Setting aside a personal preference for the idea: is the federal government obligated (strategically or otherwise) to wait for states to extend Medicaid to the uninsured? (Is it a settled matter as to when state obligations under the ACA have not been met?)
Setting aside a personal preference for the idea: is the federal government obligated (strategically or otherwise) to wait for states to extend Medicaid to the uninsured? (Is it a settled matter as to when state obligations under the ACA have not been met?)
MFAWII would replace the ACA. The ACA had many flaws owing to the fact that Obama compromised with the insurance industry and big Pharma to get it across the line. The result? Higher copays, higher deductibles, and higher drug prices. Issue an executive order for MFAWWI and you bypass these difficulties.
@Michael. Careful what you ask for. Anything that puts the ACA in front of the current SCOTUS will likely reduce its current effectiveness, and an executive order along the lines you suggest would very likely mobilize vast resources against it.
There is no question, a lot of entrenched interests would be arrayed against it, but it's an executive order right? Even Nixon issued a successful executive order to expand Medicare to those with disabilities, it's the same kind of thing. I know, the insurance industry is much stronger now than it was 50 years ago, but it's still an executive order.
It cannot be unconstitutional because it cannot be considered immoral (unlike abortion), there is no coercion, and because it would actually increase trade by increasing competition, therefore a claim cannot be made that it would reduce trade. So I don't know how or why SCOTUS could be involved.
And sure, it might fail, but nothing is easy, particularly those things of value.
Setting aside a personal preference for the idea: is the federal government obligated (strategically or otherwise) to wait for states to extend Medicaid to the uninsured? (Is it a settled matter as to when state obligations under the ACA have not been met?)
MFAWII would replace the ACA. The ACA had many flaws owing to the fact that Obama compromised with the insurance industry and big Pharma to get it across the line. The result? Higher copays, higher deductibles, and higher drug prices. Issue an executive order for MFAWWI and you bypass these difficulties.
@Michael. Careful what you ask for. Anything that puts the ACA in front of the current SCOTUS will likely reduce its current effectiveness, and an executive order along the lines you suggest would very likely mobilize vast resources against it.
There is no question, a lot of entrenched interests would be arrayed against it, but it's an executive order right? Even Nixon issued a successful executive order to expand Medicare to those with disabilities, it's the same kind of thing. I know, the insurance industry is much stronger now than it was 50 years ago, but it's still an executive order.
It cannot be unconstitutional because it cannot be considered immoral (unlike abortion), there is no coercion, and because it would actually increase trade by increasing competition, therefore a claim cannot be made that it would reduce trade. So I don't know how or why SCOTUS could be involved.
And sure, it might fail, but nothing is easy, particularly those things of value.