Obamacare Schadenfreude: "Law? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Law!"

The weather here in Slower Maryland is currently underperforming expectations. We had been promised a partly sunny day, with temperatures rising towards 60 F.  What we have are cloudy skies, and temperatures barely budging above the 40 mark.  Hey, at least it's not below freezing and snowing.

Obamacare continues to underperform expectations, too, at least democratic forecasts. Not a big lot of Obamacare Schadenfreude today, and all of it centers around the newest set of extensions, allowing, to the the extent possible, people whose individual policies were cancelled as a result of Obamacare to get those policies reinstated until after the next set of elections, and indeed, possibly until after the next presidential election.  The is some reasonable suspicion that the extensions are of more benefit to democrat politicians than to the voters:

Izvestia The Washington Post sagely notes that such extensions have greatly confused the already confusing health care market: Slew of changes to health-care law creates more confusion for consumers

By allowing many people to keep their old plans for two years longer, the administration softened the blow for congressional Democrats up for reelection this fall. No longer do members have to fear a wave of cancellation letters right before the November midterm election.

But the changes have contributed to consumer confusion, as people try to sort through their options on the already hard-to-understand subject of health insurance, and race to meet a March 31 deadline to carry health coverage or face a fine. And the changes fuel suspicions that the law is deeply flawed, forcing the administration to try to patch it on the fly.
. . .
Some critics view the constant moving of the goal posts as a sign that the White House is not confident that consumers will ever warm to the health-care law.

“It sure looks like we’re on a ramp to more changes, and those changes are occurring because people aren’t buying it — literally and figuratively,” said Robert Laszewski, an insurance industry consultant who has been an outspoken critic of the administration’s handling of the rollout.

Detroit News (they still have news in Detroit?) is more open about the governments goal of quelling discontent and gaining political ground: Politics drives serial Obamacare delays

The serial delays of Obamacare are coming so rapidly and for such obviously political reasons that the White House is barely even trying to mask its real mission of protecting vulnerable Democrats in the mid-term elections.

In announcing the latest postponement this week — this one allowing individuals to keep their existing health insurance policies through 2016 — the Obama administration carefully credited Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Udall of Colorado, Ron Barber of Arizona and 10 other vulnerable Democratic lawmakers.

All face tough reelection fights in the fall in races in which Obamacare is a key issue.

While it may be politically expedient, rewriting a law passed by Congress simply to avoid ballot box consequences is an outrageous abuse of executive power.
. . .
The clear intent is to spare Democrats from the outrage that will come when consumers are notified that they’re either losing their policies because they don’t meet the standards, or their premiums are soaring.

The president continues to defend Obamacare as a grand benefit for the nation.
But neither he nor his fellow Democrats are willing to make that case to voters.
Recall that the law was written to delay the steep premium hikes and policy cancellations until the fall of 2013, conveniently after Obama’s reelection campaign.

Preach it, brother!

Finally, Peggy Noonan wonders if there is even a law left:

Insurers, however — those poor dears — are just a mite more worried about the latest change. Health insurance industry consultant Robert Laszewski explained last week:

The fundamental problem here is that the administration is just not signing up enough people to make anyone confident this program is sustainable.
Yes, the law’s $20 billion “3Rs” health insurance company reinsurance program will prop up the program through 2016––and even be enhanced because of these changes. But then the “training wheels” come off and the program has to stand on its own. As I have said on this blog before, I don’t expect the insurance industry to be patient past 2015 before it has to begin charging the real cost of the program to consumers. …
Even if the administration gets 20%, or 25%, or 30% of the eligible group signed-up by March 31, that is nowhere near enough to create a sustainable pool. The long-time underwriting rule calls for at least 70% of an eligible group to participate in order to get enough healthy people to pay for the sick who will always show up first for coverage.

Ah, well. The Obama administration has more delays, changes, and “fixes” where this one came from. The entire ABC This Week panel this morning was basically in agreement that this latest executive amendment was nothing short of a blatantly political bone the administration is throwing to anxious Democrats, and as Peggy Noonan mused, “Is there still an ObamaCare law?”

Bless her heart!