Sunday, April 3, 2011

Mitt Romney's ObamaCare Waiver Plan is a Farce


In an effort to try to divert attention from the controversial health care legislation he enacted while Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney released the following statement via National Review last week.
If I were president, on Day One I would issue an executive order paving the way for Obamacare waivers to all 50 states. The executive order would direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services and all relevant federal officials to return the maximum possible authority to the states to innovate and design health-care solutions that work best for them. (...)
The key phrase here is "maximum possible authority." Let's take a look at what the signed legislation says about waivers and the authority granted to the states. As John Vinci of Health Care News points out, there are six different types of ObamaCare waivers.
*MLR waiver for mini-med health insurance plans
*Annual limit waiver
*MLR waiver for States
*State innovation waiver
*ACO anti-trust waivers
*Individual mandate waivers
The type of waiver Mitt is talking about, is the "state innovation waiver." Good luck complying with the requirements, as South Carolina Governor, Nikki Haley recently discovered.
South Carolina Governor-elect Nikki Haley commented on her discussion with President Obama at a recent meeting he had with newly elected governors:
“I respectfully asked him to consider repealing the bill,” she said, to which he clearly stated he would not. “I pushed him further and said if that's the case, because of states’ rights, would you at least consider South Carolina opting out of the program?”
Obama told her he would consider letting South Carolina opt out, she said, if the state could find its own solution that included a state exchange, preventing companies from bumping people for preexisting conditions and allowing insurance pooling.
“I think it’s something we go back to South Carolina and start crunching," she said. "This is not about expecting what's given. This is about saying we're going to fight this every step of the way and use every option possible.”
Was Obama offering to exempt South Carolina by virtue of his own judgment and magnanimity? Hardly. Obama was offering no more than what Obamacare already offers. Namely, a “Waiver for State innovation” from section 1332 of Obamacare. But this waiver is not as helpful as Governor-elect Haley might hope. What President Obama did not tell her is that South Carolina would also be required to:

•“provide coverage at least as comprehensive” as Obamacare;
•“provide coverage and cost sharing protections against excessive out-of-pocket spending that are at least as affordable” as Obamacare; and
•“provide coverage to at least a comparable number of its residents as” Obamacare.

Benjamin Domenech, in his December 1, 2010 op-ed says, “If this seems like a silly Catch-22 for states, it is. The only policies that could meet this waiver requirement are single-payer constructs — which many other nations are moving away from, having tried them and seen them fail.”
In addition, states can't even apply for the state innovation waiver until January 1, 2017.

There is no way individual states could comply with the onerous requirements of section 1332. In order for Romney's strategy to be effective, it would either have to be overturned by the courts, or repealed by both houses of congress. I would like to know more about what his executive order would say. Perhaps he will be kind enough to show us a rough draft?

Click HERE for the complete text of ObamaCare. Section 1332 begins toward the bottom of page 85.

22 comments:

Anonymous said...

ROMNEY 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU NEED TO GET OFF ROMNEY'S RIGHT NUT.

Johan "Mcon" said...

Here let me help you RWN.

As I have stated time and again, a one-size-fits-all national plan that raises taxes is simply not the answer. Under our federalist system, the states are “laboratories of democracy.” They should be free to experiment. By the way, what works in one state may not be the answer for another. Of course, the ultimate goal is to repeal Obamacare and replace it with free-market reforms that promote competition and lower health-care costs. But since an outright repeal would take time, an executive order is the first step in returning power to the states.

Your life would be so much less stressful if you weren't obsessed with Romney and continually trying to find ways to selectively quote him.

In The Know said...

There are 2 ways:

3 ways:

1. Do not enforce the law. Another words, as states fail to meet the incremental steps, do not fine or punish them. Similar to our immigration law.
2. Individual Mandate waiver: What defines. "poor"? If a state can show that the plan will cause a fiscal calamity in their state (many are on the verge of banckrupcy already) the state is given a waiver.
3. Individual State mandate: If a state is in the process of coming up with a plan of their own (study, planning, etc) a waiver can be granted to "stall" the enactment of a national plan.

In the mean time, while any of the above are going on, The repeal process is in progress. Once the appeal is passed, The above 3 would be deemed unnecessary.

CraigS said...

RWN
It's like working with my slower students. What part of a health care mess don't you get ? We are light years ahead of the world in cost and a third world competitor when it comes to quality. States like Mississippi and Arkansas revel in the fact that they are 44th and 48 th in health care EQUITY and point fingers at Massachusetts, which is number 1
Romney tried to address a real problem. 49 other Governors passed on the problem and it is much worse now. The gap between health care for the average guy and health care for O'Reilly and Kerry and Warren Buffett is yawning and getting bigger.
Does MassCare have problems ? Of course. As Romney said...." Why didn't Obama ask me what was wrong with the program? I could have told him what needed to be changed."
I am sick to tears of folks who continue to find fault with Romney because he tried to fix the problem and give a pass to the slumbering political giants who did NOTHING but kick the can down the road and complain about the government. I also find it amusing that we have HAD one election cycle already in 2008 when folks like Jim DeMint endorsed Romney and his 2006 health care plan ....only to find they must have stumbled over their understanding of the issue.
Give me a break. Fix the damn health care problem in this country and stop complaining

CraigS

Right Wingnut said...

Craig,

I suspect even your "slower students" would have read the article before commenting. Nothing you just said has anything to do with my post.

Right Wingnut said...

Johan,

There are copyright laws that need to be followed. I can't post his short statement in full. I made it clear that was more, and provided you with a link to National Review.

Right Wingnut said...

In The Know,

1. Do not enforce the law. Another words, as states fail to meet the incremental steps, do not fine or punish them. Similar to our immigration law.

Perhaps that's not a bad plan, but what will the executive order say? The legislation makes it clear as to the requirements for being granted a waiver.

2. Individual Mandate waiver: What defines. "poor"? If a state can show that the plan will cause a fiscal calamity in their state (many are on the verge of banckrupcy already) the state is given a waiver.

This is for individuals, not states.

3. Individual State mandate: If a state is in the process of coming up with a plan of their own (study, planning, etc) a waiver can be granted to "stall" the enactment of a national plan.

Is that in the legislation? I didn't see it, but perhaps it's an option.

Right Wingnut said...

I don't doubt that Mitt Romney would sign a full repeal if it reached his desk. However, I think this executive order strategy is unrealistic. I just feel that Mitt is trying to distract from his own plan by spreading false hope. The only hope is to defund and repeal the entire bill. The president does not have the constitutional authority to change statutory law with the stroke of a pen.

Anonymous said...

RW - I start from the position of knowing Romney is not an idiot, so your questions don't really matter to me. I give him the benefit of the doubt that he's given plenty of thought as to what he would do from day one about Obamacare.

You start from the position of either believing him to be a reckless panderer, or trying to prove it so. But are you really naive enough to believe he would declare such an intention so thoughtlessly? You severely underestimate the man.

But no matter. You can chase your tail all day long for all I care.

-Martha

Right Wingnut said...

Martha,

I don't think Romney is an idiot either. In fact, I consider him to be a very smart man.

But yes, I do believe he has a history of pandering. I believe that is what this all about.

Pablo said...

Is Romney's proposal similar to the Brown-Wyden proposal back in November that would allow states to opt for a waiver if they met certain standards? If so, then I fully support Romney's proposed executive orders. States are laboratories of democracy. If each state can come up with a solid plan then so be it. The problem is that Republicans did not go for the Brown-Wyden proposal, because most Republicans come from states with lousy health care laws. They know they will never meet the standards. Brown comes from a state that would meet the standards. And the guy who was responsible for that health care law is one being attacked in this post.

If I were Haley Barbour, Newt Gingrich, and Mike Huckabee, I would be against any proposal like the Brown-Wyden proposal as well. They know their states will never come up with a plan that covers so many people at such a low cost.

marK said...

RWN,

You know, whenever I see Sarah Palin addressing any of her perceived problems -- such as poor extemporaneous speaking, not thinking deeply about serious national issues, always picking a fight where she doesn't need to, etc. -- I cheer her on. I always assume it is a good faith effort on her part.

I have even cheered Mike Huckabee on whenever it looks like he is might be addressing some of his issues such as extreme pettiness. With him, though, it never seems to last. He seems to always slip right back into his ingrained habits. Sarah, much to her credit, usually keeps improving.

Hey, look at that. I just complemented her once more.

Right Wingnut said...

Is Romney's proposal similar to the Brown-Wyden proposal back in November that would allow states to opt for a waiver if they met certain standards? If so, then I fully support Romney's proposed executive orders. - Pablo

Are you OK with statutory law being rewritten through an executive order? That seems to be what you're proposing here.

Pablo said...

ok, now I see what you are saying. There is definitely an argument to be made that Romney should not be able to do this through an executive. I agree with the concept, but perhaps it should be done through Congress.

Anonymous said...

Romney's waivers are brilliant. Extend the state waivers and if they are challenged, the courts will tie it up for some time. If that fails, find a means in another of the waivers... and on and on while working with the congress to repeal the entire law.

The fact that there are so many waivers built into this law opens the door for a president willing to do so to tear it apart through the courts.

Right Wingnut said...

ok, now I see what you are saying. There is definitely an argument to be made that Romney should not be able to do this through an executive. I agree with the concept, but perhaps it should be done through Congress.

Yes! That is exactly my point. As the law stands, his executive order has no teeth! The states would never be able to compy with the requirements layed out in Section 1332. It has to be thrown out by a judge or rewritten by congress first.

Anonymous said...

Wingnut is right.

Typical pandering by Willard.

Right Wingnut said...

The onerous requirements of Section 1332 aren't the only problem. The state innovation waivers can't be granted until Jan 1st, 2017.

SEC. 1332. WAIVER FOR STATE INNOVATION.
(a) APPLICATION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—A State may apply to the Secretary for
the waiver of all or any requirements described in paragraph
(2) with respect to health insurance coverage within that State
for plan years beginning on or after January 1, 2017

I can do anything I want. I'm the President said...

"A State may apply"

Who said anything about, "applying"

The President could simply grant a waiver without them applying.

Where does it say in the 2000 page document that he can't?

It doesn't!

Therefore, Lots of wording are open to interpretation. WHO would argue with a President's interpretation?

Only the courts could do that. That takes TIME.

Anonymous said...

If it was sarah making the comment, RW wouldnt have a problem with it.

CraigS said...

RW
You are absolutely correct and " mea culpa " Often times, we overreact to " Titles "of input and that's what I did. I certainly agree with what I said, but it's relevance to your comments would strain credulity...even for my slowest students.
I'll try and comment with more credibility later

CraigS

Right Wingnut said...

No problem Craig! It happens to all of us.