On behalf of FreedomWorks’ activist community, I urge you to contact your senators and ask them to support the HHS Slush Fund Elimination Act, S. 3481. Introduced by Sens. Ben Sasse (R-Nebr.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the HHS Slush Fund Elimination Act would prevent the Obama administration from circumventing Congress to bail out health insurance companies that participated in ObamaCare.

Advocates of government intervention in markets usually frame the debate as a binary choice: “We need government to run things so the evil corporations don’t!” It’s an effective tactic, because most people have an inherent distrust of big business, and like the idea of a less money-grubbing alternative. Most of the time, Republicans they foolishly play into the narrative, arguing that given the choice between corporate masters or government ones, we should choose the former. Unsurprisingly, few people are convinced by this, and they shouldn’t be. The whole debate is based on a false dilemma that doesn’t exist. The discussion should not be about choosing our rulers, it should be about choosing whether to be ruled in the first place. As the 19th century individualist Lysander Spooner said, “a man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.”

Last week, I wrote about how insurance companies are receiving only a fraction of the money they asked for to compensate them for losses under the Affordable Care Act, and how this was a consequence of structural weaknesses in the design of the law. Now, analysts from ratings firm Standard and Poor's are saying that the risk corridor fund charged with providing this money is nearly exhausted, and that congressional action will likely be required to refill it sometime next year.

It's always a good idea to look at the incentive structure behind any public policy. Analyzing how people are induced to behave, and the consequences of those behaviors, is a pretty good indication of whether a plan will succeed or fail. ObamaCare is too vast an example to take all at once, but new information sheds light on a particular piece of the health care law is contributing to the skyrocketing price of insurance.

The ObamaCare bailout provision is leading some health insurance companies to low-ball premiums to attract consumers during the open enrollment period, but they could be setting up enrollees for sharp cost spikes once the transitional section of the law expires after 2016.