Tag Archive for Subsidies

It’s The Constitution .. Stupid.

The US Constitution being ignored is not a compelling reason for a Con-Con.

Donald Trump did (with a pen) what we asked for our GOP legislature to do for the last 6+ years of controlling the house.

Whether he realized it or not, he might well have set the tone for examining presidential actions, and more importantly how the bureaucracy interfaces with the public going forward.  Citing the constitution, the Trump administration has declared it will no longer pay for health care subsidies, period.  From ABC news:

”  the White House said the government cannot legally continue to pay the so-called cost-sharing subsidies because they lack a formal authorization by Congress.

However, the administration had been making the payments from month to month, even as Trump threatened to cut them off to force Democrats to negotiate over health care. The subsidies help lower co-pays and deductibles for people with modest incomes.

Halting the payments would trigger a spike in premiums for next year, unless Trump reverses course or Congress authorizes the money. The next payments are due around Oct. 20. “

Unless he “reverses course?”

He cannot reverse course.  It would be as illegal as Obama making the payments in the first place.  In fact, this very act was already preceded by a declaration that the very payment of those subsidies was unconstitutional, not just yesterday, but actually in APRIL of this year by US attorney general Jeff Sessions:

” Sessions said during a Fox News interview that the payments to insurers, which reimburse them for lowering the cost of copays and deductibles for low-income Obamacare customers and are the subject of a House lawsuit, should be appropriated by Congress.

Sessions’ comments come as insurers are concerned whether the Trump administration will continue to reimburse them for the cost-sharing reductions.

Insurers are required under federal law to provide the reductions for Obamacare and have been getting reimbursed by the federal government. They are expected to receive $7 billion this year.

But Sessions said a lawsuit filed by the House against the Obama administration in 2014 “has validity to it.”

The lawsuit argues that the Obama administration illegally bypassed Congress and didn’t get an appropriation for the payments.

Nobody could say they didn’t see this coming.

But where is the Michigan angle you ask?

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(0)

Solar Powered Failure

Same scat - different day.

Here’s to still and cloudy days

There must be a class in our taxpayer subsidized higher education system that trains government employees for subsiding business ventures that cannot survive on their own.  A preparation of sorts for the most productive work in Michigan state government.

A123 systems, LG Chem, etc..  Energy is the hot topic, but renewable energy has gotten a stake of the treasury in the past few years.

And to date, it has never been completely debunked as being a future solution for diminished resources.

That’s OK actually.  Under certain circumstances, renewable options provide ways to solve all manner of the issues.  Lawn lighting, roadside signs, or limited use for the cabin in the woods, all of which can be effectively served with solar, or other off-the-grid generation

You Betcha! (9)Nuh Uh.(0)

Why Did It Take So Long?

And how much taxpayer money has been lost to cronyism over the last 7 years?

kwamewoodWe’ve been lied to.

Michigan politicians have been telling us that the film credits were needed to compete with other states for years. Its just not so.

People in the industry have been remarking how successful other states have been by giving filmmakers taxpayer money to ‘create’ jobs in those states; all the while competing against Michigan’s excessive subsidizing of the vanity industry which HQs in Hollywood.

But the bottom line?

You Betcha! (10)Nuh Uh.(1)

When is a Failure not Deemed a Failure?: Part Deux

When Republicans raised the State Income Tax.

“We could have balanced the budget without taxing pensions,” [John] Nixon said.

Yes, raised the State Income Tax on E-V-E-R-Y-B-O-D-Y.

Special thanks goes to Dick and Betsy’s cupcake for once again illustrating the Progressive treachery within the MI-GOP.

You Betcha! (22)Nuh Uh.(1)

The Looting Continues Unabated

While All Is Not About ONE MAN, This Example Of Pay For Play Is Clear

pure-somethingThere is an explanation I have always used for my sincerest dislike of the MEDC, its mission, and how it takes advantage of the taxpayer for political payoff.

“If a business owner finds it necessary to take taxpayer dollars to start, maintain, or expand their enterprise, then that business model is already in trouble.  If there is no NEED for the money to survive, then it is simply a matter of theft.”

Its hard to be any clearer than that.

Any politico who uses the term “Jobs created” when discussing the MEDC grants, is trying to justify the stealing that must happen first, and is central to the MEDC program. In the history of subsidizing business, one would think that the predictions of ‘job growth’ with accomplished results would speak for itself.  In fact,  one might think such mechanisms insofar as they are touted, would make the news at least once a month if not weekly as a raging human interest success worthy of celebration.

You Betcha! (13)Nuh Uh.(2)

When Less Means More

Clearly, we dodged a bullet by not establishing a state run exchange. The AG appears to be watching for 'ricochets.'

Attorney_General_Bill_Schuette_410797_7For anyone who wondered WHY we did not establish a state run exchange, the answer is clearly about surrendering authority.

Not unlike the camel’s nose, the exchange was a buy-in to undermine state sovereignty. Fortunately, Michigan attorney general Bill Schuette appears to be trying to make sure the mandate does NOT apply to Michigan residents. From MLive:

Attorney General Bill Schuette is arguing an IRS rule offering tax credits to individuals buying health insurance on the federal exchange from states without their own exchanges violates the U.S. Constitution.

The argument was made in a “friend of the court” brief filed in a case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where individuals and businesses from states without insurance exchanges are challenging the ability of the IRS to offer tax credits for buying insurance through the federally established exchange.

Schuette and the attorneys general for Kansas and Nebraska argue that allowing the IRS to offer the credits overrules the decisions not to set up exchanges under the Affordable Care Act that 34 states made and is invalid under the Tenth Amendment.

Schuette’s on the right track.

Additionally, it should be noted that this might not be the most popular move, and could be painful to his campaign in the general. As many Michiganians are expecting a federal subsidy, it may not happen or they may lose that subsidy if this action is successful.

This is a courageous and quite correct move.

You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)