The Federalist: The Media Doesn't Want Americans To Know Anything About King v. Burwell

According to a new poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, 7 in 10 Americans have heard little or nothing about King v. Burwell, the U.S. Supreme Court case that will, any day now, decide the fate of Obamacare’s health insurance subsidies for millions of Americans. Yet 63 percent of those surveyed also say that if the court rules against the government, Congress should act to keep those subsidies in place.

Got that? The vast majority of Americans know almost nothing about this case, but 63 percent have an opinion about what Congress should do in response to a ruling that carries certain policy implications. How can this be?

Other recent polls about Burwell and Obamacare also appear to be contradictory, as David Harsanyi noted about the recentWashington Post-ABC News poll, in which the conflicting results stemmed from how pollsters framed the question:

Harsanyi’s response: “Chew over the absurdity and bias of that query (it’s worse when you dig deeper). For starters, it has absolutely nothing to do with the legality or constitutionality of the Obamacare challenge—the reason the case is in the courts. It’s about the theoretical consequences should the court side with the challengers.” In philosophy, this is called petitio principii, the Latin term for the logical fallacy of “begging the question”—when one assumes in the premises the very conclusion one is trying to prove.

Via: The Federalist

Continue Reading....

Most Americans oppose cutting off funding for Obamacare, poll shows

Syracuse, N.Y. -- While many Americans still have a negative view of Obamacare, most oppose the idea of cutting off funding to stop the law from being implemented, according to a poll.

The poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation found 57 percent of Americans disapprove of the idea of defunding the law.

Obamacare, formally known as the Affordable Care Act, requires most Americans to get health insurance next year or face a financial penalty. Some lawmakers in Washington, D.C. who oppose the law say that if members of Congress cannot repeal it, they should cut off funding to stop the law from being put in place.

The most common reason poll respondents cited for opposing defunding is that "using the budget process to stop a law is not the way our government should work."

But public opinion of the law continued to tilt negative. The poll shows 37 percent of Americans say they have a favorable view of the law and 42 percent have an unfavorable view, shares that have held relatively steady since February.

Roughly half the public continues to say they don't have enough information about the federal law to understand how it will impact them and their family.

Via: The Post Standard

Continue Reading....

ObamaCare Work Disincentives: 4 Cliffs Hit Employees

In the time of Caesar, all roads led to Rome. In the time of ObamaCare, seemingly every path heads straight for a cliff.

The health law is filled with cliffs where the returns for more work take a nose-dive.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated ObamaCare will "reduce the amount of labor used in the economy by roughly half a percent" — about 800,000 full-time jobs. It seems likely that four especially steep cliffs — including two where marginal tax rates can approach 100% or more — will factor into work and hiring decisions.

The 50th employee: For companies with 49 workers that do not offer its employees health coverage, the hiring of just one more worker would carry a penalty of $40,000.

A firm with at least 50 workers that doesn't offer coverage must pay a $2,000 fine per worker (minus the first 30 workers) if even one of its employees receives ObamaCare subsidies.

Likewise, even if a business with 50 employees offers coverage, it would still face up to a $3,000 charge for each worker who nevertheless claims Obama-Care subsidies.

The law gives workers this option when employer coverage is deemed unaffordable because it costs more than 9.5% of the worker's household income.

France has 2.4 times as many firms with 49 employees as with 50 due to labor regulations that take effect with the 50th hire, BusinessWeek has noted.

How many firms will institute a hiring freeze to avoid ObamaCare penalties is unclear, but the risk is that the U.S. will go down a similar path as France.

The low-income cliff: At 200% of the poverty level is a dividing line. Deductibles for married couples on one side may be $300 vs. $3,500 on the other, according to one estimate provided to the Kaiser Family Foundation by Towers Watson.

In addition, a family at 200% of poverty would pay $830 less for subsidized insurance than a family at 225% of poverty, The Kaiser Family Foundation's health subsidy calculator shows.

Via: IBD

Continue Reading...