Thursday, June 11, 2015
Obama Administration – No Action if Supreme Court Turns Down Federal Subsidies
Sylvia Burwell, HHS Secretary, has announced the Obama administration will take no action if the Supreme Court rules against federal subsidies in 37 states.
The strategy is clear: shift blame to Court conservatives and to the GOP for depriving some 8 million subsidized citizens of health care coverage.
This lack of an ObamaCare contingency plan will force conservatives to come up with a humane alternative, which will probably consist of a one year or more extension of federal subsidies while Republicans scramble to come up with a comprehensive alternative to ObamaCare before President Obama ends its 2nd term and before the 2016 elections.
Only one thing is certain. Nobody is neutral. President Obama and his liberal allies, such as the New York Times, say there is no going back. The ACA is an irrevocably entrenched part of the social fabric of America. Republicans and Wall Street Journal editors, will continue to insist that the ACA is deeply flawed, that nobody read it before ramming in through Congress in an act of political arrogance, and that it remains unpopular among the American public.
It is hard to find a neutral opinion once the Court rules. But if you are looking quickly for such an opinion, you will probably find it in Wikipedia. This online encyclopedia now rivals or exceeds Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Twitter in online readership and as a source of News. Wikipedia’s leaders and voluntary contributors, which now number in the hundreds of thousands, insist, above all, Wikipedia is quick and neutral and non-opinionated and represents an up-to-day encyclopedia of the the collective wisdom of humankind.
In case you didn’t know, “wiki” is an Hawaii word for “quick,” and “wiki-wiki” means “quicker and quicker.” President Obama, of course, is a native of Hawaii. We shall quickly see on Wikipedia his signature domestic achievement has legislative legs or is destined to be relegated to the world of the quick and the dead.
Sylvia Burwell, HHS Secretary, has announced the Obama administration will take no action if the Supreme Court rules against federal subsidies in 37 states.
The strategy is clear: shift blame to Court conservatives and to the GOP for depriving some 8 million subsidized citizens of health care coverage.
This lack of an ObamaCare contingency plan will force conservatives to come up with a humane alternative, which will probably consist of a one year or more extension of federal subsidies while Republicans scramble to come up with a comprehensive alternative to ObamaCare before President Obama ends its 2nd term and before the 2016 elections.
Only one thing is certain. Nobody is neutral. President Obama and his liberal allies, such as the New York Times, say there is no going back. The ACA is an irrevocably entrenched part of the social fabric of America. Republicans and Wall Street Journal editors, will continue to insist that the ACA is deeply flawed, that nobody read it before ramming in through Congress in an act of political arrogance, and that it remains unpopular among the American public.
It is hard to find a neutral opinion once the Court rules. But if you are looking quickly for such an opinion, you will probably find it in Wikipedia. This online encyclopedia now rivals or exceeds Google, Microsoft, Facebook, and Twitter in online readership and as a source of News. Wikipedia’s leaders and voluntary contributors, which now number in the hundreds of thousands, insist, above all, Wikipedia is quick and neutral and non-opinionated and represents an up-to-day encyclopedia of the the collective wisdom of humankind.
In case you didn’t know, “wiki” is an Hawaii word for “quick,” and “wiki-wiki” means “quicker and quicker.” President Obama, of course, is a native of Hawaii. We shall quickly see on Wikipedia his signature domestic achievement has legislative legs or is destined to be relegated to the world of the quick and the dead.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment