Discussion: How A Future GOP President Can Gut Obamacare Subsidies Even If The Supreme Court Upholds Them

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #234042

2

Well, we live in a world where people think they know the best way to teach math because they went to school when they were kids. To half the country, the Death Spiral is just another expert opinion to be ignored. A Republican President, Republican Senate and Republican House could easily just repeal the whole thing.

4 Likes
3

“…the IRS could in one administration say the subsidies are allowed, and in another administration say they are not…”

Then Republicans would be directly responsible for the economic calamity they cause.

Not that Republicans care about or are adverse to economic calamity. From destroying our credit rating, to failing to fund agencies, to refusing to pay people for their labor, to the Great Recession, Republican governance depends upon creating calamity, confident the conservative propaganda machine can revise history.

4 Likes
4

Sahil Kapur, I’m willing to concede you mean well and all, and even the possibility that your boss wanted some follow-up story to suck up the ambient anxiety as the SCOTUS cloisters toward issuing smoke on this case. Regardless: this filler.

Of COURSE president’s have lots and lots of regulatory authority and power over the directions to administration agency bureaucrats on how to conduct their duties under existing legislation. Sheesh, look at the complaints the GOP are making about Obama’s intentions for undocumented immigrants – they may claim ‘usurpation’, but it’s practically meaningless without Congress coming up with a bill he’d sign or would survive veto; they may claim ‘unconstitutional’ but the one judge’s decision to date is plain stupid and isn’t even based on the constitution and now OTHER states that want the new rules applied are jumping in, so even the SCOTUS may not be able to Moops II (assuming they Moop I, which doesn’t seem likely); so they claim ‘tyranny’ which is whatever they don’t like.

All this piece does is repeat fully developed already known features and promote pointless anxiety.

7 Likes
5

Bid question is why would Americans elect a President that hates Americans…it did not work for Romney and if somehow we can keep corporations from buying elections outright, it won’t work in the future.

3 Likes
6

Sahil, do you mean to tell us that a Republican president could kill Obamacare? Really? I hear the Sun might rise in the East tomorrow too.

4 Likes
7

Modern Republicans are anarchists who are literally high as if on drugs awaiting the severe consequences of installing their disruptive policies. Revolting.

8

And that ain’t all a GOP president could do – which is why we’d all better do our damnedest to elect a Democrat as president and work to elect more Democrats elsewhere.

3 Likes
9

Lots of things are possible. It’s possible I may win the Megamillions drawing. I don’t plan my life accordingly, though.

It would be refreshing if TPM stopped hyping stories detailing every thing that is possible, and instead, focus on that which is probable.

2 Likes
10

I’d like this a thousand times if it were possible.

TPM seems bound and determined to find every possible way that the ACA could be gutted, and then blasting that story all day long.

11

There has to be an overwhelming majority for the winner in 2016. Does anyone doubt that the Five Fascists on the Court wouldn’t pick their guy in a close race like 2000?

1 Like
12

Not sure who would actually want to be that President - sure there are plenty of candidates are eager to rattle their saber and say that the will eliminate the dreaded “Obamacare” - but get into office and actually eliminate healthcare coverage for millions and millions and million of people?

13

The Republicans do care about the potential for political fallout. I would bet that a R-pres wouldn’t do it, because they would then have to own the fallout–alone, without any plausible deniability. Politics is mostly a game to them and they would lose if they unilaterally pulled the plug on the ACA.

14

Sometimes I think this site has become talking points for the faint hearted. This author is a constant Debbie Downer.

3 Likes
16

Roberts and his fellow RATS are the most craven, corrupt and amoral Supreme Court justices in American history. They ignore facts, destroy fundamental individual rights and constitutional principles to blatantly advance the Republican party’s agenda.

17

The Electoral College map is already tilted against the GOP, a threat by a GOP Pres. candidate to kill Obamacare should shake loose a few million folks who otherwise would be solidly GOP, making their task even tougher. Please proceed.

1 Like
18

We can save the country – literally, save the country – if we elect a Democrat as our next President.

3 Likes
19

But if, in fact, the law could be gutted this way…AND it came up during the arguments…then what’s so wrong with writing about it from a journalistic POV?

Frankly, given the tenaciousness of the attack on this law–remember when the common wisdom was the first lawsuit would never get off the ground?–this doesn’t seem like gratuitous fear-mongering.

From a political perspective, a little fear-based prognosticating might get liberals or progs to get off their asses and put a few of their qualms aside and vote for the Democratic candidate, not just in the presidential cycle, but in ALL cycles and at ALL levels of government.

1 Like
20

It could be. Lots of things could happen. Is it likely to be gutted this way after having been in effect for years at that point?

21

“There’s one legal obstacle that could make it a bit tricky. Under the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act, a future president’s IRS would have to show that its reinterpretation of the law is not “arbitrary” or “capricious” or “an abuse of discretion.” It could try to argue that it would be fiscally prudent as it would save hundreds of billions of dollars. The administration’s reasoning would have to be persuasive enough to fend off an expected legal challenge from those harmed.”

But with THIS COURT especially under Roberts what’s the chance that they would put people before politics and let the ACA continue to provide subsidies to qualified applicants. I’d say just about none because this case shouldn’t even BE heard at the Supreme Court. It’s purely political and everyone knows it. It’s the reason it’s being heard in the first place POLITICS.