White House Calls for Six-Week Delay in Obamacare Personal Mandate
Don't they need Congress' approval?
Amid mounting criticism, the White House said Wednesday that it plans to push back the deadline requiring Americans to purchase health insurance — a provision of the Obama administration's health care law widely known as the individual mandate — by as much as six weeks, as experts scramble to fix the technical bugs plaguing HealthCare.gov, administration officials told NBC News.
But it was not immediately clear Wednesday whether the adjustment to a cornerstone of the Affordable Care Act would need to be approved by Congress or could be done by the Department of Health and Human Services administratively.
As the law stands now, individuals are expected to begin the application process via HealthCare.gov by Feb. 15 to avoid a financial penalty. But under the prospective change, individuals will be expected to have started enrollment by March to avoid incurring the penalty.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Don't they need Congress' approval?"
Reason is fine when Holder ignores Congress with regard to drug laws.
Unlike Obamacare relaxing drug laws is something that most of the people are FOR.
Does that answer your statement ?
Unlike Obamacare relaxing drug laws is something that most of the people are FOR.
Does that answer your statement ?
Actually, there is a distinction to be made between selective enforcement of criminal laws and selective enforcement of a tax.
Selective enforcement of criminal laws has a long history. It's known as prosecutorial discretion, and it's jealously protected in both lawyer ethics laws and by the courts. It's supposed to be used to allow prosecutors to not prosecute cases where the interests of justice are not served. That is undoubtedly the case with victimless drug crimes. This serves an important purpose in protecting people from unjust criminal prosecution.
As for selective enforcement of taxation, that is completely illegitimate because it redistributes the tax burden in a manner that was not intended by Congress. For the president to presume that he can pick and choose the taxes that he applies is a usurpation of power that has not precedent that I am aware of.
You broke it, you bought it.
Smart politics by dems to propose a 6-week delay
Oh, and called it. Anyone want to start a pool on how long the delay will actually be?
3 months, minimum.
"If he did this 1.5 weeks ago, then the government wouldn't have shutdown" - that's what the GOP should be singing.
Let's not beat about (or is it "around") the Bush here - It was Obama who shut down the government. The GOP moved away from defunding in the early stages of the shutdown and asked for the delay.
..."Let's not beat about (or is it "around") the Bush here - It was Obama who shut down the government"...
And his brown-shirts who, at great expense, caused closure of those oh, so wonderful places that Disney could run far better.
The lying piece of shit.
He "calls" for a delay?
Why bother "calling" for a delay that his incompetence has made mandatory?
Lying piece of shit...