OP-ED

The Most Effective Obamacare Delay is Defunding

There is nothing controversial about stopping Obamacare. A majority of Americans dislike the law and want it repealed. Obamacare is disastrous for individuals, businesses, and doctors alike. It is unaffordable and unworkable, and the Obama Administration has also made it unfair by giving its pet interest groups waivers and opt-outs.

Conservatives are also united behind full repeal of Obamacare, despite what you may hear from the media and liberal operatives. The debate right now is on how this goal is best achieved.

Debate is healthy for society, and also for a movement. Conservatives should not want to become the empty echo chamber that has become the liberal political/media/academic establishment.

With that in mind, let’s turn to the debate over how to save the country from Obamacare. Our view is that the most effective way to delay Obamacare is to cut off funding. Congress can halt Obamacare’s disastrous impact by defunding it entirely before the law’s health insurance exchanges take effect on October 1.

This approach would prevent further implementation of the law; it is the only tactic that fully achieves the objective that advocates of delay seek to accomplish.

Some conservatives believe they can achieve delay without defunding by postponing the individual mandate and employer mandate for one year while leaving firmly in place the massive federal spending on Obamacare’s new health care entitlements—$48 billion next year, and nearly $1.8 trillion over 10 years. Others, acknowledging that a delay of the mandate is insufficient, are now calling for Congress to delay the mandates and the new entitlements.


Both approaches are flawed, however. First, Obamacare is far more than the individual mandate, the employer mandate, and the new entitlement spending. It’s a massive, government-centered restructuring of American health care. A 53-page Obamacare timelinereleased by the House Energy and Commerce Committee shortly after the law passed found that in 2014 alone, 27 separate Obamacare programs and requirements take effect.

Delaying only the mandates and new entitlements, in other words, would leave dozens of other Obamacare programs ready to launch, from additional costly mandates on state Medicaid programs to a new Medicare payment model for community health centers.

Second, merely delaying—as opposed to defunding—the law would allow Obamacare’s regulators to continue their work, strangling the economy by imposing more government red tape. Regulators could continue to enforce the Health and Human Services (HHS) anti-conscience mandate and issue new Obamacare rules raising costs and premiums for struggling businesses and families alike. The way to stop the Red Tape Tower involves full defunding, because it’s the only way to ensure Obamacare’s regulators will cease their destructive work.

Because full defunding will stop all of Obamacare’s programs and all of its new regulations, it is the strongest play for those who want to stop Obamacare cold. Obamacare isn’t just about taxes and subsidies—it is about a series of massive new encroachments created by the federal government. Defunding of Obamacare will ensure that those encroachments cease.

We should not buy into the false assumption that efforts to defund Obamacare equate to a shutdown of the federal government. Heritage and others have pushed for Congress to fully fund regular government operations and separate Obamacare from annual appropriations. But conservatives of either party in Congress have no leverage on any of these critical issues unless the President believes that he will have to assume the responsibility of a government shutdown.

Conservatives want to keep the federal government open. We just want to shut down Obamacare.

Chris Jacobs is a senior policy analyst in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Health Policy Studies. This post originally appeared on the Heritage Foundation’s blog, The Foundry.

Livongo’s Post Ad Banner 728*90

14
Leave a Reply

12 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
12 Comment authors
Ruth BowenGabor KayeMarkJohn IrvinePeter1 Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Ruth Bowen
Guest
Ruth Bowen

Have to say that this blog infuriated me. It implies that US healthcare prior to the legislation was something we could be proud of. If that were the case, why the law to begin with? We had 50 million uninsured – and that matters because estimates were that 28,000 people in the US died every year because they had no access to care. it matters financially because the uninsured cost more in the long run to care for when they arrive at Hospital Emergency departments and have to be treated for stroke or heart attack which likely would have been… Read more »

Ruth Bowen
Guest
Ruth Bowen

What is the definition of threatening to blow up the economy if you demands are not me? My definition would be terrorism.

Gabor Kaye
Guest
Gabor Kaye

The reason to demonize the ACA is to demonstrate to the gullible public that social agendas just won’t succeed.The author and his cronies wish to reinstate
the pre 2010 status.And they will call for more privatization of government programs,many of which are already in the sphere of the private cartel…
The ACA,also is coined the term “Obamacare”. This is well thought out by the right.Associating his name with it’s failure will aid their agenda for the future and discredit unfairly a decent public servant.

Mark
Guest
Mark

I feel the same about this article as I do about the Robert Reich piece above it. It adds nothing to the value of The Healthcare Blog. It’s tactical political stuff about something that is not going to happen. A waste of time.

John Irvine
Guest

Personally, I’d like to see Chris and company over at Heritage answer some of the questions that are being posed in this forum. I have a few of my own.

John Irvine

Peter1
Guest
Peter1

“let’s turn to the debate over how to save the country from Obamacare.”

I’d rather focus on how to save the country from Republicans. Here in NC the country can view a glimpse of what their control of the three levels of government will bring. Suppression of voting rights, public education defunding, private education vouchers, environmental de-regulation, more guns in more places, abortion abolition through the trojan horse of women’s health, tax cuts for the wealthy, cut benefits for the unemployed – oh and banned the use of Sharia Law, in case you were worried.

Vince Kuraitis
Guest

Now we know what you DON’T want. What is it that you DO want to improve our health care non-system?

Paul Papanek MD
Guest
Paul Papanek MD

Oh brother. What a terrible article. First sentence “There is nothing controversial about stopping Obamacare” – Well, there’s a flat-out lie. And the article gets worse from there. (This article is utter drivel. The editors would publish this . . . because ??) However, I’ll just take a crack at a couple more incorrect statements. Second sentence: “A majority of Americans dislike the law and want it repealed.” Nope. Highly misleading. Plenty of Americans dislike the ACA, although many on the right haven’t bothered to understand it. But on the left, plenty of Americans think it didn’t go far enough… Read more »

Aurthur
Guest
Aurthur

“Obama will have to assume responsibility for a government shutdown.” What cheek! You’re saying that House Republicans will take the debt ceiling hostage (“Give us what we want or the Government is toast’), and somehow that’s Obama’s fault?

Obama cut the deficit in half so we are no where near the debt limit.

Bobby Gladd
Guest

“Obama will have to assume responsibility for a government shutdown.” What cheek! You’re saying that House Republicans will take the debt ceiling hostage (“Give us what we want or the Government is toast’), and somehow that’s Obama’s fault?
__

My refutation regarding “defund,” and blame for shutdown, and default.

http://tinyurl.com/q3ztuty

Roy Fouts
Guest
Roy Fouts

This article should assure a continuing paycheck for Chris for another month or two. The Heritage Foundation…hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaahhhhhhahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
…pause for breath…

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaahhhhhhahahahahahahahahahah.

Bobby Gladd
Guest

Son, you don’t have the votes. Resorting to unconstitutional extortion (threatening federal default) won’t get you there either. You will have to await sufficient votes in Congress.

MG
Guest
MG

I miss when the Heritage Foundation simply wasn’t an unabashed mouthpiece and actually put out things worth actually reading even if you viscerally disagreed with them. Even a semi-detailed alternative proposal to Obamacare beyond ‘tax credits’ and a couple of very generic points would be nice for a start.

Craig Miller
Guest
Craig Miller

Just clarifying..would this be the same Heritage Foundation that previously advocated the individual mandate and other key provisions of what became ACA?