Hillary Clinton and Republicans agree on at least one thing: Barack Obama’s signature health care reform law is deeply flawed and in dire need of substantial restructuring if not outright repeal.
Of course, Clinton and her counterparts in the GOP are likely to disagree on precisely what parts of the Affordable Care Act deserve to be summarily stricken from the law, but all have apparently reached the conclusion that the controversial “Cadillac tax” on high-end insurance plans has to go. The tax is so controversial that it is among the many provisions of ObamaCare that has not yet been implemented. In fact, it was delayed for so long that the measure was not even scheduled to be implemented until long after Barack Obama had left office. But removing any tax associated with this behemoth entitlement means removing one of its few funding mechanisms. That revenue will have to be replaced somehow, and that’s a prospect that the next president would surely like to avoid tackling until it becomes absolutely necessary. If only Hillary Clinton had that luxury.
Oh, surely you didn’t think that former Secretary Clinton was outlining this no-win policy position out of a commitment to transparency and forthrightness. No, the former senator from New York was compelled to make her thoughts on the matter clear by Randi Weingarten’s American Federation of Teachers, one of few labor unions to outright endorse Clinton over Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. “Many of the union’s members would be affected by the Cadillac tax, which imposes taxes on pricey employer-based coverage plans whose premiums exceed $10,200 a year for individuals and $27,500 for families,” the New York Times reported.
The Times observed that Clinton will spend this and next week talking about her proposed reforms to the health care law that she believes is “generally effective but in need of certain tweaks.” Indeed, the GOP has campaigned in favor of “certain tweaks” to the law for the last three consecutive election cycles, albeit on a far grander scale than that envisioned by their Democratic counterparts.
Therein lies the political danger for Hillary Clinton. The Times story indicates that she will seek to replace the revenue lost by the repeal of the Cadillac tax “through other means,” and Clinton would surely like to leave it at that until she is safely installed in the Oval Office. If she is blessed with a compliant press, Clinton will not have to elaborate on those “other means” through which the government can recover the revenue lost as a result of the scuttled tax. But that’s not the only funding mechanism in the ACA that is giving Democrats agita.
ObamaCare’s employer mandate for small businesses – the largest source of employment in the United States – has also been repeatedly delayed. Its onerous burden on businesses and employers is glaring and its political toxicity is widely acknowledged. To do away with it entirely would be to substantially increase the financial strain on the federal government as more Americans without employer-provided insurance are thrust into the ObamaCare pools and thousands of businesses are no longer subject to penalties and fines for evading the law. Nevertheless, “Republicans are right,” averred the Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell, in a rare concession to the GOP. “The employer health insurance mandate is dumb.”
With Democrats and Hillary Clinton essentially confirming the GOP’s ObamaCare prognosis, it will be next to impossible for liberals to continue to claim into 2016 “ObamaCare is working.” At least, it will be for those influential left-leaning outlets that are modestly enthusiastic guardians of their credibility. If unions are unduly burdened by the ACA, and their privileged status as cherished members of the Democratic coalition affords them special breaks from this burdensome law, why is the vastly larger pool of non-union American workers exempted from such beneficence?
By conceding that some elements of the law are in desperate need of excision, Hillary Clinton will de-legitimize the liberal argument that prevailed in 2012, which contends feebly that the law is just fine as it is. By confirming that at least some of ObamaCare’s funding mechanisms must be scrapped, Clinton has confirmed her intention to raise taxes on undefined groups that, presumably, are not regarded as treasured Democratic constituents.
“The Affordable Care Act is a law that passed the House, it passed the Senate, the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional,” President Barack Obama said in 2013. “It was a central issue in last year’ election. It is settled. And it is here to stay.” A hope in the form of a declarative statement, Barack Obama will find this assertion further undermined by the members of his own party in 2016.
