Former President Barack Obama’s legacy suffered a setback this week after the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major 7-1 ruling.
As noted by The Hill, the Supreme Court rolled back an Obama-era rule that changed how hospitals are reimbursed for care given to low-income patients.
While this hasn’t gotten national media attention, the ruling is a major blow for Obamacare, which is Obama’s self-described greatest accomplishment.
The change was reversed, thanks to a lack of “proper notice and comment regulations in implementing the formula.”
The court’s decision was a 7-1 in favor of vacating the rule, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh not involved in the case.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, and liberal Justice Stephen Breyer was the only dissenting member of the court on the Medicare case.
The court decided that hospitals who sued over the 2014 decision to lower their payments when serving low-income patients had a valid case, because of the lack of notice in the payment changes.
Here’s part of what Gorsuch wrote in the opinion for the majority:
“In 2014, the government revealed a new policy on its website that dramatically—and retroactively—reduced payments to hospitals serving low-income patients. Because affected members of the public received no advance warning and no chance to comment first, and because the government has not identified a lawful excuse for neglecting its statutory notice-and-comment obligations, we agree with the court of appeals that the new policy cannot stand.”
Nicholas Bagley, a law professor at the University of Michigan, took to Twitter on Monday to voice his concern over how big of a deal the ruling is to Medicare.
Bagley warned that the court’s ruling imposes burdens on the federal Medicare agency, known as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, that could hinder the implementation of the program.
Bear in mind that CMS is a tiny, beleaguered agency, as I explained in a 2013 all about Medicare's administration. To further encumber it will make Medicare more capricious, not less, as staffers tend to senseless procedures instead of doing their jobs. https://t.co/U5FoEdzL84 pic.twitter.com/gsMY1ErTLe
— Nicholas Bagley (@nicholas_bagley) June 3, 2019
The Medicare for all argument is about to heat up even more given several prominent Democrats have voiced their support for the idea.
However, two recent studies from left-leaning groups found that the Medicare for All plan could completely bankrupt the U.S. over time.
A study from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University found that the Medicare for all plan would increase government health care spending by $32.6 trillion over 10 years.
In order to pay for this, the federal government would have to impose unprecedented tax increases across the board, and even that may not be enough.
While getting “free” Medicare and health benefits sounds appealing, notable socialists fail to mention how taxpayers will be stuck footing the $32.6 trillion bill over 10 years.
A second study from Vox.com revealed that the “Medicare for All” plan would cost the United States a jaw-dropping $218 trillion over the next 30 years.
The socialist healthcare plan could literally bankrupt the entire nation, which is why Republicans and President Donald Trump have been sounding the alarm about not allowing Democrats to enact these dangerous proposals.