Why I’m Getting Sick of Defending Obamacare

Incompetence, politics, and delays frustrate advocates of health care reform.

WASHINGTON - OCTOBER 29: U.S. President Barack Obama speaks to the media at the briefing room of the White House October 29, 2010 in Washington, DC. Obama made a statement regarding the suspicious packages that were found on cargo planes from Yemen heading to the United States. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
National Journal
Ron Fournier
Feb. 11, 2014, 3:17 a.m.

It’s get­ting dif­fi­cult and slink­ing to­ward im­possible to de­fend the Af­ford­able Care Act. The latest blow to Demo­crat­ic can­did­ates, lib­er­al act­iv­ists, and naïve colum­nists like me came Monday from the White House, which an­nounced yet an­oth­er delay in the Obama­care im­ple­ment­a­tion.

For the second time in a year, cer­tain busi­nesses were giv­en more time be­fore be­ing forced to of­fer health in­sur­ance to most of their full-time work­ers. Em­ploy­ers with 50 to 99 work­ers were giv­en un­til 2016 to com­ply, two years longer than re­quired by law. Dur­ing a year­long grace peri­od, lar­ger com­pan­ies will be re­quired to in­sure few­er em­ploy­ees than spelled out in the law.

Not co­in­cid­ent­ally, the delays punt im­ple­ment­a­tion bey­ond con­gres­sion­al elec­tions in Novem­ber, which raises the first prob­lem with de­fend­ing Obama­care: The White House has politi­cized its sig­na­ture policy.

The win-at-all-cost men­tal­ity helped cre­ate a cul­ture in which a par­tis­an-line vote was deemed suf­fi­cient for passing tran­scend­ent le­gis­la­tion. It spurred ad­visers to de­vel­op a dis­hon­est talk­ing point — “If you like your health plan, you’ll be able to keep your health plan.” And polit­ic­al ex­pedi­ency led Obama to re­peat the line, over and over and over again, when he knew, or should have known, it was false.

De­fend­ing the ACA be­came pain­fully harder when on­line in­sur­ance mar­kets were launched from a multi-mil­lion-dol­lar web­site that didn’t work, when autop­sies on the ad­min­is­tra­tion’s ac­tions re­vealed an epi­dem­ic of in­com­pet­ence that began in the Oval Of­fice and ended with no ac­count­ab­il­ity.

Then of­fi­cials star­ted fudging num­bers and mas­sa­ging facts to pro­mote im­ple­ment­a­tion, noth­ing il­leg­al or even ex­traordin­ary for this era of spin. But they did more dam­age to the cred­ib­il­ity of ACA ad­voc­ates.

Fi­nally, there are the ACA rule changes — at least a dozen ma­jor ad­just­ments, without con­gres­sion­al ap­prov­al. J. Mark Iwry, deputy as­sist­ant Treas­ury sec­ret­ary for health policy, said the ad­min­is­tra­tion has broad “au­thor­ity to grant trans­ition re­lief” un­der a sec­tion of the In­tern­al Rev­en­ue Code that dir­ects the Treas­ury sec­ret­ary to “pre­scribe all need­ful rules and reg­u­la­tions for the en­force­ment” of tax ob­lig­a­tions, ac­cord­ing to The New York Times.

Yes, Obama­care is a tax.

Ad­voc­ates for a strong ex­ec­ut­ive branch, in­clud­ing me, have giv­en the White House a pass on its rule-mak­ing au­thor­ity, be­cause im­ple­ment­ing such a com­plic­ated law re­quires flex­ib­il­ity. But the law may be get­ting stretched to the point of break­ing. Think of the ACA as a game of Jenga: Ad­just one piece and the rest are af­fected; ad­just too many and it falls.

If not il­leg­al, the changes are fuel­ing sus­pi­cion among Obama-loath­ing con­ser­vat­ives, and con­fu­sion among the rest of us. Even the law’s most fer­vent sup­port­ers are frus­trated.

Ron Pol­lack, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the con­sumer lobby Fam­il­ies USA and an ally of the White House, told The Wash­ing­ton Post he was “very sur­prised” by the latest delays. For work­ers at large com­pan­ies that don’t provide cov­er­age, he said, “It’s very un­for­tu­nate “¦ that they don’t have a guar­an­tee it will be ex­ten­ded to them for quite some time.”

Put me in the frus­trated cat­egory. I want the ACA to work be­cause I want health in­sur­ance provided to the mil­lions without it, for both the mor­al and eco­nom­ic be­ne­fits. I want the ACA to work be­cause, as Charles Lane wrote for The Wash­ing­ton Post, the link between work and in­sur­ance needs to be broken. I want the ACA to work be­cause the GOP has not offered a ser­i­ous al­tern­at­ive that can pass Con­gress.

Un­for­tu­nately, the pres­id­ent and his team are mak­ing their good in­ten­tions al­most in­defens­ible.

COR­REC­TION: A pre­vi­ous ver­sion of this column in­ac­cur­ately es­tim­ated the cost of Health­Care.gov.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4711) }}

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×