House Republican Unveils Conservative Response to King v. Burwell

As Republican lawmakers brace for the U.S. Supreme Court’s King v. Burwell decision, a conservative plan has emerged that would eliminate the subsidies awarded under the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare.

In anticipation of the King v. Burwell decision, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., introduced the Premium Reduction and Insurance Market Reform Act. The bill would end Obamacare’s subsidies and eliminate the law’s age rating restrictions, benefit mandates and minimum actuarial value requirement—addressing the issue if the Supreme Court rules against the Obama administration. A decision could come as early as Monday.

The Supreme Court is examining the legality of subsidies awarded to consumers purchasing health insurance on the federal exchange. As it was written, the law limits the availability of subsidies to states operating their own exchanges. Just 16 states and the District of Columbia originally established their own exchanges.

However, the administration extended the tax credits to include the remaining 34 states using the federal exchange, HealthCare.gov.

If the court rules against the Obama administration, striking down federal subsidies, Republicans are expected to roll out a response to the decision that would still provide a safety net for the approximately 6.4 million Americans at risk of losing their tax credits.

GOP lawmakers in both chambers gathered Wednesday night to discuss legislative options.

A plan from Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., being discussed in the House allows for the allocation of block grants to states wanting them. Those states would be able to determine how to best spend the block grants to cover consumers. States that do not want the block grants would be able to keep the subsidies offered under Obamacare

Via: The Daily Signal

Continue Reading....

Obama making bid to diversify wealthy neighborhoods

The Obama administration is moving forward with regulations designed to help diversify America’s wealthier neighborhoods, drawing fire from critics who decry the proposal as executive overreach in search of an “unrealistic utopia.”

A final Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rule due out this month is aimed at ending decades of deep-rooted segregation around the country.

The regulations would use grant money as an incentive for communities to build affordable housing in more affluent areas while also taking steps to upgrade poorer areas with better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as part of a gentrification of those communities.

“HUD is working with communities across the country to fulfill the promise of equal opportunity for all,” a HUD spokeswoman said. “The proposed policy seeks to break down barriers to access to opportunity in communities supported by HUD funds.”

It’s a tough sell for some conservatives. Among them is Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), who argued that the administration “shouldn’t be holding hostage grant monies aimed at community improvement based on its unrealistic utopian ideas of what every community should resemble.”

“American citizens and communities should be free to choose where they would like to live and not be subject to federal neighborhood engineering at the behest of an overreaching federal government,” said Gosar, who is leading an effort in the House to block the regulations.

Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, are praising the plan, arguing that it is needed to break through decades-old barriers that keep poor and minority families trapped in hardscrabble neighborhoods.

“We have a history of putting affordable housing in poor communities,” said Debby Goldberg, vice president at the National Fair Housing Alliance.

HUD says it is obligated to take the action under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibited direct and intentional housing discrimination, such as a real estate agent not showing a home in a wealthy neighborhood to a black family or a bank not providing a loan based on someone’s race.

The agency is also looking to root out more subtle forms of discrimination that take shape in local government policies that unintentionally harm minority communities, known as “disparate impact.” 

Via: The Hill

Continue Reading....