Does the Administration Dream of ObamaCare Sheep?


Keep dreaming, the flock is scattered.  We’re less than one month away now from the supposed grand opening of the ObamaCare exchanges, and yet 44% of Americans aren’t even sure whether ObamaCare is still a law.

Which begs the question: Is ObamaCare a law?

This 44% shocker from the Kaiser Family Foundation’s August Health Tracking Poll reveals America’s collective “wtf?” when it comes to ObamaCare’s legal status.  Some appear to think that the House’s two symbolic full repeal attempts were actually successful (wishful thinking), others believe it was overturned by Chief Justice John Roberts and company (perhaps they read the advance copies before he went the “tax” route?).  But most (31%) just can’t figure out what the heck is going on with this law.  Can you blame them?

- Is it a law when President Obama spends years telling you that his signature legislation will let you can keep your plan and your doctor if you like them, but you’re now facing the reality of potentially losing both come 2014?

- Would a law designed to keep that promise exempt so-called “grandfathered plans” from only a handful of ObamaCare’s mandates?  Grandfathered plans are still forced to cover children to age 26, eliminate lifetime and annual limits, eliminate preexisting condition exclusions, limit waiting periods to 90 days, pay PCOR and transitional and reinsurance fees, and are subject to the employer mandate and Cadillac plan excise taxes — to name a few.  Sound like the same plan you used to have?

- Would the Framers of the Constitution think it’s a law if nobody read the 2,700 pages before the vote, it was passed by bribing Senators, via a tax bill that unconstitutionally originated in the Senate, using the reconciliation process to avoid the filibuster, and when the only way to know what’s in it was to pass it first?

- Could a law be sold to the American people as reducing premiums by $2,500, when it in fact has the predictable opposite effect for most.

- Are laws passed by fraudulent CBO scoring methods to claim that a massive new entitlement will reduce the deficit?  The updated cost for 2014 - 2023: $1.8 trillion and rising.  Anyone remember the first defunct, then repealed CLASS Act portion of ObamaCare used to cook the books?  Raise your hand if you believe the Cadillac tax will actually be implemented in 2018.

- Do laws allow the Administration to dictate that health plans provide free contraception for women even if it violates the religious conscience of certain schools and employers?  Would a law do so in the face of other laws designed to prohibit such a mandate, such as the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act?

- Would a statute with fixed implementation dates established by Congress be a law if the Administration can unilaterally change those dates at will for political advantage?  Employer Mandate: PPACA § 1513, Effective 1/1/14, Delayed to 1/1/15; Out-of-pocket maximum: PPACA § 1302(c), Effective 1/1/14, Delayed in part to 1/1/15; Notice of Exchange: PPACA § 1512, Effective 3/1/13, Delayed to 10/1/13; Insured group health plan nondiscrimination: PPACA § 1001, Effective 9/23/10, Delayed to ???; Employer automatic enrollment: PPACA § 1511, Effective ???, Delayed to ???.

- Should you call it a law when the Constitution limits Congress to a defined set of enumerated powers, yet Congress passed ObamaCare and the President signed it into law without articulating any coherent Constitutional basis?  Or when the few who made an attempt argued for the now debunked Commerce Clause theory?  (“Individuals are no more ‘activ[e] in the self-insurance market’ when they fail to purchase insurance, than they are active in the ‘rest’ market when doing nothing.” - FN6)

- If Congress and the President insist that the individual mandate penalty is not a tax, but then John Roberts says it is a tax (except for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act, in which case it isn’t), what kind of law is that?

- How about when the statute explicitly, and with no ambiguity, limits ObamaCare exchange subsidies to states that establish an exchange, yet the Administration thinks it can get away with issuing regulations that extend the entitlement to exchanges in the majority of states that have refused?  Does a law force the Oklahoma Attorney General to go to court to defend proper statutory interpretation and prevent the application of the employer mandate in his state?


The Administration has had over three years since the President signed ObamaCare into law to prepare for this final push.  They probably imagined a wonderful culmination of their efforts resulting in Americans eagerly anticipating the chance to sign on for their brand new entitlements.  All with a fleet of navigators excited to assist them.  Instead we have the messy and muddled current state of play — a law so large and unwieldy that even a bloated bureaucracy can’t keep pace, plus an executive who keeps moving the goalposts.  With such a disorganized shepherd, is it any wonder 44% of Americans have walked away from trying to understand this nonsense?

Which raises an important point.  The administration is not a collection of androids.  We are not electric sheep.  We are all humans, and flawed ones at that.  There’s probably no feasible way for the administration to lawfully implement or for us to fully comply with a government takeover of this scale.

The result is that this massive ObamaCare law has devolved into something better described as lawless.  That doesn’t mean it will collapse under itself or fade away.  Entitlements don’t disappear without heroic efforts.  It means we need to take whatever steps we can to get rid of it.  Most importantly for the moment, it means that ObamaCare is not worthy of one more penny of funding.  After all, it’s Matt Kibbe’s 50th birthday wish.

Defund ObamaCare

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.