Several days ago, in the case is King v. Burwell, United States Supreme Court, No. 14-114, an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Virginia Delegates Mark J. Berg, Bob Marshall, Dave LaRock and Senator Dick Black was filed in support of a challenge against the Obama Administration’s lawlessness in implementing Obamacare.[read_more]
This brief supports King’s challenge to the IRS regulations granting tax credits for persons enrolled in a Federal Exchange (often referred to as a “marketplace” to make it seem more palatable to the citizens). Under Obamacare (ACA), tax credits are only authorized if a person purchases a qualified health insurance plan through a “state” exchange. The text of the ACA in unambiguous on this point. The federal government is claiming that the President has the authority to change the law under the rule-making powers of the IRS. The President is, once again, usurping the constitutional legislative powers of the United States Congress.
“I will do whatever I can to prevent the Federal government from imposing its lawlessness on the people of Virginia,” stated Del. Berg.
If this challenge to Obamacare succeeds, it could very well lead to the complete unraveling of the entire law. Millions of people who would otherwise have gotten the illegal subsidies in a Federal Exchange would not get them, and many may simply decide to drop out of the exchange. Rates on those remaining in the Exchange would rise, causing a “death spiral,” with increasing numbers of people dropping out and continued rate increases.
“Obamacare has repeatedly proven itself to be bad law,” says Del. Berg. “If it is not totally eradicated, we will undoubtedly suffer further disastrous effects. In the long run, no one can avoid being hurt by Obamacare. We must get off this road to socialized medicine, and the sooner we do so, the less painful it will be.”
As you will recall, On June 12, 2014, Senator Black led a surprise conservative revolt against Medicaid expansion. Black rallied the support of the General Assembly and blocked Governor McAuliffe from expanding Medicaid on his own. According to Senator Black, King’s case is the most serious threat to Obamacare since the law squeaked through in 2011, during a lame-duck session of Congress. Not a single Republican in either the House or the Senate voted for the bill, and many Democrats who voted for passage had already lost reelection bids because of public dissatisfaction with Obamacare.
“This is a challenge that threatens the very survival of Obamacare.” Black said. “That scheme cannot exist without the payment of government credits. But the statute repeatedly says that credits are only paid to exchanges ‘established by the State.’
…
“A Supreme Court ruling in our favor would collapse Obamacare entirely.”
The Supreme Court has agreed to consider King v. Burwell. USA Today said that the case has a 50-50 chance of succeeding. It said that if the seven million people requiring subsidies drop out, “. . . insurers would be forced to raise rates on everyone else, and the entire economic model behind Obamacare could collapse.”
In May of 2012, the IRS issued regulations in an attempt to save the law. However, according to Senator Black,
“Saving Obamacare requires the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that a federal agency like the IRS can issue regulations that overrule explicit language in a federal law. This would be an unprecedented transfer of power from the Congress to the Executive Branch of government. Obamacare has been a socialist failure from the beginning and it needs to be replaced with free market solutions.”
3 comments
This years IRS tax bills to reconcile the 2014 Obamacare recipient subsidies retroactively deemed not qualified for these past payments will be strictly seat of the pants. While the MSM will develop spin stories galore the simple truth is that the back end billing and adjustment portion of this mess is STILL not in place. We have been far from seeing the worst of this program yet and if the Supreme Court rules these subsidy payments unconstitutional, which is within the realm of possibility, then the gates of Hades will truly open with NO apparent backup plan to sustain the American health care system even under current discussion. Imagine a national crisis of that magnitude being handed to the incompetency of Speaker Boehner and his ineffective leadership team. This mess may end up in the States lap.
I’m presently trying to satisfy the government that I deserve one of these tax credits, since my health insurance was cancelled due to ObamaCare and I was forced to purchase a new policy off the federal exchange. A new policy comparable to my old one would cost twice as much — raising my premiums from $347 to $822/mo — so I had to opt for a new policy with a much higher deductible — from $750 to $5500 — and much higher copays, also. .
But my new, ObamaCare policy is only “cheaper” if I get the tax credit, which will reduce my premium by over $300. To get that tax credit you have to submit a variety of documents to the government to prove eligibility. (Click through this link to see the documents they might ask for — https://www.healthcare.gov/blog/the-marketplace-might-need-more-information-from-you/ )
I sent the Healthcare Marketplace (an ObamaCare management entity) documents detailing my wife and my income. They’ve responded they want more documents.
So I’m now in the position of doing a dance for my government in hopes it will allow me to keep the money I’ve worked hard for and saved throughout a life spent living frugally and responsibly. And that government — which is telling me it’s graciously willing to permit me a “tax credit” — has so mismanaged its affairs it is $18 trillion in debt.Who doesn’t think such a government is going to try to find ways to balance its books by slowly decreasing the amount of “tax credit” allowed, or through some other sleight of hand?
Even so, I’d applaud a Supreme Court ruling in favor of King vs. Burwell. It would strip aside the elaborate lie used to gruber ObamaCare into existence. The only thing better would be watching Jonathan Gruber explaining the result to a “stupid” public after their new monthly premiums arrive.
Who actually filed this brief?