ObamaCare (PPACA)

A simple summary of where we are with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) or ObamaCare. The Supreme Court ruled on June 28, 2012 that the law was not unconstitutional, but offered confusing explanations within its decision. “The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part,” Roberts wrote. First, The Court upheld the federal takeover of 1/6th of the US economy and ObamaCare implementations will continue. On August 1, 2012 the controversial HHS contraceptive mandate took effect. Second, the Court said that it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but (who) choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.” But, “the individual mandate cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. That Clause authorizes Congress to regulate interstate commerce, not to order individuals to engage in it.” Third, as for the Medicaid expansion, "that portion of the Affordable Care Act violates the Constitution by threatening existing Medicaid funding," Roberts wrote. "Congress has no authority to order the States to regulate according to its instructions. ... The remedy for that constitutional violation is to preclude the Federal Government from imposing such a sanction." So there you have it; ObamaCare continues as a tax, the mandate is unconstitutional (but because the program continues as a tax that item is irrelevant), and the Medicaid expansion cannot be forced on the states. Open enrollment for the new federally run health-care exchanges are scheduled to start Oct. 1, 2013, with all Americans having access to affordable health insurance options effective January 1, 2014. See timeline here. Find your state's Health Exchange here. State-by-State Insurance Information is available at this site.

Archive Related Items

Charity Without the Welfare State

6/2/23

from Goodman Institute,

6/1/23:

One of the big sticking points in the debt limit discussions between President Biden and the House Republicans was whether there should be a small increase in work requirements for people receiving entitlement benefits. In the end, the negotiators basically punted on what is probably the most important public policy issue the nation faces: Who should get free food, housing, medical care and other benefits, and what—if any—should the conditions be? The current system is having a devastating effect on self-sufficiency, family formation and marriage. A better alternative is within our grasp. Let’s start with the harm our system is doing.

Penalties for working.
The marriage tax.

In search of alternatives.

Give food stamps, Medicaid, housing subsidies, earned income tax credits, and so forth, to everyone, and don’t reduce them with income.”
If instead of Medicaid, we simply designated certain hospitals and clinics as “safety net institutions” and made care available regardless of income, we could probably provide more care to more needy patients than we do now and avoid the costs of an enormous amount of bureaucratic paperwork in the process.

Conclusion. We can have a safety net that meets the needs of people who experience misfortune without creating a permanent class of nonworking dependents who behave in socially undesirable ways. More From Goodman Institute:

Charity Without the Welfare State