This week the Supreme Court begins hearing arguments about Barack Obama’s signature health-spending plan, commonly known as ObamaCare. A decision is expected within months, based on procedural and substantive issues focused on Obama’s controversial individual mandate.
But with its focus on the individual mandate, some fear the court may be overlooking a lesser-known mandate in ObamaCare, one that may have a bigger impact on the struggling economy.
Inspired by a health-spending plan from Mitt Romney, who restricted incentive for job creation in Massachusetts, ObamaCare mandates that businesses limit job creation to 200 full-time workers or pay to subsidize a so-called “Shared Responsibility for Health Care” between employers and their workers.
And Americans across the country are paying the price. High unemployment from Obama’s economic policy already includes millions of similar workers who are only marginally attached to the labor force.
Health-care expert Roger Battistella of Cornell explains:
New economic and demographic realities do more than underlie the declining role of employer-provided health coverage … They signify a larger transformation in the provision of social welfare and entitlement programs whereby individuals are required to assume greater responsibility in the financing of health and pension benefits.
America’s health-care system should benefit the economy. And it can.
We’re going to overcome disappointing change by adapting and improving on the best of tradition: transforming from ObamaCare’s unconstitutional scheme based on employer mandates to one based on individuals responsible for a robust and efficient system of consumer-owned health care – join me
Roger M. Battistella, Health Care Turning Point: Why Single Payer Won’t Work (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2010).
John A. Garraty, Unemployment in History: Economic Thought and Public Policy (New York: Harper & Row, 1978).
Roy T. Meyers, ed., Handbook of Government Budgeting (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999).