Image 01 Image 03

Another Obamacare extension: Is anyone surprised?

Another Obamacare extension: Is anyone surprised?

Another day, another Obamacare extension decided by the president himself—thus further justifying the fact that the law is called by his name.

The worst thing about this extension of the deadline to April 15 is, once again, the procedural overreach by Obama and the unconstitutionality of his declaration. The actual content of the change makes more sense than the March 31 deadline ever did because, pre-Obamacare, individual health insurance could ordinarily be purchased by the fifteenth of the month effective the first day of the next month.

The new Obamacare extension only applies to people who’ve had trouble signing up on the federal website, so I assume that people in states with functioning state websites still supposedly have to sign up by March 31. I suspect such a distinction would be unconstitutional, but isn’t most of what Obama’s been doing with Obamacare rule changes unconsitutional (not to mention Obamacare itself, whatever SCOTUS says)? The deadline change is also on the honor system, which would make it almost humorous if this weren’t a very serious business indeed.

I’m with Boehner here:

“What the hell is this, a joke?” Boehner said at his weekly press conference.

…The Speaker called the move “another deadline made meaningless,” adding it to a litany of unilateral changes that the administration has made to the law.

“This is part of a long-term pattern of this administration manipulating the law for its own convenience,” Boehner said. “It’s not hard to understand why the American people question this administration’s commitment to the rule of law.”

The Speaker mocked the use of the “honor system” to determine who was eligible for an extension after the administration said it would make no effort to ensure that people had actually begun the process of signing up by March 31.

“Why don’t they just say, ‘We’ve moved the date to April 15’? Because that’s in effect what they’ve done,” Boehner said.

Boehner said, “It’s not hard to understand why the American people question this administration’s commitment to the rule of law.” However, I would amend that to read: “It’s not hard to understand why Republicans question this administration’s commitment to the rule of law, and why conservatives and Jonathan Turley (strange bedfellows) realize that he has none.”

[Neo-neocon is a writer with degrees in law and family therapy, who blogs at neo-neocon.]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


A quick look at the ACA leads me to believe that the provision governing the date of March 31, 2014 is Section 1311(c)(6)(A) of the Act:

“(6) ENROLLMENT PERIODS.—The Secretary shall require an
Exchange to provide for—
(A) an initial open enrollment, as determined by the
Secretary (such determination to be made not later than July 1, 2012)”

If correct, then Queen Seeb had to choose a date by July 1, 2012 and could not then change the date on March 26, 2014.

Am I missing something, or is this another clear example of non-elected bureaucrats usurping the Constitutional authority of Congress to legislate?

The lawless regime marches on and why not the Republicans just let it happen. With De facto amnesty why should complete disregard of Obamacare be a surprise.

No, Boehner, *you’re* the joke. You had an opportunity to defund this Obomination, and you didn’t take it. Worse, you labeled those who wanted to defund, “anarchists, bomb throwers, terrorists…”. What a loser you are…

    voncile in reply to snopercod. | March 26, 2014 at 8:27 pm

    You are absolutely correct!!

    MarkS in reply to snopercod. | March 26, 2014 at 9:50 pm

    Boehner allowed a vote on the Continuing Resolution which withheld funding for O’care which the Senate voted on and stripped the defunding provision. This led to the so-called ‘government shutdown’ last fall.

      Vladtheimp in reply to MarkS. | March 26, 2014 at 10:00 pm

      The House exercised its Constitutional duty to pass an annual appropriations bill; Harry Reid wouldn’t permit a Senate vote on the bill; there were no appropriations for the fiscal year – Harry Reid, not John Boehner shut down the government. How hard is this to understand if you have a grasp on the Constitution and the role of the House of Representatives?

        MarkS in reply to Vladtheimp. | March 27, 2014 at 6:52 am

        What is it that I fail to understand? Reid stripped the House bill of the ACA no funding provision, voted on their version of the Bill and sent it back to the House which would not pass the Senate bill allowing Reid to claim the Repubs shut down the govt

          Vladtheimp in reply to MarkS. | March 27, 2014 at 11:59 am

          On September 29 the House passed a bill that would fund the government through December 15; it included a provision to delay the individual mandate for 1 year and repeal the tax on medical devices. Reid’s Senate voted the whole bill down on September 30, the last day of the federal fiscal year. The party line vote was 54-46. This Senate vote effectively shut down the government.

          voncile in reply to MarkS. | March 27, 2014 at 6:17 pm

          Marks: You are absolutely correct and I fully realize it was the egg-sucking Democratic Senate, and Reid in particular, that was responsible for the government shut-down!! Reid and the Democrats in congress, in lock step with Obama are totally responsible for what is happening to our America the Beautiful. You and I are on the same page here my friend. I only fault Boehner for not being strong enough to stand up more to Obama and his minions!!

        voncile in reply to Vladtheimp. | March 27, 2014 at 6:25 pm

        Vladtheimp, you are absolutely correct. It was the egg-sucking Democratic Senate that I hold responsible for the government shutting down both times.
        For the most part, the Republicans in the House are doing the job their voters sent them to D.C. to do.
        Hopefully in November conservatives and Republican’s will be so upset about the obamacare debacle that they will show up at the polls and give the House members a Republican controlled Senate! Only them will we see American start moving forward again!!!

Obamacare is not about health care, people. It is all about the money. This regime doesn’t give a rats petoot about providing ‘affordable’ healthcare to anyone. He IS about spending America the Beautiful into oblivion. He hates our country and all it stands for.
His goal is to make America a third world country. Spending our money is only a means to that end. Health care be damned!!

    Not A Member of Any Organized Political in reply to voncile. | March 27, 2014 at 11:16 am

    AGREED VONCILE! I would change one word though.

    Voncile: “It is all about the money. This regime doesn’t give a rats petoot about providing ‘affordable’ healthcare to anyone. He IS about STEALING America …. He hates our country and all it stands for.”

The real surprise will be April 15 2015, when we get to find out if the IRS will actually consider any of these extensions valid.

You might want to consider comparing the cost of the ObamaCare policy versus something like Medishare.

See this article about the exemption from the individual mandate and mutual aid societies whose members are exempt from the IRS penalty because of their participation. The cost of their medical coverage may be significantly cheaper IF you have to pay for health insurance.

How Matt Drudge (and Other Obamacare Victims) Can Escape the “Liberty Tax”

The good news — for Drudge and other Americans who don’t want to buy an Obamacare-compliant plan due to personal objections or just plain cost — is that in many cases there is a practical escape hatch from the IRS penalty. And this option may end up offering better and more affordable care than Obamacare. The only catch is you’ve got to have a little faith.

Buried in Section 1501 on page 148 of the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is an exemption from the individual mandate for a “health care sharing ministry,” a group whose members “share a common set of ethical or religious beliefs and share medical expenses among members in accordance with those beliefs.” For any member of such group, the law says, “No penalty shall be imposed.”

Read the whole article.

IF a significant portion of uninsured Americans choose this route, it will effectively kill ObamaCare because the premiums of those (victims) forced to hold ObamaCare policies will skyrocket, i.e. the subsidies paid out by the government obtained by stealing it from other policy holders (victims), because there will be an ever diminishing number of ACA victims to victimize for those subsidies. The American people through collective action can kill off this program by civil disobedience, you have a choice not to be a victim.

BTW- ObamaCare is an insidious Faustian Bargain designed to destroy your right to benefit from the product of your labors and free willingly decide without coercion how much and how hard you will labor. The premise of that bargain is in order for you to have cheaper insurance, you agree that taking money from another person is ok for you but not for them. The result is slavery. Is the subsidy you receive for cheaper insurance a moral right by you to deny the chronically ill (like people with cancer) prescription drugs whose cost would eat into your subsidy? Do you have a moral right to enslave another person (force them to labor for you at their cost) because you think you don’t have to pay for something or get a discount?

buckeyeminuteman | March 27, 2014 at 1:33 pm

Can we please call the law what it really is? The Obama/John Roberts-care Act!