Chief Justice John Roberts rewrote the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in order to rescue it from the Constitution. The IRS rewrote the law in order to rescue it from financial oblivion. And the leftist scribes who authored ObamaCare claim none of this illegal, post-legislative tampering really matters. For they contend that what they wrote in the law is not as important as what they really meant!
John Roberts stunned and angered “fellow” conservative justices on the Supreme Court when he deliberately ignored the actual language of the Affordable Care Act in ruling the law Constitutional. For although the law’s authors were careful to avoid any use of the word TAX, Robert’s ruled the individual mandate to be just that, allowing him to find the mandate Constitutional under the congressional power to tax. It was this dishonest interpretation of Congress’ “intent” that has permitted ObamaCare to continue on.
On May 23rd, the IRS finalized a rule making tax credits “…available to participants in federally run health insurance exchanges…” It was through such exchanges that ObamaCare’s authors intended for individuals and business to shop for and acquire health insurance. And the available tax credits were to make that coverage affordable. In this way, the ACA intended to FORCE states into building and fully financing ObamaCare exchanges, permitting Barack and his minions to repeat their claims that the Act would not add $1 to the federal deficit! After all, if states are on the financial hook, Washington will ostensibly spend nothing!
However, according to the language of the Act, such credits may only be offered in state-run exchanges. “Section 1311 of ObamaCare allows tax credits to certain people in state-run exchanges, Section 1321 – the section regulating federally run exchanges – does not.”
Without the tax credits, business and individuals would be asked to drop existing coverage in favor of far more expensive plans. Moreover, “by injecting tax credits into federally run exchanges, the IRS is requiring the Treasury Department to subsidize health insurance purchases in … jurisdictions that ObamaCare, by its terms, does not cover.”
How do ObamaCare supporters respond to these facts? Why, by claiming that “…the 2,700-page law’s language on the powers of federal exchanges clearly did not reflect the intent of Congress.” In short, pay no attention to what we actually SAID in the Act. Listen to and be ruled by what we are saying NOW.
But Case Western Professor of Law Jonathan Adler states that “the law is what is enacted, not what was intended.” He continues: “critics of our position have yet to identify any specific text – or even a contemporaneous statement in the legislative history – that undermines [the law’s] clear language.”
So the left has changed its mind about the authority of federally-implemented exchanges to offer tax credits, principally because elected officials in as many as 2 dozen states—perhaps more later on–want nothing to do with Barack Obama’s namesake effort to acquire the power of life and death over the American people.
There is a distinct possibility this issue will go to court in the future. Unfortunately, leftist judges make it a habit to ignore both the law and the Constitution when the agenda of the left will suffer in a truly honest decision.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.