Obama threatens to veto legislation delaying employer mandate

President ObamaEven though the White House agreed to delay the implementation of parts of Obamacare for employers until 2014, President Obama has no plans to do the same with the employer mandate program.

In fact, should Congress pass a bill to delay it, the president plans on vetoing it, according to a statement issued by the White House on Tuesday.

The White House’s statement was in reference to two bills being debated on the House floor this week — H.R. 2667 and H.R. 2668 — both of which would delay the implementation of the two mandates for an extra year.

“The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 2667 and H.R. 2668 because the bills, taken together, would cost millions of hard-working middle class families the security of affordable health coverage and care they deserve,” the White House’s statement reads. “Rather than attempting once again to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which the House has tried nearly 40 times, it’s time for the Congress to stop fighting old political battles and join the President in an agenda focused on providing greater economic opportunity and security for middle class families and all those working to get into the middle class.

“If the President were presented with H.R. 2667 and H.R. 2668, he would veto them,” it continues.

Regardless of what Obama ultimately consents to, employers nationwide are far from ready for the mandate’s implementation. A new study released this week by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that only 30 percent of small businesses nationwide believe they are prepared for the new regulations that comes with President Obama’s signature healthcare law.

Moreover, the impact that the law is poised to have on larger businesses and organizations is costly as well. Purdue University in Indiana announced a few days ago that it expects to spend an additional $2.8 million on healthcare as a result of Obamacare, and two universities in Florida have already announced they will cut the hours of adjunct faculty members to avoid paying the extra costs.

Comments