Dig away, Jay:
Numerous "experts" say Obama's unilateral re-writing of the law is totally legal and has plenty of precedent, according to Carney. Quite a few Constitutional experts disagree. Jay Carney chalks up these concerns to rank partisan sniping -- so what does Jay Carney make of Democrat Tom Harkin's criticism along these same lines? Jay Carney would rather not talk about Tom Harkin. Meanwhile, average families and small businesses are still waiting to hear whether the president will magnanimously grant them the same Obamacare mandate postponement he's given big business. And will the administration wait to hand out expensive subsidies until there's a workable system in place to ensure that dishonest, ineligible people don't receive them? Americans can expect more glitches and failures as the law's October deadline approaches. NPR: "Another day, another delay of a piece of the federal health care law known as Obamacare. The administration is having trouble setting up some of the new computer systems required by the Affordable Care Act. Last week, they announced a year-long delay in the implementation of some of the law's requirements for businesses." Reuters:
Obamacare, formally known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, could fail for many reasons, including participation by too few of the uninsured and a shortage of doctors to treat those who do sign up. But because its core is government-run marketplaces selling health insurance online, the likeliest reason for failure at the opening bell is information technology issues, say experts who are helping with the rollout. Although IT is the single most expensive ingredient of the exchanges, with eight-figure contracts to build them, experts expect bugs, errors and crashes. In April, Obama himself predicted "glitches and bumps" when the exchanges open for business.
These "bugs, errors and crashes" aren't just run-of-the-mill government failures. They will impact millions of people's health care. Philip Klein chronicles how correct Obamacare critics have been in their predictions, many of which have been vindicated over the past week:
At the time the legislation was being written, critics repeatedly pointed out that its requirement that larger employers provide government-approved health insurance to their workers or pay penalties would provide an incentive for businesses to slash their workforce (or cut worker hours). Announcements by business executives over the past several years, as well as jobs reports reflecting a shift in the U.S. labor force toward part-time work, provided evidence to support this view. But critics were mocked as blowing things out of proportion. Then, the administration announced on July 2 that it was delaying the mandate for a year, citing the complexity of the new rules and complaints from businesses. Obamacare skeptics have also spent the past several years predicting that there was no way the administration would meet the technological challenges posed by setting up new health insurance exchanges by the Oct. 1 deadline. Sure enough, the administration has delayed requirements that all applicants needed to have their income and insurance status verified before receiving federal health insurance subsidies — a change that will open the floodgates to fraud.
These are dark days for Obamacare advocates, but at least they have the option of sheltering in the familiar refuge of reflexive blame shift. Unfortunately, the American people -- who are about to see their healthcare system get a lot more expensive and a lot less functional, while footing the bill for this monstrosity -- have nowhere to hide.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member