Obamacare: Still Changing On The Fly
Once again the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama has decided to selectively enforce its socialized medicine law due to political pressure brought about by broken political promises.
This time the administration is tinkering with the law’s controversial individual mandate tax – which violated a previous Obama promise not to raise taxes on Americans earning $250,000 or less. According to Obama’s embattled Health and Human Services (HHS) director Kathleen Sebelius, a “hardship exemption” will be granted to Americans whose health care coverage was canceled as a result of new Obamacare mandates.
Americans who “might be having difficulty” paying for standard coverage will also be granted an exemption.
The decision – Team Obama’s latest departure from the parameters of the law passed by Congress – is purely political. It is designed to delay the adverse consequences of Obamacare (i.e. canceled policies, higher taxes) until after the 2014 congressional elections.
But does Obama have the legal authority to make this change – or any of the arbitrary modifications his administration has made to Obamacare over the course of the last three-and-a-half years?
Of course not …
For those of you not up to snuff on your elementary school social studies, the federal government works like this: Congress passes laws, the executive branch enforces them and the judicial branch interprets them.
Or at least that’s how it’s supposed to work …
Obama, however, seems to think he is entitled to rewrite legislation on his own – without approval from Congress (all so his party can win a mid-term election). That’s flagrantly unconstitutional, and Obama needs to be called out for it. Obama and his allies made their beds when they passed Obamacare … but now they’re trampling all over the Constitution in an effort not to sleep in those beds.
Whether you like Obama (or Obamacare) is irrelevant to this discussion: This discussion is about the rule of law – and whether it still exists in America. Seriously … what’s the point in passing laws if they can be arbitrarily rewritten at an individual’s whim?