The D.C. mandate contains three elements that make it just as bad as, if not worse than, the federal mandate it is intended to replace.
Which is worse: An unelected judge opining on how a mandate to purchase a product could meet constitutional muster, or giving Congress instructions on how to ensure it will? Kavanaugh did both.
Some conservatives are unwilling to accept the status quo. They are pushing back against congressional inertia and conservative fatalism as they urge Congress to roll back the Obamacare regime.
The plan includes parameters for a state-based block grant that would combine funds from Obamacare’s insurance subsidies and its Medicaid expansion into one pot of money.
Despite these organizations’ own statements opposing these costly requirements, the plan from Heritage and others would leave them in place, hamstringing states.
DOJ’s action represented the right policy outcome, but in the wrong venue. Congress and not the courts has proper jurisdiction to strike down the structure of the law.
Senior health reporter at Politico, Jennifer Haberkorn, talks Obamacare, Congressional healthy policy, and ‘Right to Try’ on the Federalist Radio Hour.
Rather than throwing more taxpayer money at exchanges, Republicans could emphasize new alternatives to Obamacare-compliant plans.
These requirements would undermine the bill’s supposed goal of ‘state flexibility,’ and could lead to a regime more onerous and expensive than Obamacare itself.
The plan would give states the flexibility to do what Bill Cassidy wants them to do, and only what Bill Cassidy wants them to do. That isn’t flexibility at all.
Striking down the law through legal fiat would represent judicial activism at its worst—asking unelected judges to do what elected members of Congress took great pains to avoid.
Regulation creates unforeseen issues, which are papered over by more regulations. Eventually what we’re left with is a 20,000-page bill destined to fail.
It says much about the leftward shift of the Democratic Party that the government-run ‘public option’ represents the most conservative of all the policy proposals discussed.
CBO can only assume cost-sharing payments get made through premium subsidies if it assumes those payments do not get made directly—thus violating the agency’s legal obligation.
The Commonwealth researchers claim Trump administration decisions explain the decline in the number of Americans with health insurance. But the data themselves suggest another theory.
A relatively small provision included in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, passed in December 2017, gives President Trump the ability to achieve what his party has failed to accomplish.
Rather than criticizing Tom Price for his candid comments, Republicans would do better to go back and pass legislation repealing the Obamacare regulations.
If CBO and House Budget are blameless, and everything about this budget change occurred in an above-board manner, they seem to have a funny way of going about proving their innocence.
A repeal of finance regulation also allows Congress to nullify other regulatory actions the federal government took years ago—including those on Obamacare.
- CNN Asked Five Women If They Believed Kavanaugh. CNN Didn’t Like Their Answers'In the grand scheme of things, my goodness, there was continue reading >
- Ted Cruz Opponent Beto O’Rourke Says Police Are ‘The New Jim Crow’On Wednesday, Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate Betocontinue reading >
- Joe Biden Suggests Me Too Should Mean Assuming Accused Men Are GuiltyIf we are to develop a process of adjudication in the ccontinue reading >