The topic of healthcare in our country is worth talking about. President Trump recently signed an executive order with the hopes of making the insurance market more affordable, more open, and home to more choices than ever before.
It was reported by The Washington Examiner that a federal judge will not force the Trump Administration to pay Obamacare insurers. This news follows the judge’s concerns over whether or not the customers would be harmed by the sudden cancellation.
The decision came in a California federal court Wednesday, which means that payments will not be resumed. The lawsuit asks for an immediate injunction to keep the payments flowing, but President Trump cut them off effective October 18th.
Federal Judge Vince Chhabria noted that the order Democrats are asking for could cause problems. The emergency relief would, in fact, be counterproductive.
The judge explained that state regulators have been on the case for months, working to end these payments. This, in other words, is not as sudden as the media are trying to make it sound.
Chhabria pointed out that, “Although you wouldn’t know it from reading the states’ papers in this lawsuit, the truth is that most state regulators have devised responses that give millions of lower-income people better health coverage options than they would otherwise have had. This is true in almost all the states joining this lawsuit.”
The fact of the matter is that the cost-sharing reduction helps to reimburse insurers, and brings down out of pocket costs for low-income people on ObamaCare. Insurers were, up until this point, required to lower co-pays and deductibles for these customers.
Back in 2014, the Republican-run House had a legal debate with the Obama administration. They argued that these extra payments were technically illegal. The reason cited was that Congress did not set them up.
These payments were passed without any congressional approval, just like ObamaCare’s income-based tax credits, all in an attempt to lower the cost of insurance.
As it would eventually turn out, a federal judge decided last year that these cost-sharing payments did, in fact, need congressional appropriation. The original law that was drafted was seen as “shoddy” by many.
Chhabria decided that the states who were trying to sue did not have a real argument as to whether or not there was some present danger to these payments ending. That would have to be evident and provable in order for more action to be taken.
The federal courts agree with our president. Do you?
The judge went on to say that, in order for there to be “an immediate harm to consumers,” there would have to be an injunction issued. In this case, he said that many states have already adopted measures to get around this problem, so there were no consumers in alleged danger.
This is another big blow to the crumbling ObamaCare foundation. One of President Donald Trump’s promises was to get rid of ObamaCare. It would appear in this situation that even the federal judges are on the President’s side.