Sam Olens Joins Effort Calling Obamacare “Fixes” “Illegal”

The Republican Attorneys General Association was so kind to send out a link to an article that appeared in yesterday’s edition of The Hill. The article has all the information about a letter from 11 attorneys general, including our own Sam Olens, that says the recent fixes were “illegal.”

From the article:

The attorneys general specifically criticize President Obama’s executive action that allowed insurance companies to keep offering health plans that had been canceled for not meeting ObamaCare’s more rigorous standards.

“We support allowing citizens to keep their health insurance coverage, but the only way to fix this problem-ridden law is to enact changes lawfully: through Congressional action,” the attorneys general wrote in a letter to Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “The illegal actions by this administration must stop.”

They say the healthcare fix was “flatly illegal under federal constitutional and statutory law.”


  1. Scott65 says:

    OK, so they (republicans) make a BFD about people losing insurance then they complain when Obama tries to fix it…these guys need to take a pill…a big pill. I signed up on the exchange with no no problem, I am saving almost $300.00 a month for a better policy…and I used said insurance to go to the doctor today without issue (to MY regular doctor)…so these guys need to watch their rhetoric…its going to backfire on them. I mean, how many people are already being denied healthcare due to to Deal’s stupid refusal to expand Medicaid for free for 3 years? With it in the news almost every day, republicans are drawing more attention of the people being denied healthcare…the wingnuts are already where they are, and it gains them nothing to keep harping on stupidity…people are figuring them out at a quickening pace

    • Ed says:

      Congrats on being one of the few. You’ve kind of neatly ignored a number of the other problems being highlighted by Republicans and critics of Obamacare.

        • seenbetrdayz says:

          I think he means one of the few who managed to sign up for something. (so he says)

          I’m finding it damn hard to believe anything Scott65 says anyway, seeing as he’s gone through insurmountable leaps and bounds to defend everything Obama, to the point that he’s spinning so hard it would make a pottery wheel jealous.

    • saltycracker says:

      My friends that “saved” went to policies with much larger deductibles, playing the odds they won’t need it. That’s rhetoric.

      • Dr. Monica Henson says:

        I have a friend in NC (which is also refusing to participate) who was able to keep his current Blue Cross/Blue Shield individual policy by purchasing it through the federal exchange, and the subsidy he has qualified for covers the full premium he would have otherwise paid. He doesn’t have to reapply for the policy, which qualifies as a “Bronze package” in the federal exchange. He is a recent retiree who has always purchased private health insurance coverage as a small business owner and is not yet old enough to draw Social Security or Medicare. The navigator recommended that he put the savings he would have paid as premium into a Health Savings Account, which will cover the $5,000 deductible if needed and will offer a tax deduction of a little more than half the amount of the HSA. He’s always had a $5,000 deductible when paying for the policy privately, so he doesn’t feel that it’s inordinately high.

  2. penguin says:

    Sam Olens and the Georgia State Legislature do have a history of really of fighting for constitutionality (cough – so long as it aligns with their political preferences, otherwise – constitutional rights, pshhh…).

    I don’t think you should diminish the point here that it’s pretty crass that Republicans complain about one thing and the second the Obama administration tries to fix it, they do things like this (or sue). Lesson for Obama: please ignore them.

    But, really, it would be more meaningful if Republicans would stop pretending that an uninsured problem doesn’t exist. Every thing they come up with to complain about is less important than that and seems to conveniently avoid this fact. So, maybe instead of finding little loopholes and ways to try and undercut the law, it’d be nice if the party offered some sort of alternative, amendment, etc. Otherwise, it’s hard to take seriously that their actions have any concern with the “law” or “rights” or anything other than undercutting Obama.

    • Dave Bearse says:

      They have an alternative from Georgia’s very own Tom Price. It such a great bill that the GOP House has left in Committee for a few years, what with the importance of voting to repeal Obamacare four dozen times ‘n all. It’s so good that it’s unnecessary that CBO score it.

  3. Napoleon says:

    This is nothing more than another chapter of a President pushing the envelope on what it means to “faithfully execute” the laws of the land. We all know that an executive has some latitude to enforce (or not enforce) a law. There are limits that have been defined by the Supreme Court, but as long as Congress hasn’t specifically directed the administration that it SHALL carry out X, Y, and Z, there is wiggle room. What the AGs are doing is taking the more murky line to the SCOTUS for it to define.

    • mpierce says:

      Like the employer mandate?

      (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall apply to months beginning after December 31, 2013.

Comments are closed.