Congressional intent will be hotly debated in
the U.S. Supreme Court this Wednesday in King v. Burwell, the
latest litigation vehicle being deployed by opponents of
Obamacare. "Congress could not have chosen clearer language to
express its intent to limit subsidies to state exchanges," the
plaintiffs, represented by the Competitive Enterprise Institute,
argue in their brief.
Nov 18 (This is the latest installment of Steven
Brill's weekly column, "Stories I'd Like to See.")
A recent Martin Wolf column in the "Financial Times," "An
unethical bet in the climate casino," is a story I'm glad I saw.
It prompted me to think about how to make reporting on a subject
I usually find boring a lot more compelling.
Most disputes that end up at the U.S. Supreme Court are about the interpretation of the Constitution and statutes, not about facts. The press is mostly left to provide the basic background of the dispute and then quote each side’s lawyers. Little independent digging is required.
By now there should have been a pile on of stories shedding light on just how ridiculous the indictment of Texas governor Rick Perry is.
One reason Clinton might not be inevitable is that inevitable often doesn’t sell well.
In the weeks immediately following the failure of the federal government's Obamacare exchange website, policy wonks who were inclined to attach larger meaning to the fiasco than the simple incompetence of those in charge pointed to how difficult and time-consuming government procurement is.
1. Can we get our money back for the failure of Healthcare.gov?
Conventional wisdom is that House Speaker John Boehner has been afraid to defy the Ted Cruz-inspired House members who have insisted on closing the government and holding the debt ceiling hostage unless President Obama agrees to delay or defund Obamacare. The assumption is that Boehner fears that the most zealous Republicans in his caucus would turn on him and remove him as speaker. With that in mind, there's one story I've been waiting for and still haven't seen: Why haven't the Democrats offered to protect Boehner if he runs into trouble by allowing the full House to vote to reopen the government and extend the debt ceiling?
Amid all the publicity around the glitch-filled launch of the Obamacare health insurance exchanges and the accompanying debate over whether the premiums being offered will be low enough to attract enough buyers, one aspect of the story hasn't gotten nearly the attention it deserves.
With a deadlock over raising the debt ceiling looking more likely than a stalemate over funding the government to avert a shutdown, I've been looking for a definitive story on what exactly will happen if the ceiling isn't raised.