With the Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Care Act only days away, I have tried to play out all the potential ways the Court could rule and what they would mean on a purely political level this election. As best as I can tell any Court decision is likely to be either a political wash for Democrats or a net loser. It is hard to make a case that any of the three most likely court decisions would really help Democrats or Obama this November.
|By: Jon Walker Friday June 22, 2012 9:49 am|
|By: Glenn W. Smith Sunday May 13, 2012 9:30 am|
One of the things I like best about human beings is our persistent incorrigibility. Even when we don’t want to we often escape expert predictions of our behavior. Call it the human uncertainty principle. As soon as you know where we are you lose knowledge about where we’re headed and how fast we’re headed there. Or maybe you’ve guessed where we’re headed but you no longer know where we are.
|By: Jon Walker Wednesday May 9, 2012 10:00 am|
In the Affordable Care Act the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was given the power to review health insurance premium increases, but it wasn’t given the power to actually do anything about unreasonable increases. HHS can only say an increase is “unreasonable,” but it has zero regulatory power to force the companies to change their premiums. Not surprisingly this totally toothless provision is now proving to be mostly worthless.
|By: Jon Walker Thursday March 29, 2012 8:30 am|
David Weigal and Steve Benen, along with many others, chose to criticize Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia for allegedly not knowing what was in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, because Scalia brought up the “Cornhusker Kickback.”
|By: Jon Walker Monday March 26, 2012 7:15 pm|
One of the most important questions the Justices will likely bring up tomorrow in the deliberation about the individual mandate will be: Is health care — or heath insurance — actually unique? There is an argument that the constitutionality of the insurance mandate under the commerce clause hinges on some unique aspects of health care or health insurance. It it unique, and does this link actually matter?
|By: Jon Walker Monday March 26, 2012 4:15 pm|
Pew Research has put together a helpful piece summarizing all the recent polling on the Affordable Care Act compared to polling done right after it was passed in March of 2010. Basically a few polls show it getting slightly more popular since it was signed into the law and a few polls have it losing support.
|By: Jon Walker Monday March 26, 2012 10:45 am|
As the Supreme Court begins hearing oral arguments today about the fate of the Affordable Care Act, it is important to keep in mind that the law remains very unpopular. A CBS New/New Times poll shows only about a third of Americans actually support the law, while nearly half the country disapproves of it. How can Justices not be at least indirectly influenced by popular views?
|By: Jon Walker Friday March 23, 2012 12:05 pm|
Mitt Romney used an op-ed in USA Today to again reaffirm his commitment to completely repealing and replacing ‘ObamaCare’ if elected. This op-ed is directed primarily at conservatives who still question Romney’s commitment to their causes, especially after the latest Etch-A-Sketch by his campaign.
|By: Jon Walker Friday March 16, 2012 6:00 am|
The Congressional Budget Office looked at the potential impact of companies choosing to drop their employee provide health insurance as a result of the Affordable Care Act. According to its analysis, if a large number of companies stop providing health insurance benefits it should cause the ACA on net to decrease the deficit even further.
|By: Jon Walker Monday March 12, 2012 11:10 am|
The one defense of President Obama I’ve found most annoying is the argument that Obama “only” had the largest Democratic majority in Congress in a generation for a short period, so it would be unreasonable to expect too much from him given Republican opposition. The argument ignores reconciliation, which previous administrations had relied on to get legislation through the Senate despite strong opposition from the other party.