But it does contribute to the underlying financing of the law.” As recently as April, when former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both questioned whether the mandate would survive, Democrats were quick to say they did not agree with the two former Obama administration stalwarts. But moving ahead just a few months later, experts are starting to agree with Gibbs and Clinton and say the mandate could do more harm than good for Obamacare. Even the White House has labeled the mandate as “not critical,” when delaying it twice in the past year, and now plans to slowly phase in the mandate, which states that businesses that have more than 50 full-time workers must offer them affordable insurance. But the rule has helped lead to the nation’s objections to Obamacare, especially after businesses reported cutting jobs or hours to avoid the costs of providing insurance for their workers. And according to reports such as a recent study by National Center for Policy Analysis Senior Fellow Devon Herrick, the costs to provide insurance will hurt small business’ hiring, employee compensation, and business growth, and the still-healing economy can’t afford Obamacare. But eliminating the mandate may be too costly financially, as it is expected to generate between $46 billion to $100 billion over the next 10 years to pay for coverage expansion. “The employer mandate doesnt have a huge impact on insurance coverage. But it does raise a lot of money,” said Jonathan Gruber, an MIT economist who advised the White House on crafting Obamacare.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://www.ncpa.org/media/democrats-abandoning-obamacare-s-employer-mandate