Government by Favoritism

By Thomas Lifson

ObamaCare is an even bigger disaster for America than previously suspected, going beyond merely wrecking the health care sector. It is changing the rule of law, the sacred principle of our political economy, into rule by government favor.

One of the many poorly-conceived provisions of ObamaCare was one mandating the percentage of premium income which would have to be spent on medical expenses. This had the effect of making it impossible to offer low cost plans to lower wage workers. When it became known McDonald's would drop a health coverage option for tens of thousands of its workers, ObamaCare advocates, who had bought the propaganda that "you will be able to keep your existing plan if you're happy with it", were seriously embarrassed.

Now, Bloomberg brings us the news that thirty companies and organizations have been granted a one year exemption from the rule which would have forced them to drop coverage. McDonald's and Jack-in-the-Box are the most names, but the biggest beneficiary?

The biggest single waiver, for 351,000 people, was for the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, a New York union providing coverage for city teachers.

This approach is an outrage. Why are the politically-connected and high profile granted an exemption? What about everyone else? What happened to equal treatment under the law?

This is a stinking example of government favoritism. It is obvious that the exemption is merely a way to make an embarrassment go away. For a year. If Secretary Sibelius is to grant an exemption, (pending repeal of the odious and unworkable provision), it should be a blanket exemption.

The lesson being taught to American business is that you'd better hope the authorities in DC smile upon you. If so, the worst provisions of the law won't harm you as much as they will your less favored competitors.

Ed Morrissey is correct when he writes:

The Rule of Law depends on an environment with clear regulation and unbiased enforcement. From the start, ObamaCare lacked any clarity in regulation. Congress filled the bill with the phrase "The Secretary shall determine" in place of establishing rules and regulations for the massive regulatory regime Congress created. Now, the White House has added arbitrary enforcement to uncertain regulation and opaque processes. This is not the Rule of Law, but the Whim of Autocracy.