Apparently the Obama Administration has pushed back the deadline for states to decide whether or not they will create health care exchanges as required by the Obamacare law. If they don't, then the federal government has to do it, and apparently they don't want to.
There seems to be emerging problems with mandating states to implement an expensive and unpopular law and a question of what the federal government can do if states refuse. Ohio is one of thirteen states in which it is illegal for the state to enforce any law requiring individuals to participate in a health care system.
The federal government has responded by rolling back the deadline for compliance. Michael Cannon over at Cato-at-Liberty.org wonders what the difference is between a rolling deadline and no deadline at all.
In an interesting parallel concerning another unpopular and intrusive mandate from the federal government, he reminds readers that we still don't have a Real-ID requirement, and that was passed in 2005.