There is a simple solution to the Obamacare exchange thing

[BlueStreak]

And I'll bet that the administration is already working on this.

The issue hinges simply on whether the state runs its own exchange or lets the citizens sign on to healthcare.gov. That's it. That's the whole issue.

The states that "run their own exchanges" all use contractors for at least some functions of the exchange if not the entire thing.

Sooooo.All that is needed is a contracting agreement that each state would sign with HHS to be their contractor to run their state exchange.. It they want to be really clean about it, HHS can get 38 domain names and drop each state's citizens on a different home page. This is all very easy to do, and I bet the plan is already in place to be announced am hour after Scalia and the Henchmen do what they are going to do.

The Federal side of this should be easy and not require any legislation. Such an agreement is simply a formalization of what is already in the ACA, authorizing the administration to run exchanges for the states. The administration certainly has the authority to craft to language for an agreement without Congress approving such a technicality.

The issue would be those 38 states. How many of the Governors would be dicks about it and refuse to sign this document, putting hundreds of thousands of their citizens at risk? Some would for sure. But that makes a perfect issue heading into 2016. We can really crank up the heat on the governors that try to be dicks about this.

[Hoyt]

1. The fact that would likely work, is why I believe even this Court will not strike down subsidies.

Congress' intent is/was clear. The federal exchange was simply for states too cheap or stupid to create their own.

[BlueStreak]

2. And I bet the administration is sending back channel signals to the SCOTUS

I can well imagine Keegan or Sotomayor, in the private discussions among the 9 saying "Hey guys, you do realize that if you overturn this on the basis of a narrow technicality about 'Federal exchange' versus 'state exchange', the administration will get past that in a nanosecond by turning Healthcare-gov into a contracting services agreement with the states, right? You guys do understand that don't you? You understand that we're going to all look like complete asses when that happens, right?"

[Hoyt]

4. Truthfully, I'm surprised the SC took this case, unless it was to shut some of the detractors up.

I think you are right about the women on the Court.

Let's hope. But, I like your "work around" if it becomes necessary.

[BlueStreak]

8. Re: the work-around I wonder why it has not already been discussed

After all, it seems obvious and so simple. I don't believe any legislation would be required.

If that is true, why all this drama about the SCOTUS decision? Why not just go out and offer those contracting agreements today, which would nullify the SCOTUS issue altogether?

I am thinking that this may be a trap that Obama is happy to set for the right wing. After all, this is to be the shining climax of everything they have been working toward. And if end the end, Obama can pull off the solution I describe, that will be a very powerful message that the ACA is here to stay.

And the Obama team may be laying low because they want the SCOTUS to stew in their juices a bit. I best within the next few months they will figure out that they will be totally shooting themselves in the foot if they overturn this part of the ACA. Not only would t be a stupid decision based upon the most inane of technicalities, they would immediately be circumvented. There is nothing worse that can happen to the SCOTUS than to make a horrible, very unpopular decision, and then find it nullified by a simple executive branch action.

I wonder if Obama has already gamed this out and concluded he has checkmate on this one. He isn't acting like somebody who expects to see his most important legacy be destroyed.

[brooklynite]

3. And why would a State sign this contract?

The Federal Exchange took responsibility because the (Red) States explicitly REFUSED to participate in the process.

[riderinthestorm]

5. Blue Streak addresses that in the last paragraph nt

[BlueStreak]

6. Some governors would be dicks. No doubt about that.

But they would pay a political price for that if Obama says "I am holding in my hands a contracting services agreement that is offered to each of the 38 states. The Federal government agrees to act as contractor on your behalf doing exactly what we are already doing. It costs you nothing, and it means that hundreds of thousands of your citizens will continue to have their ACA health care policies. It means that your people will be healthier, but it also means they will spend more money to the doctors and other health providers in your state, which means that more of your hospitals will stay in business and you will have a healthier economy. Governor, you have the choice to sign this agreement which costs you nothing. It is up to you."

With the right kind of grass roots actions, we could make it extremely painful for any Governor to not sign that paper.

And don't forget, behind the scenes there are going to be very powerful lobbyists from the health care system pressuring the governors to sign that. You think United Healthcare and Anthem want to see that business go away?

If the Obama Administration does not already have this team ready to hit the streets in June they are really dropping the ball.

[NaturalHigh]

7. Universal healthcare would fix it too.

Unfortunately we know that's a long ways off.

[BlueStreak]

9. My solution doesn't require any legislation at all. Obama can do this without any Republicans.

At least at the Federal level. He would need Republican Governors to sign on, but grass roots pressure -- plus the muscle of the health lobby -- would get that done.