South Carolina: Yet More Evidence that NO ONE ever thought HC.gov states were supposed to be denied tax credits
2018 MIDTERM ELECTION
Time: D H M S
As if we needed even more examples of how utterly full of hooey the chief argument of the King plaintiffs is:
A decision made more than three years ago by a committee that no longer exists might deal a major blow to Obamacare in South Carolina this summer.
...Former members of the S.C. Health Exchange Planning Committee say they weren’t aware in 2011 that their opposition to a state-based insurance marketplace might jeopardize so many people’s ability to pay for coverage.
“At no point in the committee’s discussion was there ever raised a concern that by opting into the federal exchange we were losing anything — especially subsidies,” said Tim Ervolina, president of the United Way Foundation of South Carolina and a former planning committee member. “I recall a very intense discussion with (former) Sen. (Mike) Rose, who stated that, after reviewing the law, he felt confident that we had nothing to lose and everything to gain by opting into the federal exchange.”
As a bonus, this article also gives a perfect example of just how much the Republican Party may end up regretting rooting for a plaintiff win in King v. Burwell:
Those customers include 37-year-old Erin Johnson and more than 140,000 other low- to middle-income South Carolinians who already receive those health insurance subsidies.
“If it’s full price, I honestly don’t think I could do it. I really don’t make much,” said Johnson, a medical courier from Goose Creek. She receives a federal discount worth more than $100 and pays only $56 a month for her policy. Before she purchased the plan in October, she was uninsured. “I needed it. It was pretty awesome.”
So the real question here is, who will those 140,000 South Carolinans who think that receiving decent healthcare coverage for only $56/month is "pretty awesome" blame if it gets ripped away from them a year later?