It’s been difficult not to notice that a lot of states are having terrible experiences with their ObamaCare exchanges. In fact, a recent Washington Post article reports that “Nearly half of the 17 insurance marketplaces set up by the states and the District under President Obama’s health law are struggling financially.”
In a previous post, we mentioned that this fact should hinder attempts from state officials to establish a state exchange in the event that King v. Burwell eliminates the federal subsidies.
Regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision, nothing will change for the 16 states already running their own exchange. Also, Arizona recently passed legislation prohibiting the establishment of an exchange, so that 17 states will not be directly affected by King.
Thus, 33 states would lose federal subsidies if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the plaintiffs. At least 16 of these states appear to be led by officials who will make a strong push to establish an exchange in order to retain the subsidies.
If you happen to live in one of these states, it may be in your interest to contact state officials and tell them not to establish an ObamaCare exchange, even if King strikes down the federal subsidies.
After all, this is a problem the federal government created. It would be irresponsible to call on state governments to clean up a mess they didn’t create. If state leaders end up caving into the pressure to establish an exchange, then ObamaCare repeal will become an even more arduous mission than it already is.
FreedomWorks Letter to Congress in Support of Fiscal Commision Act (H.R. 5779)