Obama’s health care law waivers are illegal

Senator, professor say ‘Obamacare’ violates the law
Tom Jackson
Mar 30, 2014
President Barack Obama’s repeated changes in provisions of the Affordable Care Act are plainly illegal and violate the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers, U.S. Sen. Rob Portman asserts.

It’s clear changes in the law are supposed to be made by lawmakers in Congress, not presidential decree, the Ohio Republican told reporters in a phone call Thursday.

Writing for the Vokokh Conspiracy, a legal blog hosted by the Washington Post newspaper, Case Western Reserve University professor Jonathan Adler has been arguing that while the health care law does give the Obama administration discretion in certain matters, some of the changes the administration has made violate the law.

In a Feb. 11 blog post, “Another day, another illegal Obamacare delay,” Adler asserted the White House’s delays in a provision requiring companies to buy insurance for their employees, the “employer mandate” clearly is illegal.

“The language of the statute is clear, and it is well established that when Congress enacts explicit deadlines into federal statutes, without also providing authority to waive or delay such deadlines, federal agencies are obligated to stay on schedule. So, for instance, federal courts routinely force the Environmental Protection Agency to act when it misses deadlines and environmentalist groups file suit” Adler wrote.

Portman was asked about the matter two days after yet another change was announced.

The White House said the end-of-March deadline for buying health insurance on healthcare.gov would not apply to people who tried to buy insurance but failed to navigate the website. They would get another two weeks.

“It’s unbelievable to me Congress would pass a law and the administration would choose not to follow it” Portman said.

If the Obama administration wants to make changes in the law, it should ask Congress to make the changes, Portman said.

Ohio’s other senator, Democrat Sherrod Brown, did not answer directly when asked what he thought of the administration’s changes.

During his own conference call with Ohio reporters Wednesday, Brown was asked for his opinion on the waivers and whether he worries a Republican president elected in 2016 might erode Obamacare by making his own changes.

Brown answered the second part of the question, saying he expects the law to be so popular and well-established by 2017, no president would dare change it.

“No Republican president is going to take away benefits from by then tens of millions of Americans,” Brown said.

Asked in a followup what he thinks of Obama’s changes, Brown said: “I have a mixed opinion of all that, but it doesn’t really matter”

Comments

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Thank you, your rationale helped me stop chuckling from such extentions of the cat's proof such as:

How do I know the sky is purple? Because everyone else says it's blue!

Well, how can one argue against such logic and reason, let alone keen observation of science? If it wasn't for you, Sam, I may have been convinced of cat's points and conceded the point that the ACA is actually working.

coasterfan

It is well documented that Obama has used Executive Action less often than other presidents during the past 30+ years. That alone is an eye-opener, but when you throw in the obvious fact that the current Congress is far more intransigent than any Congress in U.S. history, I don't think anyone should blame Obama for simply doing what all of his predecessors had done....

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Curious. Should I get less of a sentence for shooting a gun once and killing someone as opposed to fifty times at a paper target in a range? Or does it matter more what I do with the bullet than the number of times I fire them?

the office cat

President doesn't have the power?
Constitution gives the president war powers to do what is necessary to protect the protectors and the rest of the country.
AHCA is providing help for military and veterans and families that Congress - and rank Portman, Latta, and Jordan among them - have refused to do.

Darwin's choice

Do you mean like this? More trampling from your savior.....

http://www.americasfreedomfighte...

coasterfan

Actually, he's your savior, too. Unless you're one of the clueless minority who actually thinks America is worse off in 2014 than it was in 2007-2008.

Darwin's choice

Troll! How about that epic failure today? obamacare/failure!

KnuckleDragger

Actually you are in the clueless minority, since only 41% of Americans now approve of the job Obama is doing. Since you continue to hold on to the rails of a sinking ship, let us know how it looks on the bottom.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

I think you and I need to chat about the Constitution sometime. Please stop by at your convenience.

The tenuous reach you attempted to make is, in my opinion, absurd. If we continue your logic then we have no need whatsoever for either branch of Congress nor the Supreme Court. The President is king and he can do whatever he wants because he controls the military.

Interestingly enough, there are many examples of such a government at work in today's world! But, don't let that admission raise your spirits just yet. We need only look at nations such as North Korea or your friendly, local junta around the world to see just how awesome a civil society is created by such a dictatorship.

Darwin's choice

Thank's, but I'll decline your offer. I couldn't listen to a 400,000 word diatribe of your view of Law, and the Constitution. You have a tremendous gift of B.S., you should be a politician. Although I tend to just hit and run, your wind-baggery sometimes is epic, and in my opinion, a waste of time. Keep posting though, keeping the failures in charge at bay is amusing, and time killing, and we seem to have a common dislike.....

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

My offer wasn't to you. Sometimes the tabbing on this site messes up and people seem to reply to those they aren't. But my reply was directed at office cat, not you. However, it is refreshing to know how you feel about me. Perhaps I should specifically include names in the future but the context of my reply has nothing to do with what you posted and everything to do with what cat did.

airborneforever

I don't see how the ahca is helping military. Our healthcare was already free for active duty and the reserve guard rates and coverages were reasonable. Now the active duty coverages have dropped and the reserve guard premiums have went up with higher deductibles. Thanks for that help!

coasterfan

Glad you mentioned the military. Republicans in Congress were the ones who (again!) recently voted to cut funding to veterans. The events you mentioned had everything to do with the GOP and not Obamacare.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

Just checking since your finger is on the pulse of your party, no Democrats voted for it too, right? I want the inside scoop so give it to me straight. You're my go-to-guy about this since I don't get the same resources you must receive.

KnuckleDragger

Coaster is just pulling from his backside again. Dems did in fact vote for this in concert with Repubs. Let me remind you that Obama had no problem signing it either. Don't bother asking Coasternut anything pertaining to the military, he has never served. I would be happy to answer any questions you have since I am a military retiree and in my retirement am active in pushing retiree issues.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

I will be happy to bring stuff like that up in the future, thank you! I have active and retired military members in my store community and I enjoy listening to their stories, experiences, etc.

anthras

Re:"AHCA is providing help for military and veterans and families that Congress "

Has there been a change why do veterans need ACH to receive medical care?
I do have some personal friends that go to the VA hospital in Cleveland for their free medical care. I paid $3,000 for my hearing aids and I have a personal friend that went to the VA and it cost him $0.

EdO's

Just say no.

Darwin's choice

Here's one for you cat....

... We as a nation can survive an Obama administration... or any one elected official.... but what we can not survive as a nation is the stupidity of the electorate that would vote for someone as inexperienced & unqualified for the job as the likes of Obama..

Doesn't matter where the quote came from....but you keep policing while being an idiot.

It's on the internet....it must be true...Bonjour!

The Big Dog's back

Typical right wingnut attitude, "Everybody is stupid but me".

Darwin's choice

Nope, I know that you're incredibly stupid, you prove it to all daily!

coasterfan

Oh, I know exactly what you mean, Darwin. I can't believe that American's voted for George W. Bush in 2000, given the fact that he was a stunningly unqualified candidate of below average intelligence. Of course, Republicans actually thought a geography-challenged hockey mom, Herman Cain, Donald Trump and Michelle Bachmann were viable candidates.

Clearly, you and your kind truly know what a quality "experienced" candidate looks like. Rolls eyes....

News flash: Obama has been in office for 5+ years, so by definition, he is no longer "inexperienced".

Darwin's choice

Fool, he's failed at every turn in his "first ever" job. Your constant cheerleading for this failure shows your intelligence, teacher?! I pity all who had to endure you're stupidity. I'd like to see the failure results of your students. I'll bet most are incarcerated.

So,fool, how is that sign up number today? Let's hear you trumpeting how the "experienced" one has pulled something out of his azz, or your's.

KnuckleDragger

More BS pulled from your backside? Bush's IQ is listed as 125 which is not below average and about 50 points higher than yours. Obama's approval ranking is tanking. How's it feel to go down with the ship?

The Big Dog's back

You keep mentioning polls and approval ratings. Obama was behind in the polls in 2012. When people actually voted in November of 2012, they overwhelmingly voted for Obama. Another right wingnut myth flushed down the toilet.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

2008 Myth
Popular Vote:69,498,516
Popular Percentage: 52.93%
Electoral Percentage: 67.84%

2012 Myth
Popular Vote: 65,915,796
Popular Percentage: 51.06%
Electoral Percentage: 61.71%

He beat Romney alright because Romney was a poor choice, but even compared to prior years his performance was hardly "overwhelming" when he lost total votes and percentages compared to four years prior. Why did four million less people vote for him? I won't contend our current President won, but I will contend that this was an "overwhelming" win or some kind of mandate considering who his main opponent was.

The Big Dog's back

Oh sappy, sappy.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

I'm here, what do you need?

grumpy

Quote from the article:

"Brown answered the second part of the question, saying he expects the law to be so popular and well-established by 2017, no president would dare change it."

Probem with that statement is that several of the waivers or delays of parts of obamaScare that affect many folks negatively are due to go into effect then... more folks will dislike those things.

Things like staying on your parents policy, portability, pre-existing conditions and a few others will survive, after 2017, but many other will be voted out in Congress and signed by whom ever will be elected President, no matter which party it is.... most folks are now finding out what is in the bill now that is is law " we have to pass the bill so we can see what is in the bill" and don't like some, if not many or even most pieces that are in it. Those parts will be dropped out of it... no matter the party of the next President. Hopefully they will add being able to buy policies across state lines which is NOT part of the law.. I mean tax as it was ruled a tax by SCOTUS... not a law.

The Big Dog's back

So if it falls under the tax, it's not against the Constitution.

Pages