Conflicting federal court rulings on Obamacare that may imperil the subsidies that 7.3 million Americans use to afford health care coverage are a result of "sloppy language" in the law, according to a Politico article on the rulings posted Tuesday.
The rulings served as "another wake-up call for Democrats about the fragility of the health care law — and a reminder that whenever they think a lawsuit is no threat to the law, it’s probably a threat to the law."
The article noted that, because of Scott Brown's election to fill the Senate seat vacated by Ted Kennedy's death, Senate leaders were forced to use the procedural tactic of budget reconciliation, which allowed the bill to pass but also limited its ability to correct significant errors in the bill:
It didn’t allow Congress to fix simple wording mistakes in the law — an earlier version of which had squeaked through the Senate with GOP support in late 2009. The rules allowed only limited changes with a clear budget impact. It’s a bit like the college student who slaps together a rough draft of a term paper, expecting to clean it up before it’s handed in, only to find suddenly time is up.
The sloppy language stayed — and it came back to bite the Democrats on Tuesday.