Congress, not the courts, should be curing what ails Obamacare. The landmark US healthcare law doesn't need major surgery as it rolls toward full implementation, but it could do with some nips and tucks. Judges are hearing dozens of cases like this week's test of certain tax credits. Such policy issues, however, are better handled by lawmakers.
The rocky birth of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act accounts for many of its defects. An unexpected loss by supporters of a filibuster-proof Senate majority forced them to forgo negotiated fixes and enact a flawed bill. Few were sure of what was contained in the several thousand pages.
Legislators have had plenty of time for the post-passage tinkering performed on most blockbuster laws, including Medicare and Social Security. Instead, Republicans have voted 37 times to repeal the measure, while Democrats have avoided proposing adjustments for fear of political reprisal.
More From This Section
Other claims go to weightier issues that probably do belong in court. Religious organisations, for instance, argue they can't be forced to offer insurance covering contraception, while others challenge the constitutionality of an independent board that will police healthcare costs. Even those issues, however, might have been resolved in a Congress more willing to compromise.
Leaving them to the courts jeopardises the entire law. It's not a job for judges to consider how a ruling on one part of a complex statute will affect policy choices embodied in the rest. And some issues don't have clear legal answers, meaning jurists may decide them based on ideology. Sabotaging Obamacare is, of course, largely the point of these lawsuits. Their chances of success are low. They will nevertheless prolong the uncertainty that has made planning for and investing in the future of America's healthcare system so difficult.
