John Roberts Gets a Mulligan: Will He Kill Obamacare This Time Around?

Last year was when Obamacare was finally exposed as one big lie greasing the skids for the collapse of Progressivism. And we should thank two people. First should be Chief Justice John Roberts, since after all he saved entire the entire boondoggle by casting his vote with the liberal justices when he could have killed it dead in its tracks by voting with the conservative justices. And the other person we need to thank is Jonathan Gruber for being dumb enough to let himself be videotaped while saying the American people are too stupid to understand what's best for them. He exposed once and for all the arrogance and paternalism that is Progressivism.

Gruber and his ilk already knew lower premiums, keeping your doctors and the lowering the overall cost of healthcare were all lies. But this was the holy grail of progressive politics -- getting control of the healthcare system and in turn controlling the American people. The following is from The Wall Street Journal just after the ACA had passed the House and would be on its way to the desk of the president for signing into law:

"... the leadership knows how unpopular this bill is in most of America. They know this legislation is not the result of some national consensus in favor of expanding state power. Its passage was possible only because of temporary liberal majorities that are intent on fulfilling their dreams of a cradle-to-grave entitlement state."

But as reality has set in, virtually everything the Democrats said about Obamacare turned out not to be true. And with Obamacare now having been the law of the land, much of what the Right had been saying about it is turning out to be true.

And the most pernicious lie may be regarding how Obamacare would lower the cost of healthcare. It has been revealed this would be done through cost-control measures determined by the Feds, and one of the primary means would be through what's come to be know as 'the death panel' or more euphemistically labeled the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

 The following is from a recent article posted on WorldNetDaily. PRESIDENT'S INNER CIRCLE CONCEDED OBAMACARE RATIONING; Gruber not alone in making frank admission

"In September 2012, Rattner penned an opinion piece in the New York Times titled 'Beyond Obamacare' in which he proclaimed 'We need death panels' and argued rationing must be instructed to sustain Obama’s health-care plan. His comments have been virtually ignored by traditional media as the president campaigns for a second term."

Other top Democrats made the same concessions, including another Obamacare architect Ezekiel Emanuel, Obama economic advisor Robert Reich and former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean. More about what they said can be found in the following online story: Four Times Obamacare Advocates Admitted It Will Kill Old People

There are many other issues that are coming to light and that were also predicted prior to Obamacare's implementation: rural hospitals and private practices are closing,  doctors are getting on hospital payrolls as they consolidate,  and with Medicaid expansion as part of the ACA the numbers are swelling creating a shortage in primary care doctors. And to make matters worse, many doctors are refusing to see people on Medicaid because of its poor reimbursement.

Added to those issues is the confusion is kicking in with the beginning of tax season.  Individuals will have to report whether they have coverage or not on 2014 tax returns. The guidelines are unclear as are personal exemptions issued by the IRS, with the last being extremely vague. It says an individual may be exempt from having to be covered "due to hardship."  There is also more burden on the middle class because not only does it complicate filling out returns and determining your tax liability or refund, it appears from early reports that up to half those who bought a health insurance policy on the exchanges and received subsidies may end up paying more in taxes and/or losing refunds they usually received in the past.

With Obamacare back on the docket of the Supreme Court for this year, oral arguments begin in March. 

The following is from the New England Journal of Medicine (12/10/14):

"The U.S. Supreme Court's surprise announcement on November 7 that it would hear King v. Burwell struck fear in the hearts of supporters of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). At stake is the legality of an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rule extending tax credits to the 4.5 million people who bought their health plans in the 34 states that declined to establish their own health insurance exchanges under the ACA.1 The case hinges on enigmatic statutory language that seems to link the amount of tax credits to a health plan purchased “through an Exchange established by the State.” According to the plaintiffs in King, that language means that consumers who buy insurance through federally run exchanges don't qualify for subsidies. The Court's decision to hear the case without a split between appellate courts suggests that at least four justices harbor serious doubts about the IRS rule's validity."

Chief Justice John Roberts gets a mulligan this year and has another shot at killing this huge government intrusion into not just the finances every American by the IRS, but now the IRS will have access to the health records of every American, something that has been overlooked so far in the healthcare debate. This time Roberts needs to put his drive on the fairway.

Last year was when Obamacare was finally exposed as one big lie greasing the skids for the collapse of Progressivism. And we should thank two people. First should be Chief Justice John Roberts, since after all he saved entire the entire boondoggle by casting his vote with the liberal justices when he could have killed it dead in its tracks by voting with the conservative justices. And the other person we need to thank is Jonathan Gruber for being dumb enough to let himself be videotaped while saying the American people are too stupid to understand what's best for them. He exposed once and for all the arrogance and paternalism that is Progressivism.

Gruber and his ilk already knew lower premiums, keeping your doctors and the lowering the overall cost of healthcare were all lies. But this was the holy grail of progressive politics -- getting control of the healthcare system and in turn controlling the American people. The following is from The Wall Street Journal just after the ACA had passed the House and would be on its way to the desk of the president for signing into law:

"... the leadership knows how unpopular this bill is in most of America. They know this legislation is not the result of some national consensus in favor of expanding state power. Its passage was possible only because of temporary liberal majorities that are intent on fulfilling their dreams of a cradle-to-grave entitlement state."

But as reality has set in, virtually everything the Democrats said about Obamacare turned out not to be true. And with Obamacare now having been the law of the land, much of what the Right had been saying about it is turning out to be true.

And the most pernicious lie may be regarding how Obamacare would lower the cost of healthcare. It has been revealed this would be done through cost-control measures determined by the Feds, and one of the primary means would be through what's come to be know as 'the death panel' or more euphemistically labeled the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).

 The following is from a recent article posted on WorldNetDaily. PRESIDENT'S INNER CIRCLE CONCEDED OBAMACARE RATIONING; Gruber not alone in making frank admission

"In September 2012, Rattner penned an opinion piece in the New York Times titled 'Beyond Obamacare' in which he proclaimed 'We need death panels' and argued rationing must be instructed to sustain Obama’s health-care plan. His comments have been virtually ignored by traditional media as the president campaigns for a second term."

Other top Democrats made the same concessions, including another Obamacare architect Ezekiel Emanuel, Obama economic advisor Robert Reich and former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean. More about what they said can be found in the following online story: Four Times Obamacare Advocates Admitted It Will Kill Old People

There are many other issues that are coming to light and that were also predicted prior to Obamacare's implementation: rural hospitals and private practices are closing,  doctors are getting on hospital payrolls as they consolidate,  and with Medicaid expansion as part of the ACA the numbers are swelling creating a shortage in primary care doctors. And to make matters worse, many doctors are refusing to see people on Medicaid because of its poor reimbursement.

Added to those issues is the confusion is kicking in with the beginning of tax season.  Individuals will have to report whether they have coverage or not on 2014 tax returns. The guidelines are unclear as are personal exemptions issued by the IRS, with the last being extremely vague. It says an individual may be exempt from having to be covered "due to hardship."  There is also more burden on the middle class because not only does it complicate filling out returns and determining your tax liability or refund, it appears from early reports that up to half those who bought a health insurance policy on the exchanges and received subsidies may end up paying more in taxes and/or losing refunds they usually received in the past.

With Obamacare back on the docket of the Supreme Court for this year, oral arguments begin in March. 

The following is from the New England Journal of Medicine (12/10/14):

"The U.S. Supreme Court's surprise announcement on November 7 that it would hear King v. Burwell struck fear in the hearts of supporters of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). At stake is the legality of an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rule extending tax credits to the 4.5 million people who bought their health plans in the 34 states that declined to establish their own health insurance exchanges under the ACA.1 The case hinges on enigmatic statutory language that seems to link the amount of tax credits to a health plan purchased “through an Exchange established by the State.” According to the plaintiffs in King, that language means that consumers who buy insurance through federally run exchanges don't qualify for subsidies. The Court's decision to hear the case without a split between appellate courts suggests that at least four justices harbor serious doubts about the IRS rule's validity."

Chief Justice John Roberts gets a mulligan this year and has another shot at killing this huge government intrusion into not just the finances every American by the IRS, but now the IRS will have access to the health records of every American, something that has been overlooked so far in the healthcare debate. This time Roberts needs to put his drive on the fairway.