What does the Healthcare Decision mean?

[AUtiger98 24]

Congrats to all the supports of Obamacare. You won.

Now lets’ look at the precedent set by the Supreme Court. The SCOTUS looked at the intentions of Congress when they wrote the law and since the Executive Branch made a ruling to allow subsidies bases on the intentions (not the actually wording) of Congress, the SCOTUS upheld this change by the executive branch. I’m paraphrase here, so if I left something pertinent out, let me know and I’ll edit this part.

I believe giving the executive branch this power is a significant change in our Republic. It’s a power I don’t want any administration to have, because I believe it will lead to misuses of power in the future.

Here’s a hypothetical situation. Let’s say the next president is Jeb Bush and he has a Republican House and Senate. They pass the Affordable Education Act. It allows states to set up a voucher system and the Federal Govt. will provide subsidies in states that establish the program. Jeb Bush then provides subsides to kids in states that don’t establish the program. For three years, millions of poor kids go to private schools and get a good education using these subsidies.

Given the Obamacare subsidies ruling by the court, the precedent has be set that this is OK. Most likely, examples similar to the one above would not even get to the Supreme Court because the lower courts would rule based on King vs. Burwell.

An organization I work with has talked with Democratic reps on the state level (around the country), and many have concerns about the precedents that have been set since 2008. To them, a victory for this Administration also means Republicans get to play by the same rules in the future.

What does the future look like? Well the trend is more Republicans. In 2008, there were 28 Democratic Governors and 22 Republican Governors. In 2015, there are 31 Republican governors and 18 Dems. (1 independent). Republicans now control 69 out of 98 partisan legislatures on the state level (house and senate). That’s 70 % control. The Republicans hold the governor’s mansion and both chambers of the legislature in 24 states. That’s 48% of the states with total control.

With one and half years left I’m not as concerned with the Obama Administration, I’m concerned at how future administrations will use these newly gained powers. Even Republican Administrations.

[AURaptor 1,121]

My premiums went up about 80% thanks to Obamacare. Expect those premiums to keep climbing. Blank you Obama.

[AUtiger98 24]

My premiums went up about 80% thanks to Obamacare. Expect those premiums to keep climbing. Blank you Obama.

Raptor, I'm not that concerned about the healthcare aspect to the ruling. The power given the the executive branch is a bigger problem in my opinion. Laws can be changed in the future, but the power has been give forever. Even if Obamacare is Repealed (I won't hold my breath for this to happen).

I'm in the Repeal and Replace crowd if it makes you feel better.

[TexasTiger 12,800]

Congrats to all the supports of Obamacare. You won.

Now lets’ look at the precedent set by the Supreme Court. The SCOTUS looked at the intentions of Congress when they wrote the law and since the Executive Branch made a ruling to allow subsidies bases on the intentions (not the actually wording) of Congress, the SCOTUS upheld this change by the executive branch. I’m paraphrase here, so if I left something pertinent out, let me know and I’ll edit this part.

I believe giving the executive branch this power is a significant change in our Republic. It’s a power I don’t want any administration to have, because I believe it will lead to misuses of power in the future.

Here’s a hypothetical situation. Let’s say the next president is Jeb Bush and he has a Republican House and Senate. They pass the Affordable Education Act. It allows states to set up a voucher system and the Federal Govt. will provide subsidies in states that establish the program. Jeb Bush then provides subsides to kids in states that don’t establish the program. For three years, millions of poor kids go to private schools and get a good education using these subsidies.

Given the Obamacare subsidies ruling by the court, the precedent has be set that this is OK. Most likely, examples similar to the one above would not even get to the Supreme Court because the lower courts would rule based on King vs. Burwell.

An organization I work with has talked with Democratic reps on the state level (around the country), and many have concerns about the precedents that have been set since 2008. To them, a victory for this Administration also means Republicans get to play by the same rules in the future.

What does the future look like? Well the trend is more Republicans. In 2008, there were 28 Democratic Governors and 22 Republican Governors. In 2015, there are 31 Republican governors and 18 Dems. (1 independent). Republicans now control 69 out of 98 partisan legislatures on the state level (house and senate). That’s 70 % control. The Republicans hold the governor’s mansion and both chambers of the legislature in 24 states. That’s 48% of the states with total control.

With one and half years left I’m not as concerned with the Obama Administration, I’m concerned at how future administrations will use these newly gained powers. Even Republican Administrations.

The Court specifically didn't give executive branch the authority to interpret the questioned provision. It interpreted the statute within its total context. The next administration can't simply say, "subsidies don't apply to the federal exchange-- the Court has settled that question.