[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

How Jeff Sessions Plans to End Medical Marijuana Before the Year Is Over

5 Myths About Marijuana You Can Ignore (or laff at)

New Data (Again) Shows Fewer Kids Are Using Marijuana — Despite Legalization

Black Lives Matter Plans To Block White-Owned Businesses On Black Friday

I am The Field Artillery!

VA study shows parasite from Vietnam may be killing vets

Mom Arrested, Charged with Felony for Putting Recorder in 9-year-old's Backpack to Catch Her Bully

Trump ‘frightened by black people’

Judge Protects Former House Speaker and Admitted Child Rapist, Telling His Victim He Can’t Sue

Joe Barton apologizes after nude photo circulates on social media

How CBS News Aided the JFK Cover-up

6 Card Games Every Man Should Know

When Good-Faith Medicine Raises ‘Red Flags’

FBI Admits: Trump Dossier Filled With Nothing But Rumors

Type of alcohol determines whether you become merry or maudlin

Mysterious Marijuana-Related Illness Popping Up In Emergency Rooms

Wes Goodman: Anti-LGBT Republican politician 'caught having sex with man in his office' facing 30 sexual misconduct accusations

A Man Is About To Launch Himself In His Homemade Rocket To Prove The Earth Is Flat

Wrecked And Retching: Obscure Vomiting Illness Linked To Long-Term Pot Use

Family Calls 911 for Help, Cops Show Up, Beat Handcuffed Mentally Ill Man Instead

Police are using DNA mugshots to arrest innocent people

Confederate Flag Over NC Fire Department: ‘We’re Not Going To Take Down The Flag’

Thanksgiving for JFK

Police: Adults gave baby with broken leg marijuana; failed to seek treatment

Meet 'Oumuamua! The 1st Interstellar Visitor Ever Seen Gets a Name

Steve Martin's 'King Tut' Sketch Is Racist, Liberal Arts Students Say

Fake News Is Only the Beginning. The FCC Votes to Let Monopolies Decide What Local News You See

No, you’re not being paranoid. Sites really ARE watching your every move

JFK Files: The CIA Planned To Murder American Citizens In Miami And Blame It On Cuba During Operation Mongoose

Video So Gruesome, Cop Sentenced to 5 Years For Shooting Into Car of Teens, 16 Times

Study Debunks Feminism: Women Still Attracted to “Toxic Masculinity”

Student radio hosts yanked from air, suspended after using the word ‘tranny’

Cowboys, Truckers and Us

PV Police Chief's Gun Missing (Realizes he left it in the Library Bathroom, 4 days later)

General says he'd deny 'illegal' order for nuke strike

Happy Thanksgiving 2017!

Vegas Massacre Cover-Up: PR Firm Hired by Mandalay Bay Exposed Pushing Disinformation on Conspiracy Theories

20,000 DWI Cases May Be Thrown Out After Cop Arrested for Tampering With Breathalyzers

Country music legend Mel Tillis dead at 85

Helter skelter: The history of Charles Manson and rock 'n' roll

Grant Cardone was at Mandalay Hotel and he doesn't believe the official story

How a government-sanctioned scam in Newburgh Heights has taken thousands of dollars from drivers

The Cops Were Chasing a Shoplifter. They Ended Up Destroying an Innocent Man's Home.

Amtrak train smashes car in New Hampshire after GPS directed driver onto tracks

Cooking Hamburgers With Thermite

Making Charcoal the Easy Way

Homemade Gunpowder, For Science!

100% TWO ACTUAL SHOOTERS ON VIDEO IN VEGAS - According to Joe

Study reveals how a very low calorie diet can reverse type 2 diabetes

Trump’s overseas trips reap goodwill and trade agreements


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles

Title: President Trump Is Still Making Illegal Payments to Insurers Under Obamacare (unlawful maintainance of Obama/Pelosi swamp)
Source: Reason
URL Source: http://reason.com/blog/2017/08/15/t ... bamacare-csr-illegal-subsidies
Published: Aug 18, 2017
Author: Peter Suderman
Post Date: 2017-08-18 20:33:29 by hondo68
Keywords: perpetuating illegal and, unconstitutional behavior, payments made illegally
Views: 152
Comments: 3

The health law's CSR subsidies aren't a matter of executive discretion.

Gage Skidmore / Foter
Gage Skidmore / Foter

For months, President Trump has threatened to cut off a series of payments being made to insurers participating in Obamacare's exchanges.

These payments are known cost-sharing reduction subsidies (CSRs), and they are paid directly to insurers in order to offset deductibles and other out of pocket costs for lower income individuals enrolled in Obamacare plans.

Trump has held out these payments as political bargaining leverage, warning that if Congress did not act to repeal and replace the law, he would end the payments, and Obamacare would implode. Trump's decision to treat the payments as discretionary ignores a federal court ruling that the payments never should have been made in the first place.

What, exactly, would happen if the payments were cut off at the end of 2017? Higher premiums, larger federal deficits, and short-term instability, according to a new Congressional Budget Office report.

Premiums would end up 20 percent higher than if the payments were continued, and 25 percent higher after 2020. Most individuals enrolled in Obamacare plans would not feel the impact of those premium increases directly, however, because insurers would raise the cost of plans that are subsidized through a separate provision in Obamacare. Those subsidies, a form of tax credit, rise with the price of premiums, and, as a result, the federal deficit would increase by about $194 billion over a decade.

In addition, CBO predicts that some insurance plans would drop out of the individual market next year, leaving about 5 percent of the country without access to an Obamacare plan in 2018. By 2020, however, insurers would re-enter the market in most places. In the short-term, about 1 million fewer people would be covered, but after 2020, the CBO estimates that coverage rates would be higher by about 1 million, owing primarily to the interaction between the CSR payments and the law's tax credit.

The result, in other words, would not be a full-on implosion, but increased short-term instability, and higher federal spending on Obamacare going forward. In addition, it is possible that if the federal government cut off CSR payments, some states would set up programs to funnel money to insurers using the health care law's state waiver program.

The CBO, as an economic forecasting organization, treats the potential end of the health law's CSR payments primarily as a policy question, looking at the likely ripple effects on the insurance market as it exists under Obamacare. And Trump has treated the CSR payments as a point of executive branch discretion, to be dangled in hopes of gaining political leverage.

But the reason that the future of the payments is uncertain is that they are the subject of a legal dispute left over from the Obama era. The CSR subsidies are called for in the statute of Obamacare, but Congress declined to appropriate any money for them. The Obama administration, which had requested an appropriation, decided to pay them anyway.

House Republicans sued the Obama administration, arguing that under the Constitution, only Congress has the power of the purse, and that Congress was injured as an institution when the Obama administration made the payments without a clear appropriation.

Last year, a federal judge sided with House Republicans, ruling although the payment had been authorized under the law, it had not been appropriated. "Congress is the only source for such an appropriation," Judge Rosemary Collyer's ruling declared, "and no public money can be spent without one." The payments had been made illegally. The ruling was stayed pending appeal, and has been on hold since Trump won the presidency.

The point of the House GOP lawsuit, then, was that the executive branch does not have a choice. Either the administration has an affirmative duty to make the payments, or it has an affirmative duty not to make them. The judge ruled that the president has an affirmative duty not to make the payments without an explicit Congressional appropriation, and that doing so violates the Constitution.

There may be reasons to quibble with the particulars CBO's estimates, which are, as always, subject to substantial uncertainty. But the policy ramifications of cutting off these payments are worth understanding, especially since today's report suggests that cutting off federal payments now would lead to greater spending in the long term.

Yet in assessing the Trump administration's actions, the relevant question is not what effect they would have on premiums or coverage or spending, but whether they are constitutionally justified. Judge Collyer's ruling was clear that they are not. By continuing to make these payments, and by treating them as a matter of executive discretion, Trump is participating in and perpetuating illegal and unconstitutional behavior.


Poster Comment:

Your new Obamacare Trumpcare administrator, Dr. Scofflaw

Read my lips... you've got to pay and pay, to preserve Nancy Pelosi's legacy, Obamacare.(2 images)

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: hondo68 (#0)

The House controls the purse and the Republicans control the House. The House objected to Obama spending the money and filed suit. But since the House is not objecting to Trump spending the money, he has their tacit approval.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-08-18   21:21:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: misterwhite, *The Two Parties ARE the Same* (#1)

The Obamacare subsidies that Trump has illegally paid out so far, were NOT authorized by congress. That's why the GOP sued and won. Next years budget will likely come out funding ObamaTrumpcare because the GOP are big fat liars, and really love Pelosi, Obama, and Trump's socialized CommieCare.


The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party

"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul

hondo68  posted on  2017-08-18   21:54:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: hondo68 (#2)

The Obamacare subsidies that Trump has illegally paid out so far, were NOT authorized by congress.

Yes, they were. They were part of Obamacare. But the House voted not to fund that part. Obama spent the money anyways.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-08-19   10:03:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com