A project of the Galen Institute
"The latest somersaults and contortions over Obamacare last month spread from courtrooms to the blogosphere, with another round of regulatory “adjustments” not far away. The common principle followed by the health law’s most energetic advocates appears to be the whatever-it-takes motto of the late Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis, “Just win, baby!”
A pair of federal appellate court decisions on July 21 (Halbig v. Burwell and King v Burwell) sent Obamacare backers cycling through at least the first three stages of grief (anger, denial, and bargaining) over the potential loss of tax credit subsidies for states with federal-run health exchanges, along with the likelihood of further unraveling of the health law’s interrelated scheme of coverage mandates and tighter insurance regulation. A 2-1 majority ruling in Halbig delivered the latest blow to the Affordable Care Act, by deciding to vacate a 2012 Internal Revenue Service rule that attempted to authorize such subsidies.
"Let’s face it, health reform in 2014 is going to be pretty boring from here on out. Why? It’s an election year. That might seem counterintuitive, since the Affordable Care Act (ACA) demonstrated the haunting dance of partisan politics and policy making at its least consensus building. So why the yawns for 2014? Because the positions of the advocates and detractors of ACA are pretty well set in stone going into the mid-term elections."
Forbes: The Apothecary
"With 2015 premiums forthcoming, a major question hanging over Obamacare’s exchanges is what effect competition among insurers will have on premiums. Currently, the exchanges tend to be sparsely populated, with only 3.9 insurers competing in each rating area of the federal exchanges, on average. Indeed, whether premium increases moderate will be a major test for the health care law."
"The problems with Obamacare have moved off the front page recently, which is exactly what the Democrats have wanted to happen. They want to celebrate the “victory” of Obamacare by championing the alleged 8 million sign-ups, answering few questions and moving on."
"The most transparent administration in history has decided to discontinue the monthly Affordable Care Act enrollment reports now that open enrollment is closed. And why shouldn’t it? you ask. After all, open enrollment is, well, closed."
"Healthcare reform has largely ignored the poor. The healthcare safety net has far too many holes, and the Affordable Care Act builds on a flawed system of health insurance. Lower income families, especially those enrolled in Medicaid, have a difficult time finding doctors who will accept their coverage. Insurance is of little value if doctors will not work with your insurer."
"The New York Times is lawyering again in defense of the Affordable Care Act in an editorial tendentiously titled More Specious Attacks on Reform. Hence the tendentious title of this post. In reality, legal arguments typically have two sides and dismissing one as specious (or frivolous) is almost always unwarranted and undermines the credibility of the critic, in this case the editorial writer of the Times."
The Weekly Standard
"With enrollment in the Obamacare exchanges now closed, Democrats and their friends in the media are ebullient. Obamacare is an enormous success, they say, and conservatives have been humiliated. On closer inspection, however, things seem decidedly less bullish for President Obama’s signature achievement. "
"During his first run for the presidency in 2008, President Obama blasted the influence of insurance lobbyists and vowed to take on the industry if elected. Yet as president, he passed a health care law that funnels more than $1 trillion in subsidies to insurers, and fines Americans who do not purchase their products. And on Friday, the Obama administration relented to pressure by the insurance industry, vowing to use additional taxpayer dollars to help bail out insurers from losses racked up as part of his health care law."
Wall Street Journal
"From the beginning of my tenure as governor in 2013, we have been saying no to ObamaCare in Indiana. We refused to set up a state-based exchange, and we have said we will not expand traditional Medicaid. We have a better alternative in a program that offers Indiana's working poor the chance to get insurance and control their own health care."