If Obama Has Unrestrained Unilateral Power to Delay ObamaCare on His Own Political Whim…

…What Is the Point of Negotiating Border Enforcement With Him?

Ace of Spades HQ

Before that, Bobby Jindhal tweeted today:



It’s not supposed to work this way in America.

A president does not gain the powers of a tyrant simply because the unelected media likes him.

I don’t think anyone before Obama would have asserted that he has the right to change laws on his own whim.



Related:  Too little, too late: WSJ: We’re Sorry We Were Too Soft on Obamacare

The Wall Street Journal, a leading and persistent critic of Obamacare, apologized to its readers Thursday for being too soft over the law.

“These columns fought the Affordable Care Act from start to passage, and we’d now like to apologize to our readers. It turns out we weren’t nearly critical enough,” the paper said in an editorial on its website.

“The law’s implementation is turning into a fiasco for the ages, and this week’s version is the lawless White House decision to delay the law’s insurance mandate for businesses, though not for individuals.”…


Could Obama delay individual mandate by one year?

…Under intense lobbying from big businesses, the Obama administration caved by delaying the employer mandate until 2015. But the individual mandate, which hits average Americans and happens to be supported by insurance industry lobbyists, is still on track to be implemented in 2014…

But the bigger problem for the administration here may be a legal one. As a number of people have noted, it’s questionable whether the Obama administration had the authority to delay the employer mandate without Congress, because the law says that the mandate “shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013.” Administration officials likely assumed they could get away with this unilateral action because it’s unclear who has both the motive and standing to sue….


Yum, Yum! The Price of Pie: Student Loans Targeted To Fund ObamaCare

…We now live in a society that indeed steals from the rich (or anyone above poverty-level, really) and gives to the poor…or in this specific case, an underfunded mandatory law that no one wants. Michelle Obama wasn’t joking around when she proclaimed, “The truth is, in order to get things like universal healthcare and a revamped education system then someone is going to have to give up their piece of the pie so that someone else can have more”…


Despite retreat, White House determined to start Obamacare money flow

…Obamacare is designed to increase the number of Americans who depend on the government to pay for health insurance. It will expand the Medicaid rolls, and it will give subsidies to millions of individuals and families to purchase insurance on the exchanges. In all, the government will be transferring hundreds of billions of dollars to Americans for health coverage.

The White House knows that once those payments begin, repealing Obamacare will no longer be an abstract question of removing legislation not yet in effect. Instead, it will be a very real matter of taking money away from people. It’s very, very hard to do that.

So yes, retreating on the employer mandate was a big deal. But the White House would rather do that than endanger the flow of money that is the heart of Obamacare. The White House will not waver on that, no matter what Republicans say or do.




Comments are closed.