The Obama administration and its allies are having a hissy fit. The Democrats in the Senate and in the White House are lashed to the mast of the PPACA, and accuse those engaging in normal politics of being “anarchists” and “delusional“.
First, a little history. The PPACA was passed in March of 2010 over the strenuous objections of its detractors. Unsavory tactics were used to get it through the Congress, including using “reconciliation” to avoid an otherwise certain death in the Senate, and a last minute deal in the House to get a few pro-life congressmen on board. The PPACA is “the law of the land”, but it got that way though political muscle and chicanery. This is the kind of lawmaking that erodes confidence in law.
The tradition of de-funding an executive activity to bring it to heel is long and well documented. There is nothing unconstitutional about it. Presidents Nixon and Ford were forced out of Vietnam by both the threat of de-funding and the de-funding of their war efforts. Similar battles have been fought between legislatures and executives over many issues throughout our history.
President Obama engages in some pretty gutsy chutzpah when he claims that this battle is over supporting the “law of the land”. After all, he’s the one who has repeatedly said that he would “work around” congress to get things done. He has already either scrapped or delayed portions of the PPACA that were inconvenient.
The PPACA will fail. Economics tells us that incentives matter. The incentives in the PPACA are wrong because it is based on false premises. Forcing insurance companies to issue policies without considering “pre-existing conditions” is like buying fire insurance once your house is already on fire. Only a fool would buy such a policy before the fire. The PPACA tries to deal with this by forcing all Americans to buy health insurance, but there is great worry in Washington and elsewhere that people will not sign up. The fact is that the situation is just like fire insurance. Smart people like to keep their cash. Many of them, especially the young, are likely to simply pay the fine. After all, the “penalty” the first year can be as low as $95 per year. You can’t touch a health insurance policy for that price.
When the young and the healthy decline to buy insurance, the premiums necessarily will rise. It will soon become prohibitively expensive to get insurance, and I expect only the rich, and those who can get a third party – like the taxpayers – to pay the bill will have insurance.
The “If you like your health care you can keep it” promise is falling apart. PPACA proponents counted on corporations to continue to provide health insurance coverage after the law was passed, but like the young, healthy customers, companies are finding the costs too high, and are dropping coverage. (also here and here and here)
The president is fond of reminding us – falsely – that the PPACA provides health care to millions of Americans. The PPACA regulates health insurance, and indirectly health care delivery. The law does not, and cannot provide care. That is the job of doctors, (who are quitting) nurses, and institutions. I know of no one on the delivery side of the PPACA who likes the New World. It is likely that the net effect of the PPACA on health care providers will be to decrease their number, and their quality. President Obama’s likes to tout the “goodies”, like “no pre-existing conditions“, but seldom or ever talks about the costs. That’s irresponsible. A leader needs to tell us not only what we will get, but what it will cost us. There is a name for people who try to sell you something and hide the costs, and it is not flattering.
Let’s remember something. The House of Representatives is passing a CR that will fund the entire government at current levels, with the exception of the PPACA. It’s not the House that will force a government shutdown, but the supporters of the PPACA, who would rather have a hissy fit to protect this misbegotten and misguided legislation.
