According to WSFA-12 News, Alabama legislators are working on legislation to create an ObamaCare Exchange. But:
Governor Robert Bentley [R] will likely veto the bill.
“This legislation is premature. The federal government has yet to establish clear guidelines for a health insurance exchange,” said Deputy Communications Director Jeremy King, in a statement to WSFA 12 News. “Also, the federal government has extended some deadlines for putting an exchange together. Plus, the U.S. Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the constitutionality of the federal health care law. If Supreme Court justices strike down the law as the Governor hopes they will, there will be no need for such an exchange. Either way, there is no need to establish an exchange at this point,” the statement went on to say.
“Doing so without clear guidance from Washington would simply be a guessing game. Also, there would still be time in the 2013 session to set up an exchange if the law is upheld. If this legislation is approved in the current session, a veto can be expected.”
Full story and video here.
Here’s the story from WIUS, the NPR affiliate at the University of Illinois Springfield:
A health exchange is one of the main initial components of the Affordable Care Act.
It’s basically a table of insurance plans people who don’t currently have coverage could choose from once the national health care law hits its stride. If it ever does.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in March challenging the constitutionality of ObamaCare.
“I’ve suspended the talks on the Illinois insurance exchange until the Supreme Court makes its decision, which we expect in June,” Rep. Frank Mautino (D- Spring Valley), who has been leading Illinois’ talks to set up the exchange, said.
“As the negotiator, it’s very difficult to have … businesses – decide how much they’re willing to pay to run an exchange, when the federal law may go away. So I’ve lost a lot of the strength of negotiation,” he said.
Controversial aspects include who’ll run the exchange, how much power insurance companies will get, and who’ll pay for it.
About 50 organizations, including insurance companies, business groups, and health care advocates had been meeting weekly.
Audio is also available here.
Democrats control the executive and legislative branches of government in Illinois.
Merrill Goozner read my article in the March 21 National Review, in which I argue that states should refuse all ObamaCare funds and refuse to erect an ObamaCare Exchange that would execute the law’s many health‐insurance regulations. Since ObamaCare provides that the feds will set up and administer an Exchange in states that don’t do so themselves, Goozner concludes that I’m actually advocating a federal takeover of health care. Really?
Goozner either completely missed the point of my article, which I sort of doubt, or he’s trying to be cute. Let’s assume it’s the former.
As I explain in that article, under ObamaCare the feds will write all the rules governing health insurance, so who administers the Exchanges is well‐nigh irrelevant. ObamaCare is a federal takeover of health care, no matter who runs these new government bureaucracies that we call health insurance Exchanges.
Then again, there is reason to suspect that Goozner is just trying to be cute. ObamaCare apologists know that if states stop implementing the law, it will be easier for Congress to repeal it or for the Supreme Court to strike it down. They know that if states don’t set up their own Exchanges, HHS may not be able to set them up itself, which would jeopardize the federal government’s ability to start doling out ObamaCare’s hundreds of billions of dollars in new debt‐financed entitlement spending in 2014. So it makes sense to attack or ridicule me for suggesting that states should obstruct ObamaCare because he suspects that could bring the whole miserable operation down. But surely Goozner can come up with something more plausible than suggesting that I’m advocating a federal takeover of health care.
In all of Washington, is there a greater enemy of free speech than Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius?
- Her department is forcing millions of Americans to finance speech that they oppose, by using taxpayer dollars to broadcast (misleading) television ads that promote ObamaCare.
- She is using the powers granted her under ObamaCare to threaten insurers with bankruptcy if they publicly disagree with her about the law’s cost.
- Now, she is decrying the growth of anonymous political speech in congressional campaigns.
Would that coerced speech, or government suppression of speech, troubled her as much as anonymous speech.