Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Rant: who was the moron who drafted the ACA such that states can opt out automatically? [View all]phleshdef
(11,936 posts)38. Here is a thorough explanation of why you are more than likely dead wrong about this.
But we do not need to rely on the courts to correct this error. Congress corrected it itself.
Four days after Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, it enacted the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Section 1004 of HCERA amended section 36B(f) of the IRC to impose on exchanges established under section 1311(f)(3)that is, state exchangesand under section 1321(c)that is federal exchanges, the obligation to report to the IRS and to the taxpayer information regarding tax credits provided to individuals through the exchange. In this later-adopted legislation amending the earlier-adopted ACA, Congress demonstrated its understanding that federal exchanges would administer premium tax credits.
Four days after Congress passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, it enacted the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Section 1004 of HCERA amended section 36B(f) of the IRC to impose on exchanges established under section 1311(f)(3)that is, state exchangesand under section 1321(c)that is federal exchanges, the obligation to report to the IRS and to the taxpayer information regarding tax credits provided to individuals through the exchange. In this later-adopted legislation amending the earlier-adopted ACA, Congress demonstrated its understanding that federal exchanges would administer premium tax credits.
More at link.
http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2011/09/11/yes-the-federal-exchange-can-offer-premium-tax-credits/
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
62 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Rant: who was the moron who drafted the ACA such that states can opt out automatically? [View all]
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
OP
No subsidies means that that people won't be able to afford the insurance offered through
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#4
it doesn't matter if they can't be denied a product that they can't afford.
BlueMan Votes
Nov 2012
#6
There will be nothing to run---the lack of subsidies means that no one will
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#9
it won't be better if there are no subsidies to allow the poor to buy in.
BlueMan Votes
Nov 2012
#10
No, the problem is that they explicitly limited subsidies to state-run exchanges.
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#7
This isn't political bitching--it's a legal argument that the SCOTUS is going to buy. nt
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#17
No, it's not. It's a glitch. The intent of the law is not going to be overturned
Schema Thing
Nov 2012
#19
Courts generally don't care if it's an error. Especially Republican judges.
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#20
You really think the Roberts court is going to give the admin a pass on this?
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#28
They didn't buy the legal argument by everyone that ACA was totally unconstitutional.
LiberalFighter
Nov 2012
#29
Roberts did at first, and he backed down only because the shitstorm would be too big.
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#32
ACA, Section 1401 only allows subsidies for people enrolled in exchanges established
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#30
quite the contrary, they specifically allowed the feds to set it up in case some states didn't do it
unblock
Nov 2012
#27
The problem is that they authorized subsidies ONLY for state-run exchanges.
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#31
The problem is that there are no subsidies for people in the federal exchanges.
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#35
No the problem is that the Supreme Court said that you could not compel states to expand Medicaid
grantcart
Nov 2012
#51
It is clear to me in context that you are well meaning but incorrect
ProgressiveProfessor
Nov 2012
#45
Here is a thorough explanation of why you are more than likely dead wrong about this.
phleshdef
Nov 2012
#38
It seems to be a much stronger argument than the one you are attempting to make.
phleshdef
Nov 2012
#46
No, this was a simple screw up. Nobody was demanding that the federal exchanges
geek tragedy
Nov 2012
#43
Given the rushed nature of the legislation, errors and oversights were
ProgressiveProfessor
Nov 2012
#47