In Yet Another New Obamacare Bureaucracy, co-authors Karen Nix and Amanda Rae Kronquist reports in The Daily Signal, that the number of waivers granted by the Obama Administration stood at 222 in December. It took only two months for that number to rise to 915! If it this is such a great piece of legislation, why are all these waivers needed? The truth is, it isn't a great piece of legislation.

"These waivers don’t solve the real and permanent issues in the United States’ health insurance market and instead highlight the carelessness with which Obamacare was crafted. Rather than instill positive reform, they signal an attempt to plug one of the many holes under the new law."

Why the constant hole-plugging? If thinking people had actually worked on it, there would be no need for hole-plugging. Honestly, if intelligent thinking people had been involved, the legislation would never have seen the light of day. Allowing the free market to reign is the only fix for the illness of government involvement under which our health-care suffers.

The ongoing issues with Obamacare illustrate the problem with Democrats controlling and writing legislation: they don’t think. When the Liberal Good Idea Fairy strikes, they jump in without completing any kind of analysis. The problems surfacing with Obamacare indicate there was a severe lack of critical thinking going on when this monstrosity was dreamed up. Had any intelligent analysis been done prior to enacting this law, it would have revealed every problem we are seeing with Obamacare. My 16-year-old son could have crafted better legislation, and for about a quarter of the pay!

In an explanation for why waivers are necessary, Representative Fred Upton (R–MI), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is quoted as saying that...

"…waivers are necessary because “complying with the PPACA would have forced hundreds of businesses to drop the health insurance plans they provide to their workers because the plans that Obamacare would have forced them to have would have been too expensive, and would have bankrupted those business."

We were told that Obamacare would not cause insurance costs to increase, and that we would not lose our coverage if we liked what we had. So, were those statements outright lies, or simply a lack of intelligence? I recall hearing warnings about the costs of Obamacare before it passed Congress.

It’s curious to note that the need for waivers could have easily been avoided:

"Heritage health insurance expert Ed Haislmaier writes that Congress could have fixed this problem by “simply delay[ing] the effective date of the prohibition on annual coverage limits until after 2014, when the legislation’s new subsidies for more comprehensive coverage become available to workers losing their current mini-med coverage.” Another route Congress could have taken was exempting mini-med plans from the coverage requirement and calling them supplemental coverage.

"The message resonating from the subcommittee hearing is that the growing number of waivers approved by the CCIIO bureaucracy wouldn’t be needed if Congress took the time to write solid health care reform rather than slapping together ineffective changes with unintended consequences that, in fact, do the opposite of what the Administration promised the American people."

All this makes me wonder, who amongst our elected officials is actually working? Life inside the beltway must be pretty good if there are so many distractions to keep elected officials from doing what they were hired to do. Is there any wonder why so much cynicism abounds regarding the C-Hill Gang ("So let the government shut down. It's better for Americans when they aren't doing anything!")?

The never-ending assault on American citizens by our government strays far from the federal government’s constitutional authority. One Black American is wondering where in the Constitution is the federal government given the authority to prohibit health care from operating in a free market.

Anybody?