Health insurance veteran Bob Laszweski takes a contrarian approach to the Supreme Court upholding Obamacare tax credits in at least 34 states that did not establish their own exchanges. Instead of a loss for Obamacare opponents, Mr. Laszewski believes Republicans were saved from stealing defeat from the jaws of victory in King v. Burwell:
First, as any of us who know the market can appreciate, the Court just saved the Republicans from themselves. They were in no way ready to avoid the crisis that would have engulfed the individual market––half of those people on the exchange who would have lost their subsidies and the other half off-exchange that would have seen 30% to 50% rate increases––on top of the big increases already announced––without a quick fix.
The attempt to scuttle the law through the Supreme Court was ill conceived and Republicans are very lucky it did not happen.
Now Obamacare has to stand on its own going into the 2016 elections and the growing evidence is that won’t be any easier.
I think Laszewski is probably correct- I saw no real evidence that the Republicans were going to do anything other than simply extend the subsidies until after the next election. The collapse of the exchanges due to adverse selection can’t now be blamed on SCOTUS or any court case. If Republicans really want to repeal and/or replace the ACA, they will have to do what I have always pointed out- they have to win enough elections.
Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than smart. I agree with Laszewski. Republicans were lucky this time.
Guaranteed issue without a mandate has in fact collapsed the individual market every time it has been tried since about 1985.
The Michael Cannon crew that pushed the lawsuit must have been figuring that they could reinstate full underwriting and have a federal high risk pool.
It may indeed be good fortune for the GOP that they were not forced to make good on their dreamier plans.
Well, the exchanges are already guaranteed issue without mandate, for all intents and purposes. Republicans dodged the bullet because they were going to get the blame if SCOTUS had ruled otherwise on Thursday.
I have to agree with Yancy. Compared to exchange subsidies and the employer exclusion, how many people were actually motivated to buy insurance because of the individual mandate?
In the previous markets, e.g. NY and other states, there was no subsidy, just the guaranteed issue and community rating.