Obamacare had an unusually good day at the Supreme Court

[babylonsister]

Obamacare had an unusually good day at the Supreme Court
As many as six justices appeared bothered by a Republican effort to undercut the Affordable Care Act.
By Ian Millhiser Dec 10, 2019, 1:30pm EST


A trio of Supreme Court cases consolidated under the name Maine Community Health Options v. United States may fairly be described as the first “normal” Obamacare case to reach the Supreme Court.

They do not involve an existential attack on the Affordable Care Act, and they did not arrive on the justices’ doorstep after months of political turmoil over how the courts should resolve these cases. And during arguments Tuesday, a majority of the justices appeared to treat Maine Community as what it is — a difficult dispute about how the government makes promises and whether it is required to keep them, rather than as an opportunity to retreat into partisan camps.

Maine Community involves about $12 billion in payments owed to health insurers under a program known as “risk corridors.” Obamacare’s risk corridors program sought to encourage insurers to enter an uncertain new market by agreeing to reimburse a portion of their losses if the insurance company set premiums too low.

After many insurers agreed to sell plans on the Obamacare marketplace, Congress enacted a provision in an appropriations bill — a provision known as a “rider” — seeking to prevent the government from making most of the payments under the risk corridor program. The question in Maine Community is whether the government is still obligated by the Affordable Care Act’s original promise to make these payments, or whether the rider effectively ended the requirement.

A bipartisan mix of justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Justice Samuel Alito, all had difficult questions for Paul Clement, the lawyer representing the insurers. Ginsburg, in particular, asked whether Obamacare’s language, which provides that the government “shall pay” its obligations under the risk corridor program, also permits the insurance companies to sue the government if the money is not paid.

Yet only Alito appeared to be a certain vote against the insurers. By the end of arguments, six justices — Roberts and Ginsburg, plus Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh — all appeared likely to rule in favor of the insurers. Neither Justice Clarence Thomas nor Justice Neil Gorsuch spoke up during the session.

more...

https://www.vox.com/2019/12/10/21004821/obamacare-supreme-court-risk-corridors-maine-community?fbclid=IwAR1v6dDGVhYf9UIlRMvt4W0hLn1jLLGIczn1BcdYisNv3sbdPh5X3SXibfE

[Kaiserguy]

1. No surprise

insurance is big business and the GOP loves to give taxpayer money to big business and the Justices on our side believe that the government has to honor it obligations.

[tavernier]

2. I hope they're not waiting for Thomas to speak up.

He has no vocal chords. Either Scalia or Clarence’s wife were in charge of speaking for him, and when Scalia died Thomas was only able to have an opinion after his wife made her decision. It’s been a slower process.

[BigmanPigman]

3. Thank Dog!

[karynnj]

4. I think that rider was Marco Rubio's sabotage

That provision was something that worked to keep premiums reasonable. After his rider, in those areas premiums skyrocketed.

[House of Roberts]

5. The question I have

is if the insurers do get this money, will they drop premium costs, or just scam the insured?

I remember when this was passed, it was Marco Rubio that called the payments 'bailouts', and opposed them coming out of 'taxpayer money'.

Vox does a crappy job of 'explaining' that the Congress was controlled by Republicans when this passed.

[erronis]

6. "if the insurers do get this money, will they drop premium costs, or just scam the insured?"

That was rhetorical, correct?