• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge denies emergency request to force Trump administration to resume paying Obamacare insurers

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,343
Reaction score
82,727
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
FULL TITLE: Judge denies emergency request to force Trump administration to resume paying Obamacare insurers reimbursements


Dan Mangan
OCTOBER 25, 2017

104768964-RTS1G855r.530x298.jpg


A federal judge Wednesday rejected a request that he order the Trump administration to immediately resume paying Obamacare insurers key subsidies that the government cut off in recent days. Judge Vince Chhabria's decision came after a coalition of more than a dozen states last week asked for an emergency order blocking the administration's move to cease paying the insurers. Chhabria denied that bid two days after holding a hearing in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and hearing arguments from lawyers for the states and for the Trump administration. However, the case by the states will continue in that court. And it could ultimately lead to restoration of the so-called cost-sharing reduction payments. The coalition of 18 states and the District of Columbia that sued the Trump administration in an effort to restore the payments has argued that the Affordable Care Act itself authorizes the payments to be made by the government.

Many insurers have already raised their premium prices for Obamacare plans in 2018 significantly higher than they otherwise would have because of Trump's threats to end the payments. In August, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that premium prices of individual health plans would be 25 percent higher than they otherwise would have been by 2020 if the payments were cut off. The premium hikes would seek to make up for the loss of the reimbursements, while at the same time insurers are required by law to continue offering discounts to customers.At the same time, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators is pushing a bill that would restore the payments to insurers. Most Obamacare customers, by having low or moderate incomes, get subsidies from the government that reduce the cost of their premiums. And the value of those subsidies rises as premiums rise. In fact, the CBO has estimated that the federal government will actually add $194 billion to the federal deficit from the extra premium subsidies it will have to pay due to the cutoff of the CSR reimbursements to insurers.

Trumps order results in monthly premium rate hikes in most states for healthcare plans and an additional $194 billion added to the federal deficit. Trumpcare is here folks. Ironically, the hardest hit states (wowza) will be all of the red southern states that voted for Trump in 2016. Premium rates in Mississippi for example, will now jump 45% above what was originally projected by healthcare insurers due to the high number of CSR subsidized patients in this state. In other words, the government subsidized in Mississippi won't pay higher premiums, but everyone else in Mississippi will pay 45% in higher healthcare premiums to make up for the CSR funding shortfall in the state.
 
Honestly it's not so bad. The inadvertent side effect of Trump's action is that lots more subsidy money is about to get pumped into the exchanges, making insurance substantially cheaper for lots of people. Perversely, this is a backdoor way of making the ACA's subsidy structure more generous.

An example:

DNAsRDXUIAAHKlW.jpg
 
FULL TITLE: Judge denies emergency request to force Trump administration to resume paying Obamacare insurers reimbursements




Trumps order results in monthly premium rate hikes in most states for healthcare plans and an additional $194 billion added to the federal deficit. Trumpcare is here folks. Ironically, the hardest hit states (wowza) will be all of the red southern states that voted for Trump in 2016. Premium rates in Mississippi for example, will now jump 45% above what was originally projected by healthcare insurers due to the high number of CSR subsidized patients in this state. In other words, the government subsidized in Mississippi won't pay higher premiums, but everyone else in Mississippi will pay 45% in higher healthcare premiums to make up for the CSR funding shortfall in the state.

Obama shouldn't have issued an unconstitutional executive order.
 
Will be interesting:
Yes but the great thing is: this will be quickly noticed by millions of Americans. And it will be directly traced to his desk, his pen. He's busy crowing that he singularly overturned Obamacare...and just wait....

However I'm going to start a forum betting pool: who will Trump and the Trump followers *actually* blame? A few options: Congress, the insurance companies, the states.

My bet: the states "not properly disbursing the funds."
 
Honestly it's not so bad. The inadvertent side effect of Trump's action is that lots more subsidy money is about to get pumped into the exchanges, making insurance substantially cheaper for lots of people. Perversely, this is a backdoor way of making the ACA's subsidy structure more generous.

An example:

DNAsRDXUIAAHKlW.jpg


From what I have read costing approx 200 B in fed costs over 10 years.
I may be in error- only did a quick read
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...r-alexander-got-what-no-other-republican-has/

The CBO previously estimated that the federal government would pay $196 billion more over 10 years if the CSR payments were cut off. According to Loren Adler, associate director at the Brookings Institutions Center for Health Policy, since Alexander-Murray appropriates the CSR payments through 2019, including Trump’s changes to the baseline would result in an additional $10 billion in savings.

CBO has also told us that if CSRs are not paid, premiums in 2018 will go up an average of 20%, the federal debt will increase by $194 billion over ten years, due to the extra cost of subsidies to pay the higher premiums, and up to 16 million Americans may live in counties where they are not able to buy any insurance in the individual market.
 
FULL TITLE: Judge denies emergency request to force Trump administration to resume paying Obamacare insurers reimbursements




Trumps order results in monthly premium rate hikes in most states for healthcare plans and an additional $194 billion added to the federal deficit. Trumpcare is here folks. Ironically, the hardest hit states (wowza) will be all of the red southern states that voted for Trump in 2016. Premium rates in Mississippi for example, will now jump 45% above what was originally projected by healthcare insurers due to the high number of CSR subsidized patients in this state. In other words, the government subsidized in Mississippi won't pay higher premiums, but everyone else in Mississippi will pay 45% in higher healthcare premiums to make up for the CSR funding shortfall in the state.

I can’t imagine a judge forcing him to break the law. Obama didn’t care.
 
Judges are starting to understand that anything that they do in taking sides in Americas Civil War must be beyond reproach, and the less often they need to do it the better.

I think I just saw remarks the other week from CJ SCOTUS on this.
 
FULL TITLE: Judge denies emergency request to force Trump administration to resume paying Obamacare insurers reimbursements




Trumps order results in monthly premium rate hikes in most states for healthcare plans and an additional $194 billion added to the federal deficit. Trumpcare is here folks. Ironically, the hardest hit states (wowza) will be all of the red southern states that voted for Trump in 2016. Premium rates in Mississippi for example, will now jump 45% above what was originally projected by healthcare insurers due to the high number of CSR subsidized patients in this state. In other words, the government subsidized in Mississippi won't pay higher premiums, but everyone else in Mississippi will pay 45% in higher healthcare premiums to make up for the CSR funding shortfall in the state.

Um, yeah no. This is what happens to Obama care when the evil RICH insurance companies no longer get unconstitutional taxpayer bailouts. No amount of clicking your heels together will make this "Trump care".
 
Um, yeah no. This is what happens to Obama care when the evil RICH insurance companies no longer get unconstitutional taxpayer bailouts.

More taxpayer money flows to insurers because of this action, not less.
 
The federal court for the DC district ruled those payments unlawful and unconstitutional last year, and in fact entered an injunction against paying them (though stayed the injunction pending appeal):

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/HofR-challenge-to-ACA-DCt-5-12-16.pdf

This case involves two sections of the Affordable Care Act: 1401 and 1402.
Section 1401 provides tax credits to make insurance premiums more affordable, while Section
1402 reduces deductibles, co-pays, and other means of “cost sharing” by insurers. Section 1401
was funded by adding it to a preexisting list of permanently-appropriated tax credits and refunds.
Section 1402 was not added to that list. The question is whether Section 1402 can nonetheless
be funded through the same, permanent appropriation. It cannot.
 
More taxpayer money flows to insurers because of this action, not less.

Where are they diverting the taxpayer $ from? Or what taxes are being added?

Has that been specified? In other words, how are they paying for it?
 
Where are they diverting the taxpayer $ from? Or what taxes are being added?

The money isn't consciously diverted from anywhere, funds for premium tax credits are permanently appropriated to Treasury by the ACA. Those premium tax credits are designed to be price-linked, meaning if premiums abruptly rise for some reason (ahem, Trump), the subsidies go up with them. This is all on auto-pilot.

In this case, some clever decisions by states are ensuring that premiums for virtually all plans are going to get cheaper on net for subsidized folks next year.

Of course, the ACA also raised some new tax revenue to make sure more money was coming into Treasury in conjunction with the implementation of the ACA.
 
The money isn't consciously diverted from anywhere, funds for premium tax credits are permanently appropriated to Treasury by the ACA. Those premium tax credits are designed to be price-linked, meaning if premiums abruptly rise for some reason (ahem, Trump), the subsidies go up with them. This is all on auto-pilot.

In this case, some clever decisions by states are ensuring that premiums for virtually all plans are going to get cheaper on net for subsidized folks next year.

Of course, the ACA also raised some new tax revenue to make sure more money was coming into Treasury in conjunction with the implementation of the ACA.

Well "taxes" means they're getting the $ from either individuals or corporations (also now "people" :roll: ) or ? Where are they "permanently appropriating" it from?
 
Well "taxes" means they're getting the $ from either individuals or corporations (also now "people" :roll: ) or ?

Was that not clear from "More taxpayer money flows to insurers because of this action, not less"?
 
Was that not clear from "More taxpayer money flows to insurers because of this action, not less"?

Yes from taxpayers. THat's what I wrote. But I want to know specifically what taxes.
 
...that's not how taxes work.

Er, tax money is indeed appropriated and disbursed. So the "permanently appropriated" funds you spoke of are an example. I guess I'd like to know what % of a taxpayer's taxes, the scale, go to the various moving parts here.

You dont have to provide the answer, I'm sure it's available.
 
Um, yeah no. This is what happens to Obama care when the evil RICH insurance companies no longer get unconstitutional taxpayer bailouts. No amount of clicking your heels together will make this "Trump care".

7 or 8 years of GOP working on improving on Obamacare and here you are. This is Trumpcare, a fustercluck of fingerpointers.
 
Obama shouldn't have issued an unconstitutional executive order.

Indeed.

A federal court rules that the Obama EO issuing the direction for the administration to make these payments was ruled unconstitutional.

Trump complies with the ruling, complies with the law, and he's a bad guy? Part of a larger problem?
 
Um, yeah no. This is what happens to Obama care when the evil RICH insurance companies no longer get unconstitutional taxpayer bailouts. No amount of clicking your heels together will make this "Trump care".
Dems are desperate to get their names off the disaster they made.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom