In a 2-1 decision, the D.C. Circuit of Appeals ruled in Halbig v. Burwell that the administration had violated the Affordable Care Act by stretching the language detailing subsidies. The law clearly states that the subsidies must go through "an Exchange established by the State." However, only 14 states and the District of Columbia have state exchanges. That would mean subsidies through the federal government, healthcare.gov, would violate the law's wording in the other 36 states.
However, the language was clearly intended by the authors of the law. Believing support for the law would grow, Democrats wanted to pressure governors into setting up their own exchanges. Expectations would not meet reality. Therefore, the IRS expanded the definition of a state to mean the federal government in 2012.
On the news tonight, I now hear Democrats are arguing that the wording was meant to encompass the federal government. It's absurd, but it doesn't surprise me coming from Democrats.
- Democrats try to change the meaning of the Second Amendment to mean the government's right to bear arms and not the citizen's.
- Democrats interpret the First Amendment to be within the speech and religious limitations which they want to allow.
- Democrats, as well as some Republicans, interpret the Forth Amendment to extend to a general warrant when the NSA wants to track its own citizens.
- Democrats also expand the Fourteenth Amendment's right to privacy to extend to a right to have an abortion.
- Democrats also interpret voter identification, even in states that would provide free identification, as a poll tax expressed in the Twenty-Forth Amendment.
- Democrats, finally, interpret laws that they don't agree with as law that they just will not enforce, such as previous border laws.
Democrats are worried because they know if this ruling goes against them, Obamacare will come undone. The healthcare law can only survive if enough young, health, and wealthy people can pay for the elderly, sick, and poor. It revolves around the redistribution of wealth. If the federal government cannot redistribute wealth from the federal exchange in these 36 states, the law becomes ineffective because it cannot supply healthcare to those it is supposed to help.
In conclusion, this case will be appealed to the Supreme Court eventually. The Court will most likely be forced to deliver its own ruling on the case due to the importance of this case. Let's hope this time John Roberts has his head on straight. Additionally, let's hope Republicans start physically writing our own healthcare plan, so we can get a real solution to this country's healthcare problems.