What King v. Burwell and the Downfall of Obamacare Would Really Mean

Before the ACA was passed, Democrats screamed, “The sky is falling!  We must pass this law!’  Now that the Supreme Court stands poised to finally drive a stake through the heart of one of the worst misuses of legislative power exercised by a single party this century, the Democrats are again screaming, “The sky is falling!”

But is it?

Betsy McCaughey’s June 3rd New York Post article, “If Supremes Slap ObamaCare, it’s health insurers who lose” nails the post-decision fallout from King v. Burwell, should the Supremes actually apply the “plain meaning” of the ACA and gut Obamacare’s subsidies.  (Emphasis added)…

Any of the 37 states that want to can set up an exchange and immediately qualify for the subsidies. But most are controlled by the GOP and won’t do it.

Without subsidies, the employer mandate is toothless, because employers are only fined if their uninsured workers go to an exchange and get a subsidy.