QOTD: libertarian madness
by digby
Sarah Kliff: Are you 100 percent convinced it was Congress’s intent to withhold subsidies in the federal exchange?
Michael Cannon: There are two ways to interpret that question. Did the people who wrote this language mean to withhold subsidies in federal exchanges? My answer to that is, I’m 100 percent convinced that they meant to do that.
The other way to think about it is, “Did the people who voted for this law intend to withhold subsidies in federal exchanges?” That’s a different question, but the answer is the same. I’m 100 percent convinced that’s what the members of Congress who enacted this law meant to do, just the same way I’m 100 percent convinced they meant to throw people off of their existing health plans even though they said, “If you like your health plan, you can keep it.”
It’s not as though we’re pouring over the Federalist Papers here trying to figure out what the founders had in mind. This happened just five years ago. And that just ain’t true.
He states different things throughout the interview — that lawmakers were rushed and didn’t know what they doing, that they were perfectly aware that states would have to create exchanges or their people would not get subsidies, or that Democrats created a federal exchange apparently for their own health since it is completely useless without the subsidies. But at the end of the interview it’s obvious that he knows it was a drafting error and simply sees this as a way to remove the subsidies from millions of people so they will not be able to afford health insurance — at which point the Republicans can blame the Democrats for doing that and then offer some weak tea “reform” removing community ratings, the pre-existing condition ban and required coverage, all of which will raise prices even more.
And then their plan will once more be in place. You remember the libertarian health care plan don’t you?
.