Battle lines harden on ObamaCare

Republicans and Democrats are digging in their heels on ObamaCare, with both sides amplifying their rhetoric ahead of a Supreme Court decision this month that could cripple the law.

Congressional Republicans have been preparing contingency plans in case the court rules against the Obama administration in the case of King v. Burwell. That outcome would likely invalidate subsidies for 6.4 million people who have purchased insurance through the federal site, HealthCare.gov.

{mosads}The subsidies refer to tax credits paid out under ObamaCare to lower the cost of health insurance premiums. The tax credits are available for people with incomes up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $95,000 for a family of four. They are paid on a sliding scale, with poorer people getting a larger credit.  

While the administration has insisted it has no plan B for a ruling against the subsidies, it has also suggested the Republican responses are unacceptable. Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell on Wednesday said President Obama would be likely to veto the leading GOP plans.

Top Republicans, meanwhile, have made clear that they won’t accept restoring the subsidies through what Obama has called a “one-sentence fix” to the Affordable Care Act.

The resulting standoff could force the states to take the lead in dealing with the fallout from a ruling against the law.

States officials could work with the administration to create their own exchanges and restore the subsidies — but only if their governors and legislatures are onboard.

While Republicans have not coalesced around a single backup plan, Burwell on Wednesday rejected one of the leading proposals, from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.). His proposal would extend ObamaCare subsidies until 2017 while repealing the law’s individual and employer mandates for insurance.

“This bill, in its current form, is repeal, and the president has said that he will not sign something that repeals the act,” Burwell said. 

Asked if the administration had seen any Republican proposal that fixes the problem at stake in the court case while protecting the law as a whole, Burwell said, “We have not seen anything.”

Obama made clear his position at a press conference this week.

“A, I’m optimistic that the Supreme Court will play it straight when it comes to the interpretation,” Obama said. “And, B, I should mention that if it didn’t, Congress could fix this whole thing with a one-sentence provision.”

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who is leading the Senate Republican planning effort, swiftly released a statement rejecting that option, calling it a “fake fix.”

And Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) himself has said that he thinks Obama will veto any Republican response. 

“I don’t think he’s going to sign anything, frankly,” McConnell told “The Hugh Hewitt Show” last week. 

“So we’ll have a response to it, depending upon what the Court recommends,” McConnell said. “Whether the president will sign it or not is another matter, but we’ll let the American people know what we think is appropriate in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.”

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who is leading the House effort to prepare for the ruling, echoed the need to have a plan. With 6.4 million people possibly seeing a huge increase in their health insurance costs, Republicans are aware of the pressure they will be under. 

“It will be a very, very high octane political offense that the White House is going to conduct against us and you,” Ryan said on a March conference call with state legislators. 

“And that’s why I think it’s very important that all of us coordinate and that we have something to point to as a better alternative to ObamaCare, so that you’re not under such insurmountable pressure in the states to succumb and sign up for your state, and that’s basically why we’re doing this [planning effort],” he said. 

Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) said in an interview that if the court rules for the challengers, Republicans “will have to come forward to us.”

“They will have to answer the question of why they support raising taxes on 6.4 million people, most of them in states that they represent,” she added. 

Stabenow called Johnson’s plan a Trojan horse for repealing the law, and said, “I would be very surprised if any Democrat would vote for it.”

Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, said the Nevada Democrat is opposed to the Johnson plan.

If Congress plunged into a standoff, all eyes could turn to the states and their governors.

While Burwell says that the “critical decisions” lie with Congress and the states, she has also pointed to states like Nevada that already use the federal IT system for their exchanges.

Should it lose the case, the administration could forge partnerships to help jumpstart new state-based exchanges.

But that option would still require state leaders to agree to work with the Obama administration on an exchange. Some Republican governors have already ruled out doing so, while others have not made clear how willing they would be to take those steps. 

In Congress, Barrasso said Republicans would be working on their own plan, using a process called reconciliation to get through a measure with 51 votes instead of 60. 

“We’ll have to use reconciliation, 51 votes in the Senate,” he said. “I don’t expect any Democrats to support what we would bring forward, because the president will hold them hostage.”

Stabenow said Democrats would take a skeptical look.

“We certainly would look at any ideas they have,” she said. “But their ideas have been to repeal health reform.”