By Abdul Hakim-Shabazz
IndyPoltics.Org

Every time I see something in the media regarding the Affordable Care Act (ACA) all it does is make me sick to my stomach. I have maintained that this legislation was going to be a disaster and everything I see proves I am correct. Now I know my friends on the “progressive” side of the aisle think the ACA is the best thing since frozen yogurt and sliced bread, but they seem to forget the first rule of medicine is to do no harm, and that is all we will get from the ACA, harm.

First, let’s do a quick recap of what we know. Employers (despite the one-year delay) have to provide health insurance to what used to be considered part-time employees because the law now says a full-time employee is someone who works 30 hours a week instead of something a lot closer to 40. You have the federal government, for the first time in history, using its taxing authority to compel state and local governments to comply with the ACA, putting an even bigger strain on their budgets.

Abdul Hakim-Shabazz is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org.

Premiums are going to rise as the healthy now have to pay for the sick and infirm, who get a better rate. And even those folks who have tried to comply with this and register through the exchange, can’t even log on most of the time since the administration never fully had the data infrastructure ready to go, even though more than $400 million was spent to get it up and running.

Now here’s a preview for what’s on the horizon. If what you’ve seen so far has made you feel ill, this will pretty much put you in the grave. In my hometown newspaper, the Chicago Tribune, there was a very thorough front-page story this past week on how the deductibles under Obamacare are tantamount to sticker shock once you get into the weeds and crabgrass of this thing.

Someone who buys insurance through their employer, the story found, was likely to pay about $1,100 in deductibles, under the “Affordable” Care Act, and I use the term affordable very loosely, and they are staring down the barrel of about $4,000.  Now granted, that is the Cook County area, but there is no reason why Indiana will be that much different.

If you go down the road to Kentucky, which my progressive friends have touted as a model, well one of those plans is only good if you get sick or injured in Kentucky. So if you live in Louisville and are driving across the bridge or are on the Ohio River, make sure you get sick on the Kentucky side because if it happens in Indiana you are out of luck.

And this all comes in the first couple of weeks of the ACA going on line. Just imagine what life will be like in 2014. And don’t even get me started on the medical device tax that is already hitting Indiana’s medical device injury like a cement truck.

We could have easily tackled our health care problem by creating a national version of the Healthy Indiana Plan which would have offered the working poor a chance to not only purchase health insurance, but also have skin in the game to encourage them to take responsibility for the own health and well-being. Instead we are going to have to deal with a monster that is going to spiral out of control and take this nation somewhere that no one will want to go when it is all said and done.

I am no fan of Sarah Palin, but the more I look at the ACA, I really do wish it had death panels.

Abdul is an attorney and the editor and publisher of IndyPoltics.Org. He is also a frequent contributor to numerous Indiana media outlets. He can be reached at abdul@indypolitics.org.

By Greg Zoeller
Indiana Attorney General

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller

Can the IRS require Indiana’s state government to pay a tax penalty just like any other employer?

The answer will set a precedent that goes to the fundamental relationship between states and the federal government. Much confusion exists over the lawsuit my office recently filed against the IRS, similar to the confusion over the Affordable Care Act itself. Simply put, our lawsuit seeks a declaration by the court as to what the law means and how it affects state government.

We raise these questions respectfully, but since litigation is adversarial by nature some view this as an extension of political arguments in Washington D.C. regarding the ACA. Our case is part of the constitutional process by which new laws are tested and our judicial branch interprets their meaning. Obtaining a conclusive answer from the judiciary is important so that as the state’s lawyer I can provide proper legal advice to my government clients.

State government does not pay federal income taxes and the federal government does not pay state income taxes. This is called intergovernmental tax immunity, part of dual sovereignty and a bedrock of our constitutional system. As an employer, state government withholds taxes from the compensation we pay our employees who owe state and federal taxes. But state government itself does not fill out an IRS income tax form.

So when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the ACA was constitutional under Congress’ authority to impose taxes, it naturally raised the question whether states also would be subjected to the ACA employer mandate’s tax penalties. The IRS now seeks to impose tax authority over state government. If that occurs, it would significantly alter the relationship between the federal government and states in a negative way.

My office does not represent individuals or private sector employers but rather the sovereign authority of Indiana. When we realized state government could face tens of millions of dollars in IRS tax penalties if even one part-time state employee was misclassified in their benefits-eligibility category, I decided to proactively bring this question to the courts, rather than wait for the state to be hit with an enormous tax bill – a penalty that would only serve to transfer state and local tax dollars to the federal IRS.

We seek relief from the employer mandate for state government and schools; but it will be up to the court to structure a remedy. Our lawsuit does not challenge the ability of citizens to shop for insurance coverage using the new federal exchange or to insure young people on their parents’ plans to age 26; it asks whether the IRS is correctly interpreting the ACA statute Congress passed.

As attorney general, my obligation is to defend our state’s authority and the decisions of our state’s policymakers. Usually this means defending the state when it is sued by plaintiffs. But from time to time the state must initiate its own lawsuits challenging federal actions that infringe upon our state’s authority. This is one of those rare occasions.

Greg Zoeller is attorney general of Indiana and a Republican.

By Cam Savage
TheStatehouseFile.com

Cam Savage is a principal at Limestone Strategies and a veteran of numerous Republican campaigns.

Two weeks into a partial government shutdown, Congress negotiated down to the last minute – the night before the treasury department’s Oct. 17 deadline to raise the nation’s debt limit.

These negotiations, though the word “negotiation” seems a charitable characterization of what was happening, always – or at least routinely – go down to the last minute.

So with that behind us, for now, I offer a few suggested pieces of legislation which I believe could unite Democrats and Republicans in both the House and Senate and bring some measure of peace and harmony to the American people.

Packaged together, call this legislative package the “Things that Grind our Gears Agenda for America.”

First, we must address an issue critical to all Americans (at least occasionally). I suggest a nationwide ban on restaurant bathroom doors being labeled with anything other than “Women” or “Men” or “Women/Men,” given the recent trend of unisex bathrooms. Also acceptable will be very standard images depicting obvious symbols for “women” or “men.”

What we have to put an end to is the trendy and covert speakeasy-type labels popping up on bathroom doors in restaurants around the country.

Enough already with the men’s rooms marked as “Room 201: Office of Albert B. Huffandpuff, Esquire” or “Dressing Room of Mrs. Dolores K. Snickerdoodle.” We get it, inside jokes are great for management and staff, but when en route to the bathroom, what patron is interested in cleverness? Give us cleverness in the name of your establishment, the décor, even the menu, but don’t leave us scrambling in our moment of need.

Now, if you’re out at an Italian or German or Mexican restaurant in the good ole United States, this is your problem. It won’t kill you to know two words in a couple different languages and restaurants are well within their rights to mark their bathroom doors in the language of the restaurant’s offered fare. But don’t be silly about it. Yes, I’m talking to you Outback Steakhouse.

Now, because only Congress can address issues of national security, let’s end this ridiculous practice of state troopers accompanying college football coaches onto the playing field for post-game handshakes. These coaches are surrounded by 75 fully padded college athletes, are we really worried about their safety?

Some people think this tradition began with legendary Alabama football coach Paul Bryant, but no one seems to be really sure. Why a guy whose nickname was “Bear” needed a security detail is a mystery, but now every big-time college coach has at least one state trooper at his side.

This does not seem to be the case with women’s college volleyball coaches.

And I don’t care if big college teams reimburse taxpayers for the overtime that state troopers rack up while escorting teams to and from crowded stadiums or even traveling with the teams on the road. I’m okay with that as long as the athletic departments are picking up the tab, but the shadowing of coaches onto the field just looks silly. Ban it!

And here’s an urgent issue Congress must address – those people who stand up on airplanes as soon as the plane arrives at the gate. Where do these people think they are going? There are 300 people in front of you to exit the plane, cool your jets: You aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. Standing up and putting your backside into my face isn’t going to get you off this plane any faster.

For this offense to common courtesy, I propose a $50,000 fine and 75 hours of community service as a TSA pat-down agent. Problem solved – immediately.

If Congress cannot unite Americans around a simple package of reforms targeting annoying airline passengers, obnoxious college football coaches, and misleading bathroom doors, what can unite us?

Cam Savage is a principal at Limestone Strategies and a veteran of numerous Republican campaigns and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. He is a graduate of Franklin College. He can be reached at Cam@limestone-strategies.com.

By John Krull
TheStatehouseFile.com

John Krull, publisher, TheStatehouseFile.com

INDIANAPOLIS – Abraham Lincoln once told a story about a man who had been tarred and feathered and rode out of town on a rail.

“If it weren’t for the honor of it, I’d rather have walked,” the man said.

In the aftermath of the slow-motion train wreck that was the 16-day federal government shutdown and dangerous flirtation with the economic disaster that would have accompanied a default on the nation’s debt, members of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate know something about the way the man in Lincoln’s story felt.

The honor they’ve brought upon themselves and their institutions is dubious at best.

To most of the world, the whole battle made little sense. A relatively small group of conservative lawmakers decided to try to hold this country’s – and, to some degree, the world’s – economic stability hostage to get a policy victory that they weren’t able to win in Congress, in court or at the polls.

More than a few of them blithely said that a default on our national debt wouldn’t be that big a deal, despite what every economist and credible business person in the country was telling them.

The Standard and Poor index estimated that the government shutdown and pointless dance with potential default drained $24 billion out of the U.S. economy.

And for what?

The tea party conservatives who started us down this road said they wanted to kill the Affordable Care Act. In the end, after wasting $24 billion and throwing the entire country into upheaval, what they got was a commitment for income verification – a provision that already was in the law.

Along the way, they managed to do severe damage to the Republican Party’s reputation. Polls revealed that the GOP’s standing had reached record lows. Some polls showed that Americans now prefer Democrats to Republicans by more than 20 points.

Worse, the tea party “wacko birds” – as 2008 Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called them – drew increasing fire from the right as well as the left. The American Conservative magazine ran a piece that blistered the tea party wing of the GOP and said:

“There is no serious argument for Republican governance right now, even if you prefer conservative policies over liberal ones. These people are just too dangerously incompetent to be trusted with power.”

This is bad news for a lot of reasons, but chief among them is this: No political party in this country – Republican or Democratic – can be trusted to use power wisely without the check of credible opposition.

Right now, at the national level, Republicans aren’t credible.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing about this sorry episode in American history is that the far right-wingers don’t seem to have learned anything from the experience.

Five members of Indiana’s congressional delegation voted against a deal to raise the debt ceiling and for derailing the American economy. They included two members who had worked their way into the national consciousness by bits of buffoonery – Rep. Todd “Loverboy” Rokita, R-Ind., (who flirted with a CNN anchor on national television by calling her “beautiful”) and Rep. Marlin “Grab Bag” Stutzman, R-Ind., (who told The Washington Examiner that Republicans had to get something out of the shutdown even if they didn’t know what it was that they wanted).

They were defiant to the end. Just before the vote in the House to reopen government and avert economic catastrophe, Stutzman issued a statement:

“Hoosier families are struggling under the weight of Obamacare’s job-killing mandates and the nation’s crushing $17 trillion debt.  This bill does nothing to provide relief of those issues or end special treatment for Members of Congress under Obamacare and therefore I will oppose it.”

Perhaps the Stutzmans of the world can’t learn anything from this debacle. As they retreat back to heavily gerrymandered districts, their biggest fear is being “primaried” – facing a challenge from within their party from someone whose views are even more extreme than theirs.

This means that, regardless of the defeats they suffer and the damage they do to their party and country, a core of right-wingers likely still will be in a position to defy reality and court disaster.

A century ago, the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives was Rep. Joe Cannon, R-Ill. A contemporary said that Cannon was so conservative that, if he’d been alive at the time of creation, he would have voted against God and for chaos.

If Cannon were alive today, he might be the poster boy for the tea party.

John Krull is director of Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism, host of “No Limits” WFYI 90.1 FM Indianapolis and publisher of TheStatehouseFile.com, a news website powered by Franklin College journalism students.

Amid all the tussling over the government shutdown and the debt ceiling, a couple of bombshells went off in the blogosphere that may prove of more enduring importance.

They suggest that there is a nontrivial possibility that Obamacare may implode.

The first bombshell went off on Tuesday, from Ezra Klein of the Washington Post’s Wonkblog.

Klein was one of those young writers who formed JournoList a few years ago so that like-minded Obama fans could coordinate their lines of argument. It was like one of those college sophomore clubs, not really necessary in an age of ready contact through email, but it shows him as a guy inclined to play team ball.
So it’s noteworthy when he writes, “So far, the Affordable Care Act’s launch has been a failure. Not ‘troubled.’

Not ‘glitchy.’ A failure.”

Klein notes that the rollout of the Medicare prescription drug program was also rocky two weeks into the process. But later it got smoothed out.

Klein fears Obamacare won’t. It’s not just a problem of overloaded servers. Everyone knew there would be lots of traffic in a nation of 312,000,000 people. Information technology folks say it’s easy to add servers.

It’s harder to get software systems to communicate. And as Klein quotes insurance consultant Robert Laszewski, “the backroom connection between the insurance companies and the federal government is a disaster.”

The reconciliation system isn’t working and hasn’t even been tested, Klein reports. Insurers are getting virtually no usable data from the exchanges.

Bloomberg.com columnist Megan McArdle, who unlike most Obamacare architects actually worked at an IT firm for a couple of years, sees the possibility of even more trouble ahead.

She points out that the administration delayed writing major rules during the 2012 campaign to avoid giving Republicans campaign fodder.

The biggest contractor did not start writing software code until spring 2013. They were still fiddling with the healthcare.gov website in September.

Instead of subcontracting the responsibility for integrating the software of the multiple contractors, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services decided to do it in-house — “a decision,” she writes, “equivalent to someone who has never even hung a picture deciding they should become their own general contractor and build a house.”

“If the exchanges don’t get fixed soon,” she writes, “they could destroy Obamacare.” You need the exchanges to enroll enough young healthy people to subsidize those who are sick and old, which is one of the central features of Obamacare.

Otherwise, premiums shoot up and up, pushing others out of the system — a death spiral that can continue year after year.

“At what point,” she asks, “do we admit that the system just isn’t working well enough, roll it back and delay the whole thing for a year?” She suggests that if the system can’t enroll 50 percent of its users by November 1, such a hugely drastic step would be in order.

That sounds like a nightmare of the first order — for individuals, for insurers, for employers and for the Obama administration. A far worse nightmare than when Congress in 1989 repealed the Medicare prescription drug plan it passed the year before because of widespread dissatisfaction.

By: Michael Baron

Of course it’s possible this nightmare will not happen. Things will get ironed out somehow.

But if they don’t, who’s responsible? First, a president who is not much interested in how government works on the ground. As a community organizer he never did get all the asbestos removed from the Altgeld housing project.

Politico reports that his “universal heath care” promise was first made when his press secretary and speechwriter needed a rousing ending to a 2007 campaign speech to a liberal group.

Second, lawmakers and administrators who assume that, in an Information Age, all you have to do is to assign a task to an IT team and they will perform it. Cross your fingers, and it gets done.

Third, government IT procurement rules are kludgy. Apple didn’t bid on this. The IT work went to insider firms that specialize in jumping through the hoops and ladders of government procurement rules.

Unfortunately, the consequences of a meltdown are enormous when a system is supposed to be used by everybody. If a private firm’s software fails, it can go bankrupt. No one else much cares.

But if Obamacare’s software crashes, the consequences will be catastrophic — for the nation and for the Democratic Party.

Source: RCP