So, been having a bit of a Twitter-tussle with a well-regarded friend and colleague. At issue is the future of ObamaTax subsidies as we look forward to the resolution of Burwell/King/Halbig.
Which got me to thinking: Why we're having this discussion at all? After all, President Obama explicitly promised us that, under the ObamaTax, premiums would decrease 3000%, and that we would have comprehensive, affordable coverage.
If this were truly the case, then why would we needbribes subsidies in the first place? After all, who wouldn't want cheap, useful insurance coverage? Why would we need to be cajoled, nay, forced into buying it if it was such a great bargain?
And if, as Mike pointed out years ago, the folks in DC actually did their jobs, would we need to be expanding Medicaid?
Thought not.
Which got me to thinking: Why we're having this discussion at all? After all, President Obama explicitly promised us that, under the ObamaTax, premiums would decrease 3000%, and that we would have comprehensive, affordable coverage.
If this were truly the case, then why would we need
And if, as Mike pointed out years ago, the folks in DC actually did their jobs, would we need to be expanding Medicaid?
Thought not.
Posts
