The most concerning aspect about the Obama administration’s decision to delay the employer mandate is the justification for the delay. The Treasury Department is basically claiming that the reporting system they originally created to try to make the poorly designed mandate work is incredibly burdensome.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday July 3, 2013 3:25 pm|
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday July 3, 2013 10:25 am|
Despite almost fours years of preparation many significant provisions in the Affordable Care Act will not be ready for 2014. The Obama administration’s decision to delay the employer mandate until 2015 now makes it the third major coverage expansion provision that will not go into effect on time.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday July 3, 2013 8:30 am|
Yesterday in a surprise move the Obama administration announced that they were delaying the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate until 2015. This will conventionally put the implementation of the provision off until after the next congressional election. From the Treasury:
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday May 28, 2013 11:10 am|
At least some of the disagreement about how well Obamacare will turn out is actually not the result of individuals having vastly different predictions of what will happen, they simply have different ideas of what should constitute a success.
|By: Jon Walker Monday May 20, 2013 9:25 am|
The bad design of the employer mandate in the Affordable Care Act has led some businesses to look at cutting part-time employee’s work to just under the 30 hour threshold, but that is not the only loophole business could exploit. Because the new law doesn’t apply the same standards to large businesses and self-insured companies they may theoretically avoid the mandate by offering what is basically just insurance in name only. From the Wall Street Journal:
|By: David Dayen Monday June 20, 2011 4:16 pm|
This is pretty much a public relations disaster for McKinsey. They’re clearly trying to claim that their study wasn’t making a prediction about the employer market, when the initial results actually show a strong lean in that direction, particularly the line that “the shift away from employer-provided health insurance will be vastly greater than expected and will make sense for many companies and lower-income workers alike.”
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday August 31, 2010 2:45 pm|
Health care reform has steadily decreased in popularity since its passage as the Kaiser tracking poll shows; the individual mandate is deeply and extremely unpopular. Using the IRS to force Americans to buy a product from one of the most unpopular industries in America is so clearly a terrible idea that Democratic congressional candidates in contested races should think about suing the White House and their leadership for gross political malpractice. (If only some progressive blog had warned them about how unpopular the individual mandate would be without a public option.)
|By: Jon Walker Saturday May 8, 2010 4:30 pm|
Fortune magazine calls the weak employer mandate an “unintended consequence.” That’s nonsense. The logic of this producing a system that encourages companies to drop coverage is clear. If you look at the people who helped President Obama design this law, they all oppose the employer-based system and wanted to eliminate it. The Administration also did not try to get a strong employer mandate. I strongly believe the incentive for a massive dropping of coverage was part of the plan and not a bug.
|By: Jon Walker Tuesday April 13, 2010 11:55 am|
The newly passed health care law is not popular, and Republicans are starting to line up behind a political strategy of calling for its repeal. While true repeal seems like a legislative impossibility, the political strategy might work. When forced to choose between the false duality of this new health care law or no law, a large portion of the American people line up behind repeal. The relatively good news for Democrats is that most Americans don’t like the bill, but would prefer to see it significantly changed instead of repealed. This creates the perfect political environment to push for a better and quicker optional state waiver.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday January 6, 2010 6:36 pm|
A lot of the focus about how to fund health care reform has directed at the two largest taxes in the House and Senate bill. The House bill contains a so-called millionaire’s tax (raises $460 billion) while the Senate bill contains an excise tax on employer-provided health insurance benefits (raises $149 billion). While a lot of attention has been paid to the excise tax, it is the employer mandate which is an even more important funding mechanism.