“Now that more than half of our states have won federal court rulings that ObamaCare goes beyond the boundaries established by the Constitution, our states should not be forced to implement any ObamaCare provisions nor should our job creators be saddled with its new taxes and tax reporting requirements,” said Brady, the vice chair-designate of the Joint Economic Committee and a senior member of the House Ways & Means Committee. “While it is clear to me that this legislation is heading for the U.S. Supreme Court, the administration is moving full steam ahead to put all of this unconstitutional legislation’s bewildering bureaucracy in place.”
“With declining revenue forcing deep budget cuts in the states, it’s irresponsible to ask governors to divert already scarce resources toward building a massive infrastructure for ObamaCare until the Supreme Court issues a definitive ruling on the law,” added Graves, a member of the House Appropriations Committee. “If Judge Vinson’s ruling is affirmed, state budgets will be saved from billion-dollar federal mandates that will create millions of new Medicaid enrollees and force millions of private employees into the government-run health care exchanges. Our governors should not be trapped between an invalid law and an indignant administration. President Obama should have to prove his law is Constitutional before the tentacles of big government grab substantial control over state budgets.”
ObamaCare, if left in place, will impose hundreds of billions of dollars in additional costs on Americans, their states and their employers. “Imposing these burdens now, when the Supreme Court may overturn ObamaCare entirely is ludicrous,” added Brady. “Instead, our bill removes the uncertainty surrounding ObamaCare that is holding back our economy.”
A similar bill, S. 281, has been filed in the Senate by U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas). Both bills delay provisions and new regulations of the Obama health care law that are not already in effect until final judicial resolution.