...The majority opinion concluded that the law, as written, "unambiguously" restricts subsides to consumers in exchanges established by a state. That would invalidate an Internal Revenue Service regulation that tried to sort out confusing wording in the law by concluding that Congress intended for consumers in all 50 states to have subsidized coverage....
...The inaction stems in many instances from opposition by Republican governors to the Affordable Care Act....
The words in contention are taken out of context.
..."established by the state."...
The law clearly states the Premium assistance credit amount is established by the federal government as per it's definition. The State has an insurance commissioner that offers the individual market place. "...established by the state..." refers to the market place within the state itself. It will receive an assistance credit in the amount of.....as prescribed by the federal law. Yes, the ACA overrides any hideous idea a state might have in limiting the ability of a family, even if that family is only one person, to receive AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE INSURANCE. That is what the law is for. Standing one phrase on it's head doesn't change the content of the law.
(b) Premium assistance credit amount (click here)
What do we know about righties? They stand in offense to any word or group of words to their own means of their meaning. This is not new and it what happens when right wing judges make it to a bench of influence. Have we not seen the same idiocy by those of the Supreme Court with the same self-righteousness to redefine words better than Merriam Webster? The same Supreme Court that states money is more a citizen than a human being?
One would fully expect citizens of the USA to understand when the right wing political party runs for office, they talk a pretty picture, but, their reality is some of the saddest interpretation of words that ever existed. One might say the RNC is the party of the illiterate. Words are not defined within the RNC, they are 'toys of confusion and influence.' Their appointed judges are the same way.
The law does not transfer power to the states, it overrides the power of the state to exclude Americans from Affordable Health Care. The state in this instance is simply the commissioner that regulates health insurance sold in the state.
The entire law federalizes health care. Why? Because the states did a really lousy job with it. Why would a law written to bring about equity to all Americans in receiving health care hand over federal authority to a state that blew it in the first place. It's ridiculous, but, that what right wing judges conduct in court, confusion.
How many definitions does the word "the" have?
According to Merriam-Webster, many (click here).
Laws are NOT written one word at a time, they are written with CONTENT and CONTEXT. No one ever accused a right wing judge of practicing law either.
...The inaction stems in many instances from opposition by Republican governors to the Affordable Care Act....
The words in contention are taken out of context.
..."established by the state."...
The law clearly states the Premium assistance credit amount is established by the federal government as per it's definition. The State has an insurance commissioner that offers the individual market place. "...established by the state..." refers to the market place within the state itself. It will receive an assistance credit in the amount of.....as prescribed by the federal law. Yes, the ACA overrides any hideous idea a state might have in limiting the ability of a family, even if that family is only one person, to receive AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE INSURANCE. That is what the law is for. Standing one phrase on it's head doesn't change the content of the law.
(b) Premium assistance credit amount (click here)
For purposes of this section—
(1) In general
The term “premium assistance credit amount” means, with respect to any taxable year, the sum of the premium assistance amounts determined under paragraph (2) with respect to all coverage months of the taxpayer occurring during the taxable year.
(2) Premium assistance amount
The premium assistance amount determined under this subsection with respect to any coverage month is the amount equal to the lesser of—
(A) the monthly premiums for such month for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in the individual market within a State which cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer and which were enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 [1]of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or
What do we know about righties? They stand in offense to any word or group of words to their own means of their meaning. This is not new and it what happens when right wing judges make it to a bench of influence. Have we not seen the same idiocy by those of the Supreme Court with the same self-righteousness to redefine words better than Merriam Webster? The same Supreme Court that states money is more a citizen than a human being?
One would fully expect citizens of the USA to understand when the right wing political party runs for office, they talk a pretty picture, but, their reality is some of the saddest interpretation of words that ever existed. One might say the RNC is the party of the illiterate. Words are not defined within the RNC, they are 'toys of confusion and influence.' Their appointed judges are the same way.
The law does not transfer power to the states, it overrides the power of the state to exclude Americans from Affordable Health Care. The state in this instance is simply the commissioner that regulates health insurance sold in the state.
The entire law federalizes health care. Why? Because the states did a really lousy job with it. Why would a law written to bring about equity to all Americans in receiving health care hand over federal authority to a state that blew it in the first place. It's ridiculous, but, that what right wing judges conduct in court, confusion.
How many definitions does the word "the" have?
According to Merriam-Webster, many (click here).
Laws are NOT written one word at a time, they are written with CONTENT and CONTEXT. No one ever accused a right wing judge of practicing law either.
