And the walls come tumblin’ down . . .
Rather than wailing and wringing hands about the nightmare that is the ACA, some are taking steps to halt its implementation where they should be taken – in the courts.
A very important part of the Act is tax credits to help individuals above the poverty level to cover the cost of the premiums. Without those credits, many, if not most, would not be able to afford the premiums that will enrich the insurance companies. To receive this credit, the Act says, twice, that the insurance must be purchased “through an exchange established by the (individual) state.” But 36 states decided not to open exchanges, so in those states, the insurance can not be purchased through a state-established exchange, as required. Not until after the bill was passed was the glitch noticed. Then, the IRS issued a directive that redefined “exchange” to include “federally facilitated exchange.” But this is not the wording of the law as passed, but rather is an attempt to circumvent the law which the Administration itself wrote. Thus, in those 36 states, under the wording of the law, no tax credits will be available to help with the staggering costs of the premiums. Lawsuits have been filed in 4 states which, if successful, will require strict adherence to the wording of the law as passed and will effectively dismantle it in all 36 states.
phoenixlaw Please let it be so!
WesternFreePress phoenixlaw The judges in at least two of the lawsuits have denied the Administration’s attempts to dismiss the lawsuits and they are proceeding. See HALBIG v. SEBELIUS.
phoenixlaw Will Montesquieuean separation of powers and co-equal branches be our salvation?
WesternFreePress phoenixlaw Perhaps. The ACA is also being challenged in another lawsuit which contends the ACA is illegal because it violates the Origination Clause which requires revenue measures to originate in the House rather than in the Senate, since Robert’s opinion held that the ACA was an exercise of Congress’s power to lay and collect taxes.
Too bad there isn’t a clause that says, “Forcing people to buy things against their will, or to yield up the fruits of their labors for the exclusive use of someone else is NEVER okay!”
WesternFreePress phoenixlaw There is no enumerated power in the Constitution which permits such action, but unfortunately through the years, beginning mostly during FDR’s administration, the Supreme Court has allowed the Constitution to be changed without Constitutional Amendments to allow it.
phoenixlaw 100 years of creeping statism has brought us to the point where the fundamental social contract that undergirded our founding is now routinely violated.
Western Free Press
Michael Anderson on Stop Calling Them Warriors, Social Justice Whiners Are Anything But
Larry Barnes on Stop Calling Them Warriors, Social Justice Whiners Are Anything But
dleeper47 on T Minus 3 Hours until Speaker Ryan’s Millennial Town Hall