Illinois Social Media Law, Conservative News, Chicago & National Politics
Vote Trump 2016 !
Trump 2016
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obamacare. Show all posts
Saturday, November 15, 2014
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Friday, October 31, 2014
Federal Judge Rules Against Contraceptive Mandate
We’re at a strange turning point in American culture, exemplified by the growing debate over Obamacare. Not only are many Americans worried that the president’s attempt to federalize medicine will demolish the economy, but there are also intense and rightful fears about what it may do to religious freedom.
The latter concern is the focus of the Becket Fund for Religious Freedom, which has just won a significant ruling against Obamacare’s contraception mandate. A Florida federal judge ruled Tuesday that the latest revisions to the mandate do not sufficiently protect people whose religious beliefs forbid the use of certain contraceptives. As the requirement stands now, employers must pay for birth control drugs as part of their insurance packages, even if those drugs cause chemical abortion.
It’s “time for government to stop going after religious colleges and ministries and start respecting religious liberty,” said Eric Baxter, the senior lawyer for the Becket Fund. The win in Florida came courtesy of a lawsuit brought by Ave Maria University, which was facing millions of dollars in fines for violating the Obamacare requirement. It is only a preliminary injunction, however; a final ruling on the case may take months.
One of the most significant rulings in the area has come from the Supreme Court, when they decided this summer that a “closely held” for-profit business could opt out of the contraception requirement if it conflicted with their religious beliefs. Though it provided a hint to the direction of future litigation, the ruling was too narrow to effect widespread change.
Thursday, October 09, 2014
ObamaCare Website Testing Shrouded in Secrecy; Nets Ignore
By Ken Shepherd | October 8, 2014 | 8:37 PM EDT
"The new HealthCare.gov is set to open for broad testing by insurers on Tuesday, but they’re not going to be publicly talking—or tweeting—about it," Wall Street Journal reporter Anna Wilde Mathews noted in a story filed shortly before 9 p.m. Eastern Tuesday, adding that the Journal learned that the federal "Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services emailed insurers that it would require all testers to acknowledge the confidentiality of this process to access the testing environment.'"
Wilde Mathews noted that the Obama administration made no such stipulation last year during testing for the federal ObamaCare portal and added that the confidentiality requirement is pretty broad:
The new confidentiality agreement won’t just cover the industry data that will be included in the marketplace’s testing environment. It also includes “results of this testing exercise and any information describing or otherwise relating to the performance or functionality” of HealthCare.gov.
Essentially we have another instance of the Obama administration shutting down an avenue where potentially bad news involving more ObamaCare snafus can seep out into the public domain prior to the November 4 midterm elections. Given the high stakes of the midterms and the Obama administration's penchant for restricting press access, one might think the media would be up in arms, but alas, they aren't.
Saturday, August 09, 2014
Friday, August 01, 2014
Biden, Democrats Do a Throwback Thursday for Healthcare
IMAGE: @VP
Top Democrats used an unusual social media strategy to convince Millennials to sign up for health insurance Thursday — one led by Vice President Joe Biden.
Biden posted a nostalgic #tbt image of himself at 26 and shared his thoughts on button-down shirts:
The message? Under the Affordable Care Act, young people stay on their parents' health insurance plans until the age of 26. So if you were born in 1988, it's time to think about getting your own plan
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Federal Appeals Courts Divide Over Obamacare Subsidies—and Over “Textualism”
By Michael Dorf
Last week, in Halbig v. Burwell, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) lacked the statutory authority to provide health insurance subsidies for the millions of Americans who are subject to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) minimum coverage provision but live in states that did not establish their own health insurance “exchanges.” While professing regret over the “significant consequences” of their ruling “for the millions of individuals” who will lose their health insurance if the decision is ultimately upheld by the full D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court, the court blamed Congress for having tied its hands.
Yet on the very same day, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reached the exact opposite conclusion in King v. Burwell. Where the D.C. Circuit saw clear statutory language barring the federal subsidies, the Fourth Circuit saw ambiguity—and thus deferred to the IRS pursuant to the cardinal rule of administrative law permitting an agency reasonable room to fill in statutory gaps.
- See more at: http://verdict.justia.com/2014/07/28/federal-appeals-courts-divide-obamacare-subsidies-textualism?utm_source=Justia+Law&utm_campaign=6d9393c180-summary_newsletters_jurisdictions&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_92aabbfa32-6d9393c180-406021093#sthash.MVd9YjxA.dpuf
Last week, in Halbig v. Burwell, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) lacked the statutory authority to provide health insurance subsidies for the millions of Americans who are subject to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) minimum coverage provision but live in states that did not establish their own health insurance “exchanges.” While professing regret over the “significant consequences” of their ruling “for the millions of individuals” who will lose their health insurance if the decision is ultimately upheld by the full D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court, the court blamed Congress for having tied its hands.Yet on the very same day, a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reached the exact opposite conclusion in King v. Burwell. Where the D.C. Circuit saw clear statutory language barring the federal subsidies, the Fourth Circuit saw ambiguity—and thus deferred to the IRS pursuant to the cardinal rule of administrative law permitting an agency reasonable room to fill in statutory gaps.
Monday, July 28, 2014
Federal Appeals Courts Divide Over Obamacare Subsidies—and Over “Textualism”
MICHAEL C. DORF
Last week, in Halbig v. Burwell, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) lacked the statutory authority to provide health insurance subsidies for the millions of Americans who are subject to the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) minimum coverage provision but live in states that did not establish their own health insurance “exchanges.” While professing regret over the “significant consequences” of their ruling “for the millions of individuals” who will lose their health insurance if the decision is ultimately upheld by the full D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court, the court blamed Congress for having tied its hands.
- See more at: http://verdict.justia.com/2014/07/28/federal-appeals-courts-divide-obamacare-subsidies-textualism#sthash.fqaeCAcu.dpuf
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Second Federal Court Rushes To Save Obamacare From Devastating Ruling
A second federal court ruled Tuesday that Obamacare subsidies in federal exchanges are in fact legal, just hours after the D.C. Circuit Court ruled just the opposite.
While the Affordable Care Act statute reads that premium tax credit subsidies are available only to those exchanges “established by the state,” the Internal Revenue Service issued a rule that allowed it to issue subsidies to federally-run exchange states as well as state-run exchanges.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the IRS action to hand out subsidies in the federal exchange doesn’t violate the law; the U.S. District Court of Appeals ruled earlier in the day that the federal exchange subsidies are illegal. (RELATED: Federal Court Takes Down Obamacare: Subsidies In Federal Exchange Are Illegal)
The D.C. appeals court found the subsidies to federal exchange customers illegal largely based on the letter of the law. The Fourth Circuit, instead said the language was “ambiguous” and deferred to the administration’s “discretion,” while also giving weight to their interpretation of Congress’s intent — and to their feeling that Obamacare subsidies are “desperately-needed.”
TweetMe Please
White House To Ignore Court Ruling, Keep Handing Out Obamacare Subsidies
The Obama administration
will continue handing out Obamacare subsidies to federal exchange customers despite a federal court’s ruling Tuesday that the subsidies are illegal.
will continue handing out Obamacare subsidies to federal exchange customers despite a federal court’s ruling Tuesday that the subsidies are illegal.
A D.C. Court of Appeals panel ruled Tuesday morning that customers in the 36 states that didn’t establish their own exchange and use HealthCare.gov instead cannot be given premium tax credits, according to the text of the Affordable Care Act itself. (RELATED: Federal Court Takes Down Obamacare: Subsidies In Federal Exchange Are Illegal)
Care Act itself. (RELATED: Federal Court Takes Down Obamacare: Subsidies In Federal Exchange Are Illegal)
But the White House said in response that it will continue handing out the billions of taxpayer dollars in subsidies. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said that while the case continues to be battled out in the courts, the administration will continue to dole out billions in tax credits to federally-run exchange customers.
TweetMe Please
Fed appeals court panel says most Obamacare subsidies illegal
Dan Mangan | @_DanMangan
In a potentially crippling blow to Obamacare, a federal appeals court panel declared Tuesday that government subsidies worth billions of dollars that helped 4.7 million people buy insurance on HealthCare.gov are illegal.
The 2-1 ruling said such subsidies can be granted only to people who bought insurance in an Obamacare exchange run by an individual state or the District of Columbia—not on the federally run exchange HealthCare.gov. The ruling relied on a close reading of the Affordable Care Act.
"Section 36B plainly makes subsidies available in the Exchanges established by states," wrote Senior Circuit Judge Raymond Randolph in his majority opinion, where he was joined by Judge Thomas Griffith.
Getty Images
People wait in line to see an agent from Sunshine Life and Health Advisors as the Affordable Care Act website is reading, 'HealthCare.gov has a lot of visitors right now!' at a store setup in the Mall of Americas on March 31, 2014 in Miami, Florida.
Friday, July 11, 2014
Boehner Will Sue Obama Over Obamacare Employer Mandate
Speaker of the House John Boehner announced Thursday that he’ll file a lawsuit against President Barack Obama for breaking the law in his implementation of Obamacare’s employer mandate.
Boehner revealed last week that House Republicans planned to sue the president for abuse of executive power, but failed to specify in what department, leaving many to speculate that the case would center around the heath care law’s piecemeal implementation or executive action on immigration. The House released a draft resolution authorizing the lawsuit Thursday evening.
“In 2013, the president changed the health care law without a vote of Congress, effectively creating his own law by literally waiving the employer mandate and the penalties for failing to comply with it,” Boehner said Thursday. “That’s not the way our system of government was designed to work. No president should have the power to make laws on his or her own.”
TweetMe Please
Speaker of the House John Boehner announced Thursday that he’ll file a lawsuit against President Barack Obama for breaking the law in his implementation of Obamacare’s employer mandate....
Wednesday, July 09, 2014
How the Affordable Care Act is Poised to Ruin America’s Economy
If you’re fortunate enough to have health insurance provided by your employer, you may have regarded all the news and strife over ObamaCare with little more than theoretical interest. After all, the Affordable Care Act was meant to insure Americans who would be otherwise uninsured, right? It doesn’t have anything to do with you.
Well, you may want to think again.
Prominent Republicans have called ObamaCare a job-killer, and that’s only one of the reasons this law is so bad for the country. With some of the nation’s top retailers expected to cut hours for their part-time employees, it won’t be long before we see tangible, disastrous ripples emanating from the tsunami that is Obama’s prized legacy. This is a law poised to have extraordinarily dire consequences for the nation’s economy. Here are just some of the ways you can expect to see ObamaCare hurt hard-working Americans.
Increased Identity Theft
- See more at: http://www.leanrightamerica.org/finance/how-the-affordable-care-act-is-poised-to-ruin-americas-economy/#sthash.ltsHPVnC.dpuf
Tuesday, July 01, 2014
Supreme Court rules on Hobby Lobby vs. Obamacare
BOB UNRUH
The U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision Monday ruled that a “closely held” for-profit business can opt out of Obamacare’s controversial contraception requirement based on religious objections.
The case brought by Hobby Lobby, an Oklahoma-based arts and crafts chain with about 13,000 employees, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a Pennsylvania cabinet maker, challenged the Affordable Health Care Act requirement that employees provide free contraception coverage, including abortion-inducing drugs.
Hobby Lobby’s argument was based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA, which protects the individual beliefs of citizens.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/supreme-court-rules-in-hobby-lobby-vs-obamacare/#WXidkHoPdqB6DLEk.99Saturday, June 28, 2014
VIDEO - Dem Accuses Obamacare Opponents Of Being Racist - showing just how DUMB THEY ARE!
“That you would say that opposition to Obamacare necessarily must stream from some inherent racism? Very offensive. Listen, my opposition to health care has nothing to do with the race of President Obama. It is the greatest assault on our freedom in my lifetime.”
Image theblaze.com
Monday, June 23, 2014
Federal Judge Grants Catholic Diocese Obamacare Injunction
Saranac Hale Spencer, The Legal Intelligencer
A suburban Pittsburgh Catholic diocese has gotten a preliminary injunction from the contraceptive mandate of Obamacare.
U.S. District Judge Arthur J. Schwab of the Western District of Pennsylvania on Friday granted the motion for an expedited preliminary injunction filed by the Rev. Lawrence E. Brandt, bishop for the Greensburg diocese.
Because of the fast-approaching renewal date for the diocese's health care plan, the "plaintiffs need to decide by June 30, or July 1, 2014, whether to sign the self-certification form, thereby violating their sincerely-held religious beliefs," Schwab said, referring to the form that the bishop would have to fill out in order to comply with the Affordable Care Act.
Read more: http://www.thelegalintelligencer.com/id=1202660339342/Federal-Judge-Grants-Catholic-Diocese-Obamacare-Injunction#ixzz35TwlzsWd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)