Skip to main content
  • Home
  • About
  • Faculty Experts
  • For The Media
  • ’Cuse Conversations Podcast
  • Topics
    • Alumni
    • Events
    • Faculty
    • Students
    • All Topics
  • Contact
  • Submit
Health & Society
  • All News
  • Arts & Culture
  • Business & Economy
  • Campus & Community
  • Health & Society
  • Media, Law & Policy
  • STEM
  • Veterans
  • University Statements
  • |
  • The Peel
  • Athletics
Sections
  • All News
  • Arts & Culture
  • Business & Economy
  • Campus & Community
  • Health & Society
  • Media, Law & Policy
  • STEM
  • Veterans
  • University Statements
  • |
  • The Peel
  • Athletics
  • Home
  • About
  • Faculty Experts
  • For The Media
  • ’Cuse Conversations Podcast
  • Topics
    • Alumni
    • Events
    • Faculty
    • Students
    • All Topics
  • Contact
  • Submit
Health & Society

Q&A: University Professor Carl Schramm on Affordable Care Act Decision

Thursday, June 25, 2015, By Cyndi Moritz
Share
health and wellnessQ&A

In a 6-3 decision that many predicted to be the death knell of so-called Obamacare if it had gone the other way, the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday upheld federal tax credits for eligible Americans living not only in states with their own exchanges under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), but also in the 34 states with federal marketplaces. University Professor Carl Schramm, who taught a seminar on the ACA to students at the College of Law (one of the few courses devoted to this subject at any law school), shares his views of the case and its outcome.

Carl Schramm

Carl Schramm

Q. It was widely predicted that the ruling in King v. Burwell would swing the other way. Did you foresee this outcome? Why or why not?

A. I was betting that the ruling would come out this way. A recent case saw some hedging on statutory interpretation by several of the justices; I saw this as protecting themselves from being seen as inconsistent. Further, I never thought that the chief justice had made a “mistake,” as some have said, in finding a tax-related justification [for upholding the statute] the first time the ACA had been heard. I had a sense that the external push on the justices in the media about the alarming consequences of overturning Obamacare was effective before, and the push continued. The justices, as it was once said, do read the newspapers.

Q. Can you explain the state exchanges that were at the heart of the lawsuit?

A. It comes down to a few words in the statute. The states had the option of starting insurance pools, really public companies, to sell insurance. If they did, they would get subsidies from the federal budget. States have been baited for four decades into accepting federal guidance in Medicaid in this manner. Policy makers on the left presumed that offering incentives would do the trick. But, surprisingly, many governors and state legislatures balked. They did not institute exchanges because they saw that the federal regulations of health care provision would be a denial of fundamental liberties to patients and providers in their states. This quarrel is not resolved by the King case.

Q. What was the legal principle on which the majority made its ruling? Do you believe it is legally sound?

A. In my opinion, there is no principle involved. The Supreme Court apparently just wanted to make the Affordable Care Act statute work, and ignored the principal of reading plain meaning as the rule of interpreting statutes. One avenue of “reasoning” is not really legal at all. The majority opinion turns to several economic studies to say that if the court overturned the statute, severe economic hardship would descend on uncovered individuals. Ironically, there are now more uncovered individuals than when the ACA passed.

Q. The Affordable Care Act has been subject to many legal and legislative challenges since its inception. Will this latest ruling change all that, or will it spur more challenges?

A. We must remember the law was rammed through the Congress. Many of those who voted for it have left Congress, punished by voters. The law will continue to arouse anger among a wide range of citizens. The government continues to allow, unfairly, selected groups to opt out of coverage or avoid penalties for having, in the government’s view, too much coverage. Many big labor unions have enjoyed this exemption. The scheme has driven health care costs upwards. Look at the market surge of stocks in hospital and drug companies immediately after the decision was announced. Healthcare under the ACA sanctions enormous wealth shifting to health care providers with little assurance that more people will get better care. All of this will continue to feed a sense that the scheme, while now found constitutionally acceptable for a second time, is somehow not working and unfair. When more people find themselves without insurance, or being penalized for not buying it but still finding it too expensive to buy, there will ultimately be more political pressure. So, the game, for now has shifted back to Congress. In King v. Burwell, the court has said this is a political question. I suspect the court won’t take up another case on this, and given what it has declared, that the statute’s words do not mean what they say, lower courts will be reluctant to turn to the statute as guidance. The issue could not have been more clearly put before the court than in the King case. This is the end of the road for judicial review.

  • Author

Cyndi Moritz

  • Recent
  • Arts and Sciences Names Gwendolyn Pough Associate Dean of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility
    Monday, December 11, 2023, By Dan Bernardi
  • VPA Design Professor Named ‘Educator to Watch’ by Graphic Design USA
    Monday, December 11, 2023, By Erica Blust
  • Applications Open for SOURCE Explore, an Undergraduate Short-Term Research Experience
    Monday, December 11, 2023, By Cristina Hatem
  • Iona Volynets Named a 2024 Marshall Scholar
    Monday, December 11, 2023, By Kelly Homan Rodoski
  • Innovation Fund at SyracuseCoE Awards $40,000 to Local Climate Tech Companies
    Friday, December 8, 2023, By News Staff

More In Health & Society

Psychology Professor and Ph.D. Candidate Awarded NIH Grants for Alcohol-Related Research and Treatment

Nearly 30 million people in the United States struggle with alcohol use disorder (AUD), which is characterized by impaired ability to stop or control alcohol use despite adverse social, occupational, or health consequences. Of that 30 million, less than 10%…

Center for Health Behavior Research and Innovation Unites Investigators Across Disciplines to Improve Health and Well-Being

The College of Arts and Sciences (A&S) is pleased to announce the opening of the Center for Health Behavior Research and Innovation (CHBRI). The center will promote and support innovative health behavior research, training and community outreach endeavors across disciplines…

New Lerner Gift Amplifies the Impact of Healthy Mondays and Public Health Initiatives

Words that resonate, a memorable message and the power of the media to inspire action—these are fundamental to improving public health and foundational to the Lerner Center for Public Health Promotion and Population Health. Established at the Maxwell School of…

Research Shows Wastewater Testing Improves Predictions for COVID-19 Hospital Admissions

Testing wastewater for COVID-19 provides a better forecast of new COVID hospital admissions than clinical data, according to a Syracuse University research team led by postdoctoral researcher Dustin Hill. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a burden on the U.S. health…

Falk College’s School of Social Work Provides American Perspective at International Seminar

Alsace is a region in northeastern France that borders Germany and Switzerland and reflects a mix of cultures because over the centuries it has alternated between German and French control. It seems an unlikely place for an American university to…

Subscribe to SU Today

If you need help with your subscription, contact sunews@syr.edu.

Connect With Us

  • X
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
Social Media Directory

For the Media

Find an Expert Follow @SyracuseUNews
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Youtube
  • LinkedIn
  • @SyracuseU
  • @SyracuseUNews
  • Social Media Directory
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy
  • Campus Status
  • Syracuse.edu
© 2023 Syracuse University News. All Rights Reserved.