Obamacare | The Government's Takeover of Health Care
Obamacare Architect Admitted That States Without Exchanges Lose Subsidies
Created on Wednesday, 06 August 2014 08:30
Written by Justin Credible
What happens when a politburo writes Obamacare behind closed doors, only keep their special interests in mind? You end up with a law that is beyond flawed, extremely confusing and detrimental to the United States health care system. Two courts came up with two different responses as to whether or not states would be required pay subsidies if they didn't have exchanges set up. This is going to be the next major Obamacare battle front.
From Human Events:
Many commentators have since claimed that there’s no way Congress intended to deny premium assistance to residents of the 36 so-called “refusenik” states that have not set up their own health insurance exchanges.
But in January 2012, Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economics professor whom the the New York Times has called “Mr. Mandate” for his pivotal role in helping the Obama administration and Congress draft the Affordable Care Act, told an audience at Noblis that:
What’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits—but your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So you’re essentially saying [to] your citizens you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country. I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges. But, you know, once again the politics can get ugly around this.
Obviously, the White House has tried to backtrack the comment from this Obamacare architect. Too bad it's the truth.
Jusin Credible is a contributing editor for Habledash.