The reason 35 states chose not to build a local ObamaCare exchange – even though the federal government made billions of dollars available to do so – is pretty simple: After an initial burst of funding the a state must foot the bill to maintain it.
That’s turning out to be a very costly proposition.
“The case of Oregon is the most extreme,” explains an editorial in the Washington Examiner. “After spending $200 million to develop its own health insurance exchange, the Beaver State was forced to abandon it altogether because of pervasive and intractable technical problems.”
It gets worse.
“Tiny Vermont spent roughly $4,000 for every uninsured Vermonter to develop its exchange – more than enough to buy a pre-ObamaCare policy for everyone for an…[more]
If the Supreme Court strikes down an unauthorized IRS rule that gives ObamaCare subsidies to ineligible citizens, the Obama administration thinks it has a way to save them.
Last week the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in King v. Burwell, a Virginia-based challenge to the mechanism that makes “The Affordable Care Act” affordable.
In order to claim that ObamaCare would not increase federal spending beyond federal revenues – i.e., it would be deficit neutral – the drafters of the law made subsidies available to citizens who purchased their health insurance…
"There could be no greater examples of the diversity of the 2016 Republican presidential field than the dueling announcements of Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina Monday morning.Carson, the only black candidate in the race, and Fiorina, the only woman, are also the only two candidates who have never held public office before. Each is working to turn what some would call a gap in their resumes into a strength…[more]