Obamacare: Excluding Federal exchanges from granting subsidies was NOT a mistake
Since the Halbig case last week ruled that the Obamacare law does not allow states with Federally run exchanges to grant subsidies the Democrats have been running around saying this provision was a mistake and Federal exchanges were also supposed to be giving out subsidies. It was a simple wording error so we are told and of course because nobody read the bill before it was passed I thought that was likely the case–still, the law must be changed if Federal exchanges are to be allowed to hand out subsidies. (Providing of course that this ruling holds up and is not overturned in time.)
But here is a video I found over at The Right Scoop and it shows a man considered to be one of the Obamacare architects, Jonathan Gruber, giving a talk in 2012 where he admits the law only allows states to grant subsidies. And it was done for a reason…
There you have it in his own words; this was done intentionally in order to persuade the states to set up their own exchanges. Now that they have been caught the story is changing, and if you check out the link I provided above you will see that Jonathan Gruber is one of the people who is now claiming this was just a typo.
Trackbacks
- Obamacare: Excluding Federal exchanges from granting subsidies was NOT a mistake
- Obamacare: The Supreme Court will hear the case about Federal subsidies | America's Watchtower
- Obamacare: The Supreme Court will hear the case about Federal subsidies | SilentSoldier
- Obamacare architect: Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage due to the “stupidity of the American voter” | America's Watchtower
- Obamacare architect apologizes for calling the American voters stupid, but lies about typos in the law | America's Watchtower
- Video: Obamacare architect apologizes for CALLING AMERICAN VOTERS STUPID, but LIES about typos in the law | SilentSoldier
America's Watchtower 
Reblogged this on Brittius.
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLike
You’re welcome.
LikeLike
In the Obama run schoolyard anything he doesn’t like is a do-over.
LikeLike
And they will get away with it. Every time you almost tag them they reach the gools.
LikeLike
Interesting – I saw this after posting my comments on your other post. Nevertheless, I’ve got my doubts about whether it’s constitutional to deny citizens a benefit based on the actions of their state governments.
I don’t really know how well Gruber’s message was communicated to the states – that is, of the states that declined to establish their own exchanges, did any take seriously the idea that their citizens who availed themselves of the federal exchange wouldn’t have access to the generous subsidies given to citizens of states that did create exchanges? If they did, I’d think that would be especially damaging in terms of electoral politics – i.e., states acting to increase costs for their citizens.
If the subsidies in the federal exchange states ARE overturned, I think that also might lead to repercussions at the ballot box.
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
Technically the states acted within the law so I don’t know how this will play out in regards to residents of these states being denied benefits.
I also wonder if the states realized this was the case because I doubt the governors read the law but that is not an excuse. If they did know this was going to happen it could backfire on them as people realize they are losing what they thought they had.
LikeLike
Steve,
Gruber said it was a “typo” today. This could be a timely repost
LikeLiked by 1 person
Got a post on that coming soon.
LikeLike