Nothing beats paying customers.
Daily Kos isn't the only news organization to
point out that big business hasn't lined up in support of the
King challenge to the subsidies in Obamacare. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is most notably absent, which Bloomberg Business
also points out.
Large corporate lobbying outfits, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, often file "friend of the court," or amicus, briefs in Supreme Court cases affecting business and the economy. This time, they haven't joined the assault on Obamacare. The reason can be inferred from the amicus briefs of more narrowly focused insurance and health-care interests that have filed to support the White House. With a significant portion of its constituency urging the justices to leave Obamacare in place, the Chamber couldn't very well join the attack. (In response to my inquiry, the Chamber promised to comment on its non-filing but hadn't done so as of publication).
The Chamber is probably feeling the need to tread kind of lightly here, given how closely they are tied to Republicans. They don't want to lose any influence in the party by looking like they, you know, support commerce in the healthcare sector. Speaking of that massive industry:
Among those filing amicus briefs defending health reform are HCA, the American Hospital Association, America's Health Insurance Plans, the National Alliance of State Health Co-ops, the Catholic Health Association of the United States, the American Cancer Society, and the National Association of Community Health Centers. The insurance and medical industries share the administration's goal of seeing millions more people covered because that translates into millions more customers seeking the services of carriers, hospitals, and doctors.
Beyond additional customers, health-care businesses argue that they also care about consumer welfare. "We will not mince words," the American Hospital Association declares in its brief. The plaintiffs' position, "if accepted, would be a disaster for millions of lower- and middle-income Americans. The ACA's subsidies have made it possible for more than 9 million men, women, and children to have health coverage—some for the first time in years; some, no doubt, for the first time in their lives. That coverage allows them to go to the doctor when they are sick, and to do so without fear that the resulting bill could leave them in financial distress."
At this point, overturning the subsidies that pay insurance premiums for millions will indeed be a disaster all the way around—for the people losing their insurance, for the hospitals losing paying patients, for the states that have to pick up the costs of care for those people, and for the industry that would lose customers. But mostly, it would be a disaster for Republicans, who the Supreme Court would leave holding a big ol' bag of blame for the mess.