In December 2013, Politifact, which bills itself as a nonpartisan political fact-checking operation, awarded its lowest honor to President Barack Obama, for "Lie of the Year." On more than 30 occasions, Obama had promised that under the Affordable Care Act, the health law often referred to as Obamacare, no one would lose their health care plan involuntarily. "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan," Obama said. This was simply not true. Obamacare's health insurance exchanges, the government-run online portals for purchasing individual market health insurance, launched in October 2013. In the weeks and months that followed, millions of people received notices that their existing insurance plans would be canceled as a direct result of the law. The exact number of cancellations is difficult to pin down, but Politifact, in making its award, cited a figure of around 4 million. Other contemporaneous estimates suggested the number could be higher. "Boiling down the complicated health care law to a soundbite proved treacherous," Politifact noted years later in a review of "Lie of the Year" award winners. "Obama and his team made matters worse, suggesting the claim had been misunderstood all along." Obama had made the promise in order to ease fears about coverage loss and health care disruption that had helped to doom a health policy overhaul under President Bill Clinton nearly two decades earlier. And he had done so knowing it wasn't true. As the Wall Street Journal reported in November 2013, White House aides questioned the claim in internal discussions. But in the end, they didn't want to complicate what was already a difficult political messaging operation. As the Journal noted at the time: Administration officials worried "that delving into details such as the small number of people who might lose insurance could be confusing and would clutter the president's message." Obama lied. And he did so for political reasons—to sell the public on major legislation on a promise he knew wasn't true. At last night's final presidential debate, Joe Biden, who is both the current Democratic presidential nominee and Obama's former vice president, repeated that lie. "Not one single person with private insurance would lose their insurance under my plan, nor did they under Obamacare," he said. "They did not lose their insurance unless they chose they wanted to go to something else." Biden made this statement as a rejoinder to President Donald Trump's accusation that Biden's health care plan would eliminate private insurance. As Biden noted, that is not true: Biden's proposal would set up a government-run health insurance plan known as a public option that would be sold along with private health insurance options. It might degrade private insurance options, and would likely mean that fewer people are covered via private insurance, especially as time goes on. But unlike the Medicare for All plan proposed by Biden's one-time rival, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.), which would outlaw virtually all private coverage in the space of just four years, Biden's plan would not end private coverage. Trump's attack on Biden's health care plan was false, as it has been before. But Biden's claim about Obamacare was false as well. And given the notoriety of that particular false promise—Politifact's award was announced on CNN and covered in The Washington Post, Politico, NPR, and other major outlets, and Obama even apologized to people whose plans were canceled—Biden should have known better. In many ways, the health care portion of this debate resembled the health care portion of the prior debate: Trump, asked about his repeated and unfulfilled promises to put forth a replacement plan for Obamacare, dodged the question, saying that he had repealed the health law's individual mandate without specifying what he would do instead. Biden laid out his own plan to spend $750 billion expanding Obamacare's subsidies and building a new government-run health insurance plan. But there was one notable difference: This time, Biden said that, under his plan, "Obamacare" would become "Bidencare." Biden didn't just repeat Obama's lie. He put his name on it.
The Democratic nominee's last health care plan led to millions losing their private insurance, and there are sings his new policy will end much the same.
American politics can sometimes feel like if the movie Groundhog Day had a baby with the movie Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: Repeating the same things over and over again while pretending those things never happened in the first place. Joe Biden's mind is the furthest thing from spotless. Though his brain is naturally turning into pudding without the
Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden falsely claimed Thursday that no one lost their private insurance plans because of Obamacare. "The reason why I had such a fight with 20 candidates for the nomination was I support private insurance," he said. "Not one single person with private insurance would lose their insurance under my plan, nor did they under Obamacare. They
CLAIM: Former Vice President Joe Biden said during the presidential debate Thursday night that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) never resulted in Americans losing their health insurance plans. VERDICT: False. Millions of Americans lost their health insurance plan because of Obamacare, which was called the “lie of the year” in 2013. During the presidential debate, Biden said he supports Americans’
President Donald Trump said Thursday that he would like to see the Supreme Court strike down the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, which he would replace with his own health care plan. During an interview with CBS News’ “60 Minutes,” Trump said he will be announcing his “fully developed” health care plan right after the Supreme Court decides on the fate of Obamacare. The Supreme Court is set to hear a case challenging Obamacare in mid-November. “I hope that they end it. It will be so good if they end it because we will come up with a plan,” Trump told CBS News host Lesley Stahl. “It is going to be announced very soon when we see what happens with Obamacare, which is not good,” he continued. “It will be much less expensive than Obamacare, which is a disaster, and it will take care of people with preexisting conditions.” “We have large sections of it already done. And we’ve already come up with plans,” Trump said, without elaborating on the possible changes to the existing health care plan. “We have to see what happens. It’s got a ways to go. We’ll see what happens.” Trump has repeatedly promised to implement a health care plan that he says would be superior to Obamacare. “Obamacare will be replaced with a MUCH better, and FAR cheaper, alternative if it is terminated in the Supreme Court,” he wrote last month on Twitter. “Would be a big WIN for the USA!” Meanwhile, Democrats are worried that Judge Amy Coney Barrett would form a 6-3 anti-Obamacare majority if confirmed to the Supreme Court. According to the Congressional Budget Office, approximately 22 million Americans have gained health coverage under Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion. “What I am concerned about is anyone that President Trump would have appointed was there to undo the Affordable Care Act,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told CNN’s Jake Tapper last month. “That is why he was in such a hurry, so he could have been in place for the oral arguments which begin Nov. 10.” Although she has written critically about certain provisions of the ACA as a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, Barrett told senators at her confirmation hearings that she isn’t particularly “hostile” to Obamacare. “I think that your concern is that because I critiqued the statutory reasoning that I’m hostile to the ACA, and that because I’m hostile to the ACA, I would decide a case a particular way,” Barrett said. “I’m not hostile to the ACA. I’m not hostile to any statute that you pass.”
President Donald Trump has continued to fulfill his promise to lower health insurance premiums by lowering the Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchange premiums for the third year in a row. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced on Monday that the average premium for the benchmark ACA plan, or the second-lowest costing silver plan, fell by two percent
Though Kansas state Sen. Barbara Bollier (D) is portraying herself as a moderate who is “bringing people together to expand healthcare,” a video interview obtained by the Washington Free Beacon in September shows her longstanding support for abortion industry giant Planned Parenthood. Bollier said when she and her husband were married, the first group they donated to was Planned Parenthood.
A lead attorney representing parties challenging the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare, said Congress should get to work in developing a health care package that would protect Americans with pre-existing conditions and empower people to make their own health care decisions. “States and Congress have an obligation to do better,” attorney Robert Henneke told The Epoch Times’ “American Thought Leaders.” Henneke is the lead counsel representing two individuals challenging former President Barrack Obama’s signature health care law in a pending Supreme Court case set to be heard on Nov. 10. A coalition of Republican-led states is also challenging the law. “And so they shouldn’t wait until the [Supreme] court rules but rather should get to work today, to make sure that there’s a safety net for people with chronic conditions who aren’t able to be insured and to also make sure that people have the personal freedom to be able to make healthcare decisions for themselves and to restore that doctor-patient relationship.” Robert Henneke (Courtesy of Texas Public Policy Foundation) The ACA was repeatedly highlighted by Democrats during Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett’s recent confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senate Democrats tried to make the case that Barrett, being a President Donald Trump nominee, would not hesitate to overturn the health care law if she is confirmed in time to join the bench to hear the case. The case in question deals with whether a provision in the law, referred to as the “individual mandate,” which required people to obtain health insurance or pay a tax penalty, is unconstitutional after Congress removed the tax penalty in 2017, rendering the law unenforceable. If the top court finds that the law is unconstitutional, the justices would have to weigh whether the provision is so vital that removing it would collapse the entire ACA. A group of Republican-led states led by Texas, and two individuals—who Henneke represents—are arguing that the provision is unconstitutional and the entire ACA needed to be invalidated because the provision was inseverable from the rest of the law. A district court judge in Texas found in favor of the plaintiffs and an appeals court upheld the plaintiffs’ constitutional claims and sent the case back to the district court for a more detailed review of the question of severability. The U.S. House of Representatives and a group of Democrat-led states then escalated the case to the Supreme Court, requesting intervention. The top court agreed to take on the case in March. Henneke, who is also the general counsel for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, said Democrats were using fear-mongering tactics during Barrett’s confirmation hearings in order to convince the American people that the ACA, which he said has failed Americans, is good policy. “I think the Democrats are still working off their playbook from 2018, where they very successfully use the fearmongering over the elimination of the Affordable Care Act to retake the House of Representatives and to achieve other gains through the election process,” Henneke said. He said Democrats succeeded in 2018 because the Republicans, who had the White House, House, and Senate, did not achieve any health care reforms. But he said it is different now because President Donald Trump “has a pretty robust package of reforms that he has accomplished.” In September, Trump unveiled his ‘America First’ health care plan, which the president said “expands affordable insurance options, reduces the cost of prescription drugs, will end surprise medical billing, increases fairness through price transparency, streamlines bureaucracy, accelerates innovation, strongly protects Medicare, and always protects patients with preexisting conditions.” Henneke said many Americans are dissatisfied with the ACA because it failed to deliver what Obama had pledged it would deliver. “This was the law that was promised by President Obama to not only decrease costs but to give, you know, universal access to care. There are still, today, many problems with their health care system, and those are being driven by the Affordable Care Act,” he said, adding that some of the problems include affordability and lost of the choice of patients’ doctors. Public Opinion tracking by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that attitudes toward the ACA are divided. In a poll conducted in October, 55 percent hold a favorable view of the ACA, while 39 percent hold a negative view of the law. When broken down by parties, 85 percent of Democrats hold a favorable view compared to 18 percent of Republicans who share the same opinion. Meanwhile, the poll also found that 58 percent of Americans do not want the Supreme Court to overturn the ACA, with 89 percent of Democrats and only 16 percent of Republicans saying they don’t want the top court to strike down the law. With reporting by Jan Jekielek.
Commentary For more than 10 years, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), aka Obamacare, has been the law of the land. To date, it has survived one major challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court. However, another lawsuit challenging the ACA’s constitutionality will be heard by the Supreme Court in less than a month, and this time it could be stricken down as unconstitutional—which it clearly is. Obamacare is unconstitutional for the simple reason that it mandates that Americans purchase a product, regardless of whether or not they choose to do so. As originally written, the ACA forced Americans to purchase health insurance. If they refused to do so, they would face a monetary penalty. If they refused to pay the penalty, they would eventually land in jail. In short, Obamacare (as originally written, more on this later) is 100 percent unconstitutional because nowhere in the Constitution does the government have the power to force “We the People” to purchase anything. For years, Obamacare supporters have tried to obfuscate this vital point. They claim that Americans have to purchase auto insurance or homeowners insurance. Of course, this is blatantly false. One must only purchase these products if they choose to have a car or a home. Obamacare, on the other hand, represents the first and only time in U.S. history that the federal government passed a law that literally forces every single American to purchase a product simply because the government says so. This flies in the face of freedom. And it is and always will be unconstitutional, unless a constitutional amendment is passed that requires all Americans to purchase health insurance. Although Obamacare supporters claim that everyone should, when they actually mean must, possess health insurance because it alleviates risk and is for the overall good of the country, this is a ridiculous argument with no constitutional credence. Taking this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, the government would have the power to mandate all sorts of things, as long as it is for the common good. That is nonsense. In America, the Constitution delegates the powers of the federal government, and nowhere in the Constitution does a provision exist that allows the national government to do anything close to this. In 2012, when Obamacare was before the Supreme Court, it was upheld by a five to four ruling. According to the nation’s highest court, the law was upheld because the majority claimed the individual mandate was a tax, and under the Commerce Clause, Congress can impose taxes. This was and is a tortured ruling. According to Obamacare as written, the individual mandate was not a tax, it was a penalty. Furthermore, citing the Commerce Clause as the underpinning to the ACA’s constitutionality would allow Congress virtually unlimited power. As Roger Vinson, a Senior U.S. District Court Judge, wrote shortly after the ACA became law, “At issue here is the assertion that the Commerce Clause can only reach individuals and entities engaged in an ‘activity’; and because the plaintiffs maintain that an individual’s failure to purchase health insurance is, almost by definition, ‘inactivity,’ the individual mandate goes beyond the Commerce Clause and is unconstitutional. The defendants contend that activity is not required before Congress can exercise its Commerce Clause power, but that, even if it is required, not having insurance constitutes activity.” The Obama administration’s interpretation of the Commerce Clause, as cited above, would give Congress unfettered power. That was not and is not the intention of the clause. The Commerce Clause states, “that Congress shall have the power to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” As Vinson eloquently puts it, “the individual mandate seeks to regulate economic inactivity, which is the very opposite of economic activity. And because activity is required under the Commerce Clause, the individual mandate exceeds Congress’ commerce power, as it is understood, defined, and applied in the existing Supreme Court case law.” For more than 10 years, Obamacare has been the law of the land because the U.S. Supreme Court erroneously ruled that is was constitutional, under the auspices of the Commerce Clause. Now that the individual mandate has been severed—it was zeroed out by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act—how in the world could the Supreme Court deem it constitutional again? Chris Talgo (firstname.lastname@example.org) is an editor at The Heartland Institute. Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Here’s a LinkedIn profile I’d like to see: In a fantasy world where everyone is obligated to tell the truth, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel’s top-of-the-page summary would read, “Professional medical ethicist. Served two American presidents by crafting intellectual framework and persuasive moral arguments in service of world-changing health care policy. Will craft bioethical philosophy and matching rhetoric to suit your needs!”
Today President Trump travels to North Carolina to deliver remarks on his ‘healtcare vision for the Nation’ in Charlotte. The anticipated start time is 4:30pm ET. Livestream Links Below White House Livestream Link – Fox News Livestream – Alternate Livestream [embedded content] [embedded content] . [embedded content] . Share this: Like this: Like Loading...