How States Can Reject and Replace Obamacare

How States Can Reject and Replace Obamacare

This is an interesting twist.

The story outlines how companies can get around the $2000 per employee penalty by getting their State to simply not set up an insurance exchange !!

Somehow that might actually be "Legal".

Here’s the blueprint for how the states can eviscerate three central pillars of Obamacare, crippling it, and set the stage for replacing it if Mitt Romney takes the White House and the GOP takes the Senate this November.

Many are focusing on whether Congress will refuse to fund all the provisions of Obamacare that require federal money. While very important, this is only one barrel of what must be a double-barreled approach. The other is what states can do to dismantle Obamacare. And if we pursue both of these simultaneously, we can defeat Obamacare and safeguard the greatest healthcare system the world has ever known.

Two reasons compel dismantling Obamacare. First is restoring individual liberty by empowering states against the national government and citizens against both. Second is recognizing that free markets outperform centrally-planned markets, so private-sector healthcare will better serve Americans than government-controlled Obamacare ever could......

.....if employers with 50+ employees do not provide federally-approved healthcare, Obamacare imposes a $2,000 penalty per employee, per year. (Minimum penalty $100,000.) However, that penalty is triggered when those employees receive tax subsidies from a state-based exchange.

Since HHS-run exchanges have no subsidies, for states refusing to create exchanges, no employer in that state will be subject to that penalty. This means business owners will band together to lobby their state not to set up exchanges.

Intended "Loophole" ?

It also triggers an "enforcement" and clerical nightmare.

How States Can Reject and Replace Obamacare

This is precisely why I was not at all upset over the Supreme Court decision about Obama-care. Heck, I was very happy. Roberts and the others managed the thread the needle perfectly. They held to Constitutional limitations on their own ability and power which is what we'd hope they would do if not for the emotions on this specific case. Then they reaffirmed that concept of state's rights in a way that literally left the future of Obama-care to the people by way of State government deciding their own futures on it.

Well, it's no surprise as states are going broke too, that a growing list is saying no. The Super Court really did the truly American thing ....when one looks at it bluntly, IMO.

So replace the watered-down pro insurance, pro big pharma garbage that is Obamacare with the full, hardcore pro insurance, pro big pharma POS we had previously?

Eeexcellent, Smithers!

States can't print money and the Fed can't print it fast enough to keep themselves entirely stable anymore. Programs can't happen with what flat out doesn't exist and this has no funding in a growing number of states.

A whole lot of people tried hard to point this out before it was passed and the system we had to reform was torn to pieces. Now we're left where many said was the whole point. Can't go forward, can't go back. How long would anyone like to bet it takes for Government Health Care as a direct and outright suggestion to come? I'm thinking soon....and the states saying no to the mandates, after the court allowed them that, could be the justification.