-
Recent Posts
- Kamala’s brother-in-law fleeced taxpayers for billions to give to left-wing groups and lawyers | New York Post | 8.24. 24
- Coming: Global Political Recalibration
- Clark Judge: FDR, Reagan, and European Nationalism | NatCon Rome 2020
- Lady Gaga Tells All
- Trial Lawyers Use COVID-19 to Prey on America’s Corporations | Real Clear Policy | 12.1.20
Categories
- Book Reviews (12)
- Communication Strategy (23)
- Constitution and Law (14)
- Economic Policy: General (33)
- Economic Policy: Health Care (30)
- Economic Policy: The Great Financial Crisis (15)
- Economic Policy: US Debt Crisis (32)
- Education Policy (1)
- Global Issues (57)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2008 (18)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2012 (43)
- Political Commentary: Campaign 2020 (5)
- Political Commentary: General (122)
- Politics & Policy (6)
- Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Administration (11)
- Speeches/Lectures (9)
- Uncategorized (6)
Archives
- September 2024
- March 2023
- July 2022
- April 2022
- December 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- November 2019
- December 2018
- September 2017
- April 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- June 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- January 2008
- June 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- June 2006
- October 2005
- August 2005
- March 2005
- November 2004
- August 2004
- June 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- August 2003
- April 2003
- July 2002
- December 2001
- November 2001
- May 2001
- December 2000
- June 2000
- January 1995
- August 1994
- August 1992
- June 1991
- July 1990
- September 1989
- July 1989
- March 1989
Tags
2012 2012 election Benghazi campaign constitution debt debt crisis Democrats economy election 2012 Energy Financial Times fiscal cliff foreign policy Gingrich Global Warming GOP Hoover Digest hughhewitt HughHewitt.com Immigration IRS National Review New York Post New York Times Obama Obamacare Republicans Ricochet Ricochet.com Romney Russia Scandal Senate SOTU speech Supreme Court Syria Tea Party Trump U.S. News Ukraine Wall Street Journal war Washington Times
The Buck Stops Somewhere Else | USNews.com | 07.26.13
Haven’t we seen this act before?
This week, President Obama denounced Republicans in Congress who were trying, he said, to destroy Obamacare by mucking up its implementation. You’ve got to admire the president. A man of many gifts – intellectual, rhetorical – but none of his gifts matches that of passing blame.
Harry Truman may have said, “The buck stops here.” With this president, that peripatetic dollar bill doesn’t encounter so much as a speed bump as it shoots through the Oval Office, untouched by the occupant’s hands.
For in this administration, passing the buck is what you do when your signature legislation – the bill you bent every effort and resisted every plea for compromise in order to ram through Congress and that with great fanfare you signed into law – turns out to be “unworkable.
Unworkable isn’t my term. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal used it this week in an op-ed that catalogues only the most recent problems to have surfaced in implementing the multi-thousand-page law.
For example, the administration itself has delayed the employer mandate by a year. No one knows why implementation next year will be any less damaging to the economy (the administration’s apparent reason for the current delay) than this year, other than that the mid-term elections will have passed. They have made no secret of their ambition to take back the House next time around. But for the moment, their actions say that, for this part of the Affordable Care Act, at least, they agree with the two governors. It is unworkable.
Last week, three major unions – the Teamsters, the United Food and Commercial Workers and UNITE-HERE (a service and textile industries union) – told the House and Senate Democratic leadership that the full-time worker mandate would wreak havoc with their membership. The ACA defines a full-time workweek at 30 hours, not the standard 40. So, in a development that every student of public policy has seen countless times, employers who cannot afford the mandated coverage are taking that floor as a ceiling and cutting back worker hours to stay under the threshold.
Instead of protecting these workers and providing a much-heralded path to the middle class, Obamacare is building a wall around middle-class status, cutting the pay of many marginal workers by a quarter and much more when they are eligible for overtime. For these unions and many others, that provision is unworkable.
As the 30-hour week conundrum illustrates, thresholds in laws almost always spawn unintended consequences. Years ago I catalogued a number of these and discussed the problems they create. I am sure I am not the only one to have done so. The 50-employee limit is another threshold in this law. Under it, an employer who qualifies and does not provide health care coverage is exempt from penalties. So, of course, many employers are already halting their companies’ growth at 49 workers – and wouldn’t you, too?
You are about to hire employee number 50. Let’s see: salary, $40,000; the payroll tax and benefits, an additional 25 percent, $10,000; new Obamacare penalties or premiums or taxes (I am not sure any more what to call them), $2,000 per employee x 50 = $100,000, which to many employers means priceless. So for those employers and their employees, the legislation is unworkable.
Then there is the hapless federal software development supervisor charged with designing the ACA’s online insurance exchange. He declared in March that his team had given up on creating” a world-class user experience.” “Let’s just make sure it’s not a third-world user experience,” he lamented. For those in charge of the nuts and bolts of implementation, the program is unworkable, too.
As it will be for millions more. Not long ago, the Congressional Budget Office announced that a key promise of the law could not be delivered. The president had pledged that if you wanted to keep your current employer-provided health insurance, you could under Obamacare. But according to the CBO, that will not be true for at least 7 million workers who currently receive coverage. Thanks to one detail or another of the law, they will be thrown out in the cold.
And some reports have it that CBO didn’t account for the most devastating detail. If your provider changes a single line of your policy, it and your employer will come under federal supervision, and the policy could be thrown out, just like that. For every now-covered employee who loses his or her health insurance, Obamacare will also be unworkable.
I haven’t even touched on Obamacare’s unworkability for the states. According to Govs. Walker and Jindal, federal guidance to the states has been “inconsistent, arbitrary and frustrating.” Instead of approaching the states as partners, “the administration has treated the states with mistrust.” The result: the states are denied flexibility that might enable them to make the law even a little more workable.
Throughout his first term, whenever Obama met with a setback, he blamed it on President Bush. In his second term, he has blamed House Republicans. Isn’t it time to drop this tiresome act and accept blame for himself?