1 / 13

Healthcare Reform: Implications of ObamaCare vs. RomneyCare

Explore the Affordable Care Act's impact on Medicare, Medicaid, and individual mandates. Illustrates Supreme Court's role in shaping healthcare laws. Investigates partisan elements influencing legal decisions.

bryden
Download Presentation

Healthcare Reform: Implications of ObamaCare vs. RomneyCare

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. J. Bradford DeLong July 2, 2012 What Next for Health Care Reform? 1 04/11/12 1

  2. J. Bradford DeLong July 2, 2012 ObamaCare and the Decision: A Precis 1 04/11/12 2

  3. The Affordable Care Act • ObamaCare--but also RomneyCare • Leaves Medicare alone: the elderly are happy with their health insurance • But does strive to make Medicare more efficient--Independent Payment Authorization Board, etc. • Medicaid expansion to cover the the near-poor • Middle-class uninsured • Creates health exchanges--benefits departments for those who don’t work for a bureaucracy • Requires insurers to sell at one price to everyone in an exchange • Mandates that everybody buy health insurance • So people don’t game the system by saving money now and only buying insurance when they get sick 07/02/12 2 3

  4. The Questions Posed • Is the mandate that everybody purchase insurance a legitimate exercise by Congress of its power to regulate interstate commerce? • Is the requirement that states expand their Medicaid programs or lose all of their federal Medicaid funding unduly coercive? 07/02/12 2 4

  5. The Questions Answered • Four Democratic justices say that the mandate that individuals buy insurance is a legitimate exercise of commerce-clause power, and that the requirement that states expand Medicaid is not unduly coercive. • Four Republican justices say the reverse. • Chief Justice Roberts thus decides • And here things get very tricky very quickly 07/02/12 2 5

  6. The Mandate That Individuals Buy Insurance • Roberts agrees with the other Republican justices that the mandate is beyond Congress’s legitimate power to regulate interstate commerce. • But Roberts then pulls a fast one • He says that the mandate is a legitimate ue of Congress’s power to tax 07/02/12 2 6

  7. The Requirement That States Expand Medicaid • Roberts agrees with the other Republican justices that the requirement is unduly coercive, and intrudes on state sovereignty. • But Roberts then pulls a fast one • He says that the cure is not to strike the Medicaid expansion provisions as unconstitutional • He says that the cure is for the Supreme Court to rewrite the law to say that states that do not expand Medicaid do not lose all their Medicaid funding but just the extra Medicaid funding to pay for the expansion 07/02/12 2 7

  8. Chief Justice Roberts Has Gone to Malta • Republicans are furious: “Dishonest John” • Democrats are praising Roberts as a fine chief justice. 07/02/12 2 8

  9. J. Bradford DeLong July 2, 2012 ObamaCare Is RomneyCare: Two Implications 1 04/11/12 9

  10. The Affordable Care Act • It’s ObamaCare • It’s also RomneyCare • No Republican office holders objected to RomneyCare • Every single Republican office holder objects to ObamaCare • The key complaint is that forcing people to buy health insurance is not regulating commerce, but rather regulating the absence of commerce • But back in 2005 George W. Bush proposed, as part of his Social Security privatization effort, to require everybody to purchase a private pension account • And no Republican then complained that that mandate was an unconstitutional regulation of “inactivity” • And none of the Four Horsemen would have ever thought to find such a Republican-sponsored mandate to purchase a pension unconstitutional 07/02/12 2 10

  11. Partisanship • The Supreme Court engages in “Constitutional Moments” • It says that henceforth, the law will be different than it was yesterday • In such “Constitutional Moments”, the justices become moral and political actors rather than mere text- and precedent-based legal technicians • Miranda, Brown, Jones and Laughlin, Lochner, Santa Clara, Dred Scott • Past “Constitutional Moments” have been moral and political • This moment is purely partisan • The mandate that is under attack was a rock-solid conservative-Republican “personal responsibility” principle as recently as 2009 07/02/12 2 11

  12. The Future • ObamaCare = RomneyCare • It thus has RomneyCare’s weaknesses • No public option • Hands market power to many near-monopoly insurers • Requires state-level bureaucracies to be effective when state politicians have bet their careers on the failure of reform • Huge stresses on the system from the expansion of Medicaid • Increases in efficiency rest on six largely-untested bets 07/02/12 2 12

  13. Six Untested Bets to Improve Efficiency • Six bets: • Congress will allow the tax on high-cost health plans • Congress will allow the IPAB to function • Evidence-based medicine will work • For-profit hospitals and others will not find new ways to game the system • That we can double the amount of health care currently received by our 40 million presently-uninsured without demand for care outstripping the ability of our doctors, nurses, and technicians to provide it. • That the health exchanges will work • The first two are bets on what congress we elect • Preliminary news from Massachusetts on the latter four is good • Nevertheless, I am anxious 07/02/12 2 13

More Related