurdent on November 14, 2013 at 2:36 PM

Did the Obamacare Act make President Obamba king?

Just because they had 60 Dem senators could they say “We declare President Obama king for life.” No. The congress must act. And act with a permanent solution. What good is a one year delay? Permanent, or nothing. A permanent “fix.” Like declare that there should be no higher health care insurance rates for people. In fact, Obama said rates would go down by $2500 per family. Append that to the Obamacare law. If you like your plan you can keep it, and if you like your doctors you can keep your doctors, and if you would like your family rates to be $2500 less than your rates will be $2500 less like obama said. And then repeal the whole horrendous thing.

anotherJoe on November 14, 2013 at 2:36 PM

So , any troll wants to explain what the meaning of “keep” is ?????

burrata on November 14, 2013 at 2:35 PM

We’ve been troll-free on Obamacare threads for a couple weeks now.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:37 PM

‘If they don’t like Obamacare, they can unelect us.’

- Senator Mary Landrieu, 2009

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:37 PM

I prefer to think of them as zombie insurance policies. You think that they’re dead and suddenly BAM! there they are again, looking a little different than before, but wanting to embrace you once again.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:33 PM

I have a few tools that work well on zombies….

dentarthurdent on November 14, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Allah…

… What is this “legal” that you speak of?

Seven Percent Solution on November 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM

So , any troll wants to explain what the meaning of “keep” is ?????

burrata on November 14, 2013 at 2:35 PM

r a c i s t !

Murphy9 on November 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM

“Legal authority? We don’t need no legal authority. I am the king!!! The dictator!!!

albill on November 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM

So the cancelled insurance policies can be reinstated, just like someone can build a coal plant, but they’ll go bankrupt meeting all the regulations.

txhsmom on November 14, 2013 at 2:38 PM

So just to keep things straight.

Obama told us the he was for keeping your plan if you liked it.

But he was against keeping you plans after you lost them, because they were substandard, and now illegal.

And now he is for keeping your plan?

So he was for it before he was against it before he was for it?

oldroy on November 14, 2013 at 2:39 PM

‘If they don’t like Obamacare, they can unelect us.’

- Senator Mary Landrieu, 2009

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:37 PM

That should be part of every ad by whomever runs against Mary. Even if just a crawl at the bottom of the ad.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:40 PM

We’ve been troll-free on Obamacare threads for a couple weeks now.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:37 PM

I have so many questions about jiziahCAIR and no one has come forward to answer them :(

burrata on November 14, 2013 at 2:41 PM

So he was for it before he was against it before he was for it?

oldroy on November 14, 2013 at 2:39 PM

Not really. He’s always wanted to destroy private insurance and force the young, healthy, and productive onto Obamacare to pay for all the parasites that need to be funded with the exact same coverage as those that actually pay.

The differences in position are nothing more than the consequences of three years of lying.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:42 PM

This is outrageous. This is a big f–n joke. This idiot tries to take over 1/6th of the economy and it is a disaster. Now, he is trying to fix this with that. The world, and reasonably thinking people, must be looking at this guy as the biggest fool on the planet.

rjoco1 on November 14, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Piers Morgan @piersmorgan

Considerably more Americans signed a petition to have me deported than enrolled for Obamacare. I’d start panicking, Mr President…

11/13/13, 7:16 PM

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

I think its more like a game of 3 card monty.

dentarthurdent on November 14, 2013 at 2:36 PM

3 card kabuki?

onomo on November 14, 2013 at 2:43 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Bambi’s Mother (The People) versus The Hunters (O’Bolsheviks) with lots of cymbals, kettle drums and trumpets.

(featuring George Stephanopoulos as preening Leonard Pinth-Garnell the early SNL days host of Bad Theater / Opera / Ballet… Interpretive Dance.) “Truly bad… almost gloriously putrid..”

viking01 on November 14, 2013 at 2:44 PM

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex., isn’t quite finished with his crusade against Obamacare.

“This thing isn’t working, and we need to start over,” the senator said in an interview with Megan Kelly on Fox News on Wednesday night.

Cruz was the force behind the Defund Obamacare movement that resulted in the government shutdown in October.

In the interview Wednesday, Cruz called for full repeal and replacement of the law, citing insurance plan cancellations as indication that the health care law isn’t working.

“We need to do two things,” Cruz explained. “No. 1, we need to suspend Obamacare; we need to repeal it altogether because it’s not working. Not fiddle around the edges, but acknowledge the thing is fundamentally flawed. No. 2, we need positive health reform, to empower consumers to purchase health care across state lines and create a true national market, so your health insurance can be afford, personal, and portable.”

Cruz said the bills being considered in Congress to allow individuals to keep their health plans are not sufficient. Instead, he intends in the coming weeks to lay out a plan to repeal the law.

“At this point, starting over, stopping Obamacare, I think is the essence of pragmatism,” he said.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM

Update 2:36 p.m. Senator Mark Udall (D., Colo.) expressed tepid approval of Obama’s administrative fix in a press release earlier. “I am glad the White House is starting to address my concerns and those of thousands of Colorado families that received insurance cancellation notices,” Udall said. “While I would prefer that these families receive a longer extension to keep their existing insurance policies and the greater certainty my legislation provides.”​

Update 2:20 p.m. Senator Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) said that there is no need for a legislative fix for Obamacare, as of yet.

Update 12:57 p.m. Despite President Obama’s announcement of an administrative fix to the failing health-care law, Senator Kay Hagan (D., N.C.) says, that she still wants the legislation proposed by Senator Landrieu (D., La.) because it’s a permanent fix, not just a one year fix, according to Dana Bash at CNN,

Senator Todd Harkin (D., Iowa) also told reporters regarding Obama’s announced fix, “If I were the president I would not have done that.”

Live Updates: Democrats Scramble to Address Obamacare Flaws

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Therefore, Obamacare is revenue-raising tax legislation, originated in the Senate in violation of the Constitution.

[Brat on November 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM]

I’m a little lost on this. The bill Reid used to initiate Obamacare was a tax bill sent to them by the House. Logically, that would seem to obviate that argument.

One might argue that it is a different tax than the original one proposed by the House, but wouldn’t that mean that the Senate could never offer a tax on a source different than one the House first proposes, leading to the conclusion that the Senate always be confined to only proposing different rates of tax on sources originally offered in a House bill?

Unless there is more to it than what you provide in the excerpt, I don’t see the argument passing muster wrt the Constitution.

Dusty on November 14, 2013 at 2:47 PM

Obama health care law
5m
===

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, on Obama’s changes to health care law: ‘True to form, it appears this is little more than a political response designed to shift blame rather than solve the problem’ – statement
read more on speaker.gov
=========================

Americans Need Real, Not Political Solution to Obamacare
Posted by Speaker Boehner’s Press Office
November 14, 2013
Press Release
**************

WASHINGTON, DC – House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) issued the following statement after the president announced “administrative” changes to Obamacare.

“After finally acknowledging he repeatedly misled the American people to sell his health care law, the president is asking Americans to trust him again. The President has absolutely no credibility on his promise. True to form, it appears this is little more than a political response designed to shift blame rather than solve the problem. This problem cannot be papered over by another ream of Washington regulations. Americans losing their coverage because of the president’s health care law need clear, unambiguous legislation that guarantees the plan they have and like will still be allowed. That’s why the House will be voting on the Keep Your Health Plan Act tomorrow, and the president should support it.”

- See more at: http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/americans-need-real-not-political-solution-obamacare#sthash.j6he9wJX.dpuf
=====================================================

http://www.speaker.gov/press-release/americans-need-real-not-political-solution-obamacare

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 1:14 PM

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 1:56 PM

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 2:48 PM

What is the obamacare bodycount so far?

Murphy9 on November 14, 2013 at 2:49 PM

We’ve been troll-free on Obamacare threads for a couple weeks now.

Happy Nomad on November 14, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Not entirely.
A couple of them have popped in – mostly verbaldouche.

dentarthurdent on November 14, 2013 at 2:50 PM

And if they don’t get it done, Democrats will run to the podium to claim that they did everything they to bring back canceled plans but the bloodsuckers in the industry who helped make their dream of a giant insurance boondoggle come true failed America at the last minute.

All this BS is not going to work anymore… It is way too late for Obama and his socialists to be saved from their Obamacare disaster… In fact delaying the plan cancellation for one year is not going to convince the majority of voters and those whose plans are going to be cancelled in 1 year that all is fine again… The opposite is true… By October of next year the insurance companies have to send again plans cancellation notices the same way they have been doing it for the last few weeks and the timing could not be worst for the democrats who will be running for elections in November of next year… Add to that the employers will be working months before that and through November 2014 to abide by the employer insurance mandates i.e. firing employees or reducing their working hours below 29 or reducing their healthcare benefits… This disaster is going to get worse by the day and on elections day 2014 it is going to be much worse than it is today…

mnjg on November 14, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Speaker John Boehner
Speaker John Boehner Verified account
@SpeakerBoehner

Official Twitter account for U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH)

Washington, DC · Speaker.gov

https://twitter.com/SpeakerBoehner

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Obama demonstrates once again his thorough disregard and contempt for the law. He is lawless and he is now urging the insurance industry to be complicit in that lawlessness by offering plans that are not compliant with the law.

All Hail Obama! Pharaoh of Denial, Son of Narcissus, Brother of Deceit, Husband of Avarice, Father of Disregard, Purveyor of Lawlessness.

Lo! His titles are many and the shadow of his ego eclipses the sun.

thatsafactjack on November 14, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Don’t worry, Mr. President. Surely John Roberts will pull something out of his ass for you.

Kafir on November 14, 2013 at 2:51 PM

Obama in The Ten Commandments: “So let it be written; so let it be done.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O8gTIr4lys

BuckeyeSam on November 14, 2013 at 2:51 PM


Yo Ho,Hopey,………

HealthCare IceBergy Dead Ahead…..

..what are your orders for the USS HopeLess!!

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 2:52 PM

This is just the latest in a number of likely unconstitutional and illegal changes / actions / decisions / nominations made by this President.

Few of them have actually been challenged or elevated to the crisis stage.

That has to change. This President has abused power on a scale that far exceeded that of Richard Nixon. If the separation and balance of powers in the Constitution is to be restored, actions have to be taken against this WH for those abuses.

This is something that pragmatic Congressional Democrats have to see – because there is no guarantee that there will never be another Republican President who may look at all that Obama has done, without question, as a precedent for realigned powers and authority.

Athos on November 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM

I think a Declaratory Judgment Act suit from a member of the insurance industry is in order.

EdmundBurke247 on November 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Obama in The Ten Commandments: “So let it be written; so let it be done.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O8gTIr4lys

BuckeyeSam on November 14, 2013 at 2:51 PM

BuckeyeSam:Lol,….good one:)

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Why would an insurance company that is now getting higher premiums and higher deductibles go back to a less expensive policy considering that they were told to do that by law…?

NeoKong on November 14, 2013 at 2:26 PM

How many people have signed up for new plans? 100k?

How many MILLIONS have been cancelled?

Would you rather have 100k customers at higher premiums, or MILLIONS of lost customers, some of whom may *never* come back because they can’t afford the new higher premiums?

Midas on November 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM

Yes … it’s legal … now it is anyway.

See, the first time Obama violated the law – the Ayatollahs of the GOP SHOULD HAVE told every GOP lawmaker to leave the capitol and not return until Ogabe had rescinded his illegal alteration of it.

Of course – true to form – the Ayatollahs didn’t have the BALLS to do that. Had they done it – and had the balls to stick to it – they would have forced a Constitutional crisis which would have, eventually, caused Obama to have to back down.

The LINE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DRAWN AT THE FIRST OFFENSE.

Since it was not – there’s no way they’re going to get away with attempting to draw it now.

HondaV65 on November 14, 2013 at 2:56 PM

Therefore, Obamacare is revenue-raising tax legislation, originated in the Senate in violation of the Constitution.

[Brat on November 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM]

I’m a little lost on this. The bill Reid used to initiate Obamacare was a tax bill sent to them by the House. Logically, that would seem to obviate that argument.

One might argue that it is a different tax than the original one proposed by the House, but wouldn’t that mean that the Senate could never offer a tax on a source different than one the House first proposes, leading to the conclusion that the Senate always be confined to only proposing different rates of tax on sources originally offered in a House bill?

Unless there is more to it than what you provide in the excerpt, I don’t see the argument passing muster wrt the Constitution.

Dusty on November 14, 2013 at 2:47 PM

On October 8, 2009, the House of Representatives unanimously passed the six-page “Service Member’s Home Ownership Tax Act” (SMHOTA), H.R. 3590, 111th Cong. (2009), which was intended to reduce taxes by providing a tax credit to certain veterans who purchased homes.2

The Senate “amended” H.R. 3590 by deleting its entire text and substituting the 2,074 page bill which Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid referred to as the “Senate Health Care Bill,”3 which included 17 specifically denominated revenue
provisions, including the penalty or “tax” imposed on those non-exempt persons who fail to buy a government approved health insurance policy.

The legal arguments in this case are straightforward. The Origination Clause of the Constitution, Article I, Section 7, clause 1, provides that “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” The “Senate Health Care Bill,” which
is one the largest tax increases in American history, did not originate in the House simply by virtue of keeping a House bill number. Amici argue in the alternative, that even if it had originated in the House, the Senate’s legerdemain of substituting
the SMHOTA with the Senate Health Care Bill was not constitutional for two reasons: (1) SMHOTA was not a revenue raising measure to which the Senate might amend under the second prong of the Origination Clause and (2) even if it were, the total “gut and replace” Senate amendment was not germane to the subject
matter of the House bill.

kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 3:01 PM

The ‘Make it so” only works in Star Trek.

Of course it’s legal – after Congress (That’s House and Senate) repeals Obamacare!

TerryW on November 14, 2013 at 3:01 PM

AP, this is one of your finest stories you’ve ever written IMHO.

D-fusit on November 14, 2013 at 3:03 PM

Obama doesn’t like law ‘duly passed’ by Congress; makes pen and ink changes.

BobMbx on November 14, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Obama thinks he has ex post facto line-item veto authority….or something.

Bitter Clinger on November 14, 2013 at 3:08 PM

If the president wants to relax those rules, even though it’s a total clusterfark for the insurance industry, hey. That’s what they get for trying to do business with this harebrained chump.

Don Obamaleone put a horse head in their beds despite agreeing with his “offer they couldn’t refuse”.

Bitter Clinger on November 14, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Obama can provide for uncancelling plans in the regulations but can he force insurers by law to uncancel plans? I also wonder if the ambiguity and the general arbitrary and capricious nature in implementation of the law is allowed, including the deferral of the business mandate, since both understanding what the law and regulation clearly requires being able to comply with it’s timetables will be next to impossible thus making this law unconstitutional on it’s face.

Considering the whole effed up implementation, the fraudulent premises and sale, and the seat of the pants adaptation for the inherent infeasibility of Obamacare being a workable alternative to what we had had really demands we go back to the previous model and start again in developing an overhaul. This is not a condition that will go away anytime soon and the problems will be dragged out for years.

I suppose there ought to be some additional provision to take care of insuring those without insurance because of pre-existing conditions. I have no idea how this would affect those who are now enrolling in Medicaid and maybe a provision on that would be needed, too, but Obamacare legislation itself truly does need to be deep-sixed.

Dusty on November 14, 2013 at 3:15 PM

Of course, it would be handy if there were some sort of document out there that set forth the powers of the Executive Branch. Since no such document exists, it will be up to Obama to set his own limits.

I don’t know about the rest of you but I enjoy being ruled by a king, rather than led by a president.

Hucklebuck on November 14, 2013 at 3:19 PM

Sarah Kliff ‏@sarahkliff 17m

Wow – already a backlash in Washington, where the state insurance commissioner will *not* be allowing insurers to extend their policies.

https://twitter.com/sarahkliff

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

Bingo.

And playing a crazy game of Fizbin as we dance.

bigbeachbird on November 14, 2013 at 3:26 PM

Sarah Kliff ‏@sarahkliff 17m

Wow – already a backlash in Washington, where the state insurance commissioner will *not* be allowing insurers to extend their policies.

https://twitter.com/sarahkliff

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Ahahahahaha! This just gets better and more convoluted by the hour. Pretty soon everyone will be so confused by the regulations everything will be blamed on Obamacare.

txhsmom on November 14, 2013 at 3:32 PM

Sarah Kliff ‏@sarahkliff 17m

Wow – already a backlash in Washington, where the state insurance commissioner will *not* be allowing insurers to extend their policies.

https://twitter.com/sarahkliff

canopfor on November 14, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Ahahahahaha! This just gets better and more convoluted by the hour. Pretty soon everyone will be so confused by the regulations everything will be blamed on Obamacare.

txhsmom on November 14, 2013 at 3:32 PM

Talk about taking lemonade and making lemons.

Bitter Clinger on November 14, 2013 at 3:37 PM

(1) SMHOTA was not a revenue raising measure to which the Senate might amend under the second prong of the Origination Clause and

[kcewa on November 14, 2013 at 3:01 PM]

I assume that this argument relies on the definition of raising, as opposed to lowering, of revenues. If my assumption is accurate, because the Constitution is silent on lowering revenues that means there is no Constitutional bar to the Senate initiating bills lowering revenues?

Hey, I’m no Constitutional scholar, but that argument (1) doesn’t persuade me.

As for (2), I think this argument reduces the Senate to arguing with the House about the rate only, but I’d be willing to consider it more if some evidence was provided that being germane is a requirement that has some court precedence.

BTW, do you have a link to the source for this excerpt? I can’t find it using portions of the text alone.

Dusty on November 14, 2013 at 3:37 PM

Wake me up when the Republicans stop asking questions they should know the answer to and start taking actions they should have taken a long time ago.

rrpjr on November 14, 2013 at 3:39 PM

Is Obamacare a law or more like an interpretative dance?

Resist We Much on November 14, 2013 at 2:14 PM

This times 1,000,000.

null on November 14, 2013 at 3:41 PM

King Barrack the Turd.

….or is he number two…

FloatingRock on November 14, 2013 at 3:44 PM

King Barrack the Turd.

….or is he number two…

FloatingRock on November 14, 2013 at 3:44 PM

Don’t see a difference between either one.

milemarker2020 on November 14, 2013 at 3:55 PM

He wins again because no one will challenge him!

The courts will take years to adjudicate this mess and he does what he wants in the meantime.

If the law is repealed, the riots begin and he declares Marshall Law and has the forces to win the battle.

If no one challenges he gets away with another anti Constitutional move and implements whatever he wishes.

If he is challenged and the other side prevails, the riots begin because everyone is racist against this poor “partially” black man.

In any event, it’s another tear down of our country and he wins because that is what he intended all along.

Anyone have any other points to add?

Pardonme on November 14, 2013 at 4:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2