Quote:

 

http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/24/hr-block-helped-shape-obamacare-now-set-for-gigantic-payday/print/

H&R Block Helped Shape Obamacare, Now Set For Gigantic Payday
Posted By Richard Pollock

Get your billions back, America! (And give a bunch of it to H&R Block.)

Five years ago, a bevy of high-priced H&R Block lobbyists worked on the tax preparation company’s behalf to shape the Affordable Care Act.

And this April 15, those efforts are set to pay off in a big way for the company.

H&R Block is well positioned to earn more than $100 million in additional fees from low-income Obamacare enrollees as they face the daunting challenge to properly file this year’s complicated health-related tax forms.

Consumers are familiar with H&R Block’s massive “Get Your Billions Back” ad campaign that includes direct appeals to Obamacare recipients who will have to file health information on this year’s IRS tax forms.

[...]

LTC8K6

Feb 26 2015, 12:37 PM

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/treasury-wont-explain-decision-to-make-3-billion-in-obamacare-payments/article/2560739

Treasury won't explain decision to make $3 billion in Obamacare payments

wingedwheel

Feb 27 2015, 07:44 AM

Who's going to stop them? The democrats are in on it and the republicans are a bunch of wimps.

Quote:

 

http://kaiserhealthnews.org/news/5-things-to-know-about-the-supreme-court-case-challenging-the-health-law/
5 Things To Know About The Supreme Court Case Challenging The Health Law
[...]
1: This case does NOT challenge the constitutionality of the health law.
[...]
2: If the court rules against the Obama administration, millions of people could be forced to give up their insurance.
[...]
3: A ruling against the Obama administration could have other effects, too.
[...]
4: Consumers could lose subsidies almost immediately.
[...]
5: Congress could make the entire issue go away by passing a one-page bill. But it won’t.
[...]

Quote:

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/some-republicans-seek-extension-to-health-law-credits-1424969060?mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy

GOP Lawmakers Seek Short-Term Tax Credits Extension
Republicans ask about government’s plans if Supreme Court strikes down subsidies

Support is growing among Republican lawmakers to temporarily help consumers pay their insurance premiums if the Supreme Court strikes down the health law’s tax credits in much of the country.

The court will hear a legal challenge next week that contends the health-law’s language restricts its credits to residents of a handful of states that set up their own insurance exchanges.

If the court voids the tax credits that millions of Americans have obtained through the federal HealthCare.gov site, the law could become unworkable, supporters and opponents agree.

Democratic backers of the health law say such chaos is a reason the court must uphold the credits for people in all 50 states.

Republicans see the court challenge as their best opportunity to change a law they have long opposed.

Now a group of GOP legislators say they have to make clear they want to minimize the impact on Americans in 37 states—including Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming—who bought insurance through HealthCare.gov. In all, more than six million people already have received tax credits for 2015 through HealthCare.gov.

The calls for a short-term extension of financial help came as GOP legislators grilled Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell about her department’s contingency plans if the court overturns the tax credits. The justices’ decision is expected in June.

Ms. Burwell has said the Obama administration believes it could do little to avert problems if the court sides with the plaintiffs.

“We know of no administrative actions that could, and therefore we have no plans that would, undo the massive damage to our health-care system that would be caused by an adverse decision,” Ms. Burwell said in a letter sent to members of Congress this week.

Rep. Joe Pitts (R., Pa.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s health panel, told Ms. Burwell during a hearing on Thursday that a source within her agency said there was a 100-page planning document circulating among top HHS officials about potential action.

“We have only heard silence,” said Mr. Pitts. “This is not the transparency you promised.”

Ms. Burwell testified: “This is a document I’m not aware of,” adding that she would like to know about it, if it exists.

Democrats at the hearing also criticized Republicans for failing to agree on a specific alternative to the health law.
["criticized" = blame!]

“It’s been almost five years since the Affordable Care Act was passed and I’ve yet to see any legislation introduced by my Republican colleagues to replace the Affordable Care Act, even though we’ve had at least 56 votes on the House floor to repeal it,” said Rep. Gene Green (D., Texas).

Insurers and hospitals recently launched a lobbying campaign to persuade the court to preserve the tax credits and to press lawmakers to ensure an orderly transition if the justices don’t.

In an op-ed article published in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday, Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska called for an 18-month period of “temporary, transitional relief” if the court rules against the credits.

“Obamacare took these patients hostage. Conservatives have a duty to save them…Congress should offer individuals losing insurance the ability to keep the coverage they picked, with financial assistance, for 18 transitional months,” he wrote.

Aides to Mr. Sasse said he didn’t necessarily want to retain the tax credits in their current form.

The move is being debated privately by Republicans. Leaders, including House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah say they aren’t ready to release plans.

But Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.), who is working with Mr. Hatch and others on a GOP replacement plan, called it “a terrific idea. We want to protect the people, not the law.”

Sen. James Lankford (R., Okla.) said, “I do believe we have to have a bridge, but that needs to be part of a larger agreement.”

Rep. Renee Ellmers (R., N.C), said, “The discussion that the GOP is having is that there has to be a safety net in place…There will definitely be a period of time of a continuation.”

Quote:

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/02/26/jindal-to-gop-no-time-to-quit-obamacare-fight/

Jindal to GOP: No Time to Quit Obamacare Fight

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, looking to carve a conservative policy niche in the crowded field of potential GOP presidential candidates, Thursday criticized fellow Republicans in Congress for backing away from the push to repeal of the health care law.

“They are about to wave the white flag of surrender on Obamacare,” Mr. Jindal said at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, referring to congressional efforts to revamp rather than repeal the law. “We won’t stand for that. “

[...]

“We must repeal every single word of Obamacare,” he said. “Not a little bit, but all of it.”

[...]

kbp

Feb 27 2015, 09:55 AM

The majority of Americans did NOT want Obamacare, so in 2010 they gave control of the purse strings to the GOP, as the old establishment withheld support and even campaigned against Tea Party candidates. What did they do with that control?

NOTHING

In 2012 the GOP retained control of the purse strings AND gained 2 seats in the Senate. What did they do with that control?

NOTHING

In 2014 the GOP retained control of the purse strings AND gained the majority in the Senate. What did they do with that control?

NOTHING (unrestricted budget passed!)

What is the next plan (to avoid blame for taking away the FREE MONEY)?

Quote:

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/some-republicans-seek-extension-to-health-law-credits-1424969060?mod=rss_Politics_And_Policy

GOP Lawmakers Seek Short-Term Tax Credits Extension
Republicans ask about government’s plans if Supreme Court strikes down subsidies

Support is growing among Republican lawmakers to temporarily help consumers pay their insurance premiums if the Supreme Court strikes down the health law’s tax credits in much of the country.

The court will hear a legal challenge next week that contends the health-law’s language restricts its credits to residents of a handful of states that set up their own insurance exchanges.

If the court voids the tax credits that millions of Americans have obtained through the federal HealthCare.gov site, the law could become unworkable, supporters and opponents agree.

Democratic backers of the health law say such chaos is a reason the court must uphold the credits for people in all 50 states.

Republicans see the court challenge as their best opportunity to change a law they have long opposed.

Now a group of GOP legislators say they have to make clear they want to minimize the impact on Americans in 37 states—including Nebraska, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming—who bought insurance through HealthCare.gov. In all, more than six million people already have received tax credits for 2015 through HealthCare.gov.

The calls for a short-term extension of financial help came as GOP legislators grilled Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell about her department’s contingency plans if the court overturns the tax credits. The justices’ decision is expected in June.

Ms. Burwell has said the Obama administration believes it could do little to avert problems if the court sides with the plaintiffs.

“We know of no administrative actions that could, and therefore we have no plans that would, undo the massive damage to our health-care system that would be caused by an adverse decision,” Ms. Burwell said in a letter sent to members of Congress this week.

Rep. Joe Pitts (R., Pa.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee’s health panel, told Ms. Burwell during a hearing on Thursday that a source within her agency said there was a 100-page planning document circulating among top HHS officials about potential action.

“We have only heard silence,” said Mr. Pitts. “This is not the transparency you promised.”

Ms. Burwell testified: “This is a document I’m not aware of,” adding that she would like to know about it, if it exists.

Democrats at the hearing also criticized Republicans for failing to agree on a specific alternative to the health law.
["criticized" = blame!]

“It’s been almost five years since the Affordable Care Act was passed and I’ve yet to see any legislation introduced by my Republican colleagues to replace the Affordable Care Act, even though we’ve had at least 56 votes on the House floor to repeal it,” said Rep. Gene Green (D., Texas).

Insurers and hospitals recently launched a lobbying campaign to persuade the court to preserve the tax credits and to press lawmakers to ensure an orderly transition if the justices don’t.

In an op-ed article published in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday, Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska called for an 18-month period of “temporary, transitional relief” if the court rules against the credits.

“Obamacare took these patients hostage. Conservatives have a duty to save them…Congress should offer individuals losing insurance the ability to keep the coverage they picked, with financial assistance, for 18 transitional months,” he wrote.

Aides to Mr. Sasse said he didn’t necessarily want to retain the tax credits in their current form.

The move is being debated privately by Republicans. Leaders, including House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah say they aren’t ready to release plans.

But Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.), who is working with Mr. Hatch and others on a GOP replacement plan, called it “a terrific idea. We want to protect the people, not the law.”

Sen. James Lankford (R., Okla.) said, “I do believe we have to have a bridge, but that needs to be part of a larger agreement.”

Rep. Renee Ellmers (R., N.C), said, “The discussion that the GOP is having is that there has to be a safety net in place…There will definitely be a period of time of a continuation.”

“...Conservatives have a duty to save them…Congress should offer individuals losing [FREE MONEY] the ability to keep the coverage they picked, with financial assistance, for 18 transitional months,”
Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska

Well, after 4+ years of doing NOTHING - sitting on your azzez waiting for "others" to solve the problem thru the courts - the strategy now is for the GOP to take credit for saving the day with more FREE MONEY and getting us past the next election so we may again do NOTHING or we may prance like the knight in shining armor who gave them a permanent means to just a little less FREE MONEY ....it could have been worse.

After Barry rewrote the laws with EO's and directives to OBVIOUSLY get the best results possible in the last two elections (mandate delays!), we can at least propose that this “temporary, transitional relief” ends the day after Tuesday, November 8, 2016.

kbp

Feb 26 2015, 10:14 AM

http://www.latimes.com/nation/healthcare/la-na-court-health-argument-20150226-story.html
Obamacare defense is tailored for key Supreme Court justices


Interesting points made in the article, but lots of non-facts added to make it look better than it is.
.

Quote:

 

...The Obama administration and healthcare advocates are arguing that the law, when read as a whole, makes clear that the subsidies were intended to be available nationwide for low- and moderate-income people, not just those in certain states.

But if the justices doubt that reading, supporters of the law have a legal backup plan that highlights the "clear notice" rule for states. It says that when Congress passes a new law and seeks cooperation from the states, it must not withhold important information.

...Supporters of the law say that even if Congress meant to restrict subsidies to marketplaces created by the state, no one warned state officials that relying on the federal version would deprive their residents of millions of dollars in insurance subsidies.

Late last month, lawyers for 22 states, including Virginia, Illinois, Pennsylvania and North Carolina, told the justices they were blindsided by the claim that federal subsidies might be cut off because they failed to establish state marketplaces.
[Filed a brief]

..."Surprising states with a dramatic hidden consequence" violates a basic principle of fair dealing between Washington and the states, the state lawyers said in the court brief. Congress "does not hide elephants in mouse holes," they added, quoting a comment by Justice Antonin Scalia in a previous case

• 
  
• The Senate HELP committee put together a bill that gave States four years to establish an exchange, after which HHS could establish it in any State that failed to. The bill EXPRESSLY stated that the HHS exchange could provide tax credits to subsidize the premiums, in addition to it providing that State established exchanges could.

• 
  
• The Senate Finance committee put together a bill that gave ONLY the State established exchanges the authority to provide subsidies thru tax credits. That means the EXPRESS language authorizing HHS exchanges to provide tax credits had been eliminated scratched removed canned... by the committee controlled by the Dem's.

• 
  
• The Senate amended (entirely rewrote) a House passed bill to construct Obamacare. They constructed it using wording borrowed from the 2 bills mentioned above, all assembled within about 3 months of each other. The EXPRESS language authorizing HHS exchanges to provide tax credits was NOT included ...INTENTIONALLY.

Quote:

 

http://kaiserhealthnews.org/news/hhs-shifts-money-from-cancer-global-health-to-pay-for-health-insurance-exchange/

HHS Shifts Money From Cancer, Global Health To Pay For Health Insurance Exchange

In their latest attack on the Affordable Care Act, House Republicans question why the Obama administration transferred money last year from the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to pay for the operation of the federal health insurance marketplace.

“Now it appears that we are robbing Peter to pay Paul in order to finance the disaster that is healthcare.gov,” said Rep. Jody Hice, a Republican congressman from suburban Atlanta.

Hice complained at a hearing last week that the Department of Health and Human Services shifted millions of dollars last year from those agencies to help pay the $1.4 billion cost of running the insurance marketplaces in 37 states, according to an HHS spending document.

But HHS officials say they have authority to move money between agencies that are under their jurisdiction. And they note that only about 0.25 percent of each department’s funding – about 50 in all, including global health and AIDS and substance abuse treatment programs — was used to finance the exchange.

Congressional Democrats did not appropriate sufficient funding to support the startup and operation of the federally run exchange, partly because they expected most states to run their own marketplaces. More than three dozen states decided to rely on the federal government, leaving HHS scrambling to find money to do the job. In 2013, HHS took $454 million from the $15 billion Prevention and Public Health Fund, created by the health law, and $158 million from the health law’s Health Insurance Reform Implementation Fund, according to the Congressional Research Service.

In 2014, the single largest dollar amount that was transferred within HHS — $34.2 million — came from the Low Income Home Energy Assistance program, which helps poor people heat their homes in winter. Another $12 million came from the National Cancer Institute and nearly $11 million came from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. In contrast, the state-run exchanges received an “indefinite appropriation” from Congress to support their operations until this year when they were supposed to become self-sufficient. However, the federal exchange could not tap that money. Both the state and federal exchanges are also supported by premium taxes paid by those buying health plans in the marketplaces.

HHS officials say they have used their authority to transfer funds from one budget category to another when faced with pressing needs before, including paying for cybersecurity protection, caring for unaccompanied children caught crossing the U.S.-Mexico border and helping states provide medicines to individuals living with AIDS.

[...]

Quote:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal_government/gop-our-plans-would-help-people-losing-health-subsidies/2015/03/02/e0c4bee6-c149-11e4-a188-8e4971d37a8d_story.html

GOP: Our plans would help people losing health subsidies

...“It’s appalling that Republicans are once again putting politics first and rooting for a ruling that would take away coverage and raise health care costs for millions of people,” said Washington Sen. Patty Murray, top Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.