The law is imposing many new rules on what insurance companies may and may not take into account when setting premiums. There is no experience anywhere indicating that these kinds of changes will lower premiums. And there’s an abundance of evidence from state experiments indicating that these changes will increase premiums, and probably quite substantially.

Conservatives and Republicans in Washington — activists, strategists, politicians — are increasingly embracing a theory about Obamacare: It's going to collapse of its own weight, and its failure could yield a sharp right turn in the 2014 and 2016 elections.

Their official name was changed recently to “marketplaces,” but the ACA’s mechanisms for expanded coverage can’t “exchange” a host of implementation problems immediately ahead.

The central provisions of the Affordable Care Act require younger and healthier Americans to buy insurance policies that will, in essence, subsidize the health care of older and sicker Americans. But one of Obamacare's hidden taxes — a new limit on contributions to health flexible spending accounts, or FSAs — will hit older and chronically ill individuals hardest.

This history of Obamacare’s political origins makes it all the more ironic that Obamacare, from what we now know, should not be considered a “universal coverage” plan, even by the benchmark the administration was using in 2009.

The Internal Revenue Service is facing a class action lawsuit alleging that more than 60 million personal medical records were improperly seized by agents from the embattled agency.

So how do you feel about turning over access to some of your most sensitive healthcare information to the Internal Revenue Service?

The latest mortal threat to Obamacare’s full implementation next January resurfaced last Thursday in the form of a new lawsuit filed in federal district court in the District of Columbia.