They Don’t Get It

August 18, 2013

The editors of the Chicago Tribune just don’t understand the administration’s actions with respect to ObamaCare:

Democrats strong-armed Obamacare into law three years ago. Now they’re busy flouting it.

The mandate that employers provide insurance next year or pay a penalty, as the law requires? Delayed for at least a year.

The law’s dictate that people applying for federal subsidies to buy insurance provide proof that they’re eligible for the government aid? Scaled back.

Sharp limits on Americans’ out-of-pocket costs for health care? Suspended for a year.

Providing members of Congress and more than 10,000 staff members with federal health care subsidies that the law does not allow? Done, via a deal brokered by President Barack Obama.

And on and on.

As I’ve said before the administration clearly has a very different view of law than the Trib’s editors do. The law is merely the raw material of the policy. It will be reshaped and reworked by regulation, executive diktat, and selective enforcement to make the unworkable work. I think that was always the plan.

5 comments… add one
  • sam Link

    You know, I wonder if this kind of stuff isn’t just endemic to healthcare legislation:

    CRS Report for Congress

    Congressional Research Service

    Health Savings Accounts

    [Order Code RL32467]

    Large Employers.

    Large employers are generally defined as those with over
    500 employees. Two segments of these employers are likely to be particularly interested in HSA plans: those that currently offer HRAs and others that also offer some form of high deductible insurance.

    Employers that currently offer HRA plans are likely to give serious
    consideration to adopting HSAs, which generally are more advantageous for employees. These employers have already bought into the concept of consumer-driven health plans as a strategy for improving cost awareness and accountability. They have programs in place for educating employees about provider costs and choices. According to Mercer, there are at least 1 million employees enrolled in HRAs in 2004, mostly through large employers.

    Other employers offer high deductible insurance without HRAs. According to a 2003 Kaiser survey, 17% of jumbo firms (5,000 or more workers) offered a health plan with a deductible of $1,000 or more for single coverage in 2003 and 41% stated that they were very or somewhat likely to offer such a health plan in 2004.24 These
    plans may not meet the definition of a qualified HDHP under the HSA legislation, but many could be modified to do so. These employers could then allow employees to add an HSA account funded entirely with employee contributions with no added cost to the employer.

    Some large employers may find it difficult or inadvisable to offer HSA plans because prescription drugs will not be exempt from the deductible requirements of the HDHP. Currently, large employers often offer prescription drug plans through specialty vendors such as Medco or Express Scripts. The prevalent design provides prescriptions without a deductible, with separate copayments for generic versus brand
    name drugs and for mail order versus retail drugs. Revenue Ruling 2004-38 issued in March 2004 clarified that in order to meet statutory requirements, prescription drug benefits must be subjected to the deductible underlying the HDHP along with other healthcare claims. However, the Treasury Department was responsive to
    complaints from employers and health plans that it would take time to change plan design and administrative systems to comply with this ruling. Revenue Procedure 2004-22, released concurrently with Revenue Ruling 2004-38, provides transition relief until January 1, 2006, by allowing individuals to be eligible for HSAs even if
    covered by a prescription plan that provides benefits before the annual HDHP deductible is satisfied.

  • jan Link

    I guess Scott Johnson of Powerline doesn’t get it either, when he asserts that Obama is the hardest working man in demagogy.

  • Red Barchetta Link

    “It will be reshaped and reworked by regulation, executive diktat, and selective enforcement to make the unworkable work. I think that was always the plan.”

    That’s a hell of an executive “plan” to dominate a 6th of the economy. I heard Obama trying to justify the inevitable start up problems of Obamacare with a new product launch. That he equates the magnitude of the two tasks truly boggles the mind.

    Had he tackled the portability and free rider problems and called it a day he could have admirably walked off into the sunset and claimed to have materially advanced the ball. Whether arrogance, incompetence or collectivist ideology this is a bridge too far and as wild eyed Republican Max Baucus – who can afford to be honest – noted, “I see a train wreck coming.”

  • steve Link

    Making the unworkable workable. Isnt that an executive function? What I see is delay in a few provisions, and his claim about the 10,000 staff is pretty much BS. (Can provide legal analysis if you want.) I remain unaware of any substantive changes that have been made.

    Steve

  • Andy Link

    Making the unworkable workable. Isnt that an executive function?

    Not really. Besides, who gets to decide what is “unworkable” and therefore subject to unilateral adjustment? Seems to me that President Reagan found a “workable” solution to the problem of carrying out his policy with regard to Nicaragua and the Contras….

Leave a Comment






Categories