In the next Congress, Republicans have an opportunity to show whether they are the party of corporate payoffs or of limited government, of K Street or of Main Street.
A potentially favorable ruling in King v. Burwell shouldn’t be viewed by Republicans as an invitation to “fix” Obamacare; instead, it should be viewed as a chance to effectively repeal and replace Obamacare with a conservative alternative in 36 states.
The claim that Congress should never force a battle over funding the government, that it must always give the president the funding he insists upon—even for unconstitutional purposes—amounts to a claim that Congress should hand off the power of the purse.
Under a winning alternative, costs would drop, liberty would be secured, and any American who wants to buy health insurance would be able to do so.
Jeff Anderson talks about how the 2017 Project’s Winning Alternative to Obamacare can pave the way to full repeal with a plan that would move things in a conservative direction from the pre-Obamacare status quo.
The end of Obamacare’s insurer bailout is an important step on the road to repealing the 2,700-page overhaul.
Health insurance companies are full of self-righteous indignation about losing their Obamacare bailout—the absence of which will now force them to price their Obamacare policies more honestly, rather than lowballing their prices and expecting taxpayers to help cover their losses.
Tucked away on page 1602 of the omnibus spending bill is a particularly fine example of how cronyism works.
With King v. Burwell now at the Supreme Court, the time is right for Republicans to coalesce around a winning conservative alternative to Obamacare, so that they aren’t tempted to try to “fix” the 2,700-page monstrosity if the Court declares it largely inoperable.