To: rhema
"Setting up and running an Exchange involve significant burdensmeeting strict deadlines, §18041(b), implementing requirements related to the offering of insurance plans, §18031(d)(4), setting up outreach programs, §18031(i), and ensuring that the Exchange is self-sustaining by 2015, §18031(d)(5)(A). A State would have much less reason to take on these burdens if its citizens could receive tax credits no matter who establishes its Exchange. (Now that the Internal Revenue Service has interpreted §36B to authorize tax credits everywhere, by the way, 34 States have failed to set up their own Exchanges. Ante, at 6.) So even if making credits available on all Exchanges advances the goal of improving healthcare markets, it frustrates the goal of encouraging state involvement in the implementation of the Act.Scalia (unknowingly?) identifies the real goal of the scheme in part II of the dissent: single payer gubmint health care. Between him and Thomas, two of the best minds on the current SCOTUS.
15 posted on
06/25/2015 8:36:02 PM PDT by
cport
(How can political capital be spent on a bunch of ingrates)
To: cport
OOPS, part III of the dissent.
16 posted on
06/25/2015 8:38:19 PM PDT by
cport
(How can political capital be spent on a bunch of ingrates)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson