It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:33 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
 Supreme Court decision on Obamacare 
Author Message
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 2775
Post Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Health care: What the Supreme Court's ruling means for US consumers

Those insured through employers

Preventive health care services without co-pays. Insurers cannot impose lifetime limits or rescind your coverage, except in cases of fraud. Adult dependents can have coverage up to age 26. Beginning next year, employees will only be able to contribute up to $2,500 to their health flexible spending accounts. Some employers’ plans will see improvement in women’s preventive care benefits next year.

Those who buy insurance directly

States will establish health care exchanges where you can purchase insurance. The exchanges are meant to make insurance more affordable.

Those who don’t have insurance

Individuals who haven’t been able to purchase insurance due to a pre-existing condition will be able to buy insurance, and insurers will not be able to discriminate against them. Beginning in 2014, low-income individuals will be eligible for federal subsidies if they enroll in a plan through exchanges.

Those who choose not to buy insurance

They’ll have to pay a penalty — with exemptions for financial hardship. The penalty is $695 per year up to a maximum $2,085 per family, or 2.5 percent of household income. The penalty is to be phased in starting in 2014. (This is the portion of the Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of Obama's directives forcing people to purchase health care insurance that is controversial. The Supreme Court sees this penalty as a tax and the president (oops, the government) has the right to levy taxes. I just can't see what is being taxed.... taxing a non-purchase? Maybe somebody will explain how this is a tax but I haven't seen it yet.)

The article goes on to explain effects on other portions of the population. Then we read the following (which I don't understand either - :huh

The poor


The court ruled that the government can’t force states to expand Medicaid by cutting Medicaid funding. For states that don’t expand Medicaid eligibility to 133 percent of the federal poverty level, there could be a gap where people don’t qualify for a federal subsidy in the exchanges, but don’t qualify for Medicaid either. But some states will expand Medicaid benefits.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/13493663-4 ... o-you.html



Supreme Court's Obamacare decision hands federal government unlimited power (over how you spend your paycheck).


the U.S. Supreme Court has now ruled the federal government has the power to tax Americans into mandatory purchases of private industry products means an end to economic freedom in America. Why? Because it hands the federal government the power to force the American people to buy anything the government wants or face tax penalties for refusing to do so. It is the equivalent of announcing a federal monopoly over all private purchasing decisions.

"The Affordable Care Act's requirement that certain individuals pay a financial penalty for not obtaining health insurance may reasonably be characterized as a tax," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, in his majority opinion. "Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness."

Thus, the government can force Americans to buy anything it wants by simply characterizing the forced payment as a "tax."

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/036329_Obama ... z1zEz7uLW4

_________________
"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." ~ Albert Einstein


Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:58 pm
Profile YIM
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
It's not a tax, Ruts. It's legal speak/political speak, IMHO.

I, for one, am grateful to John Roberts and the US Supreme Court for upholding the Health Care Act.

As to folks who chose not to purchase insurance - well, there ya go! At this point, no one knows how many folks will even do this.

Hopefully, this will alleviate some of the terrible overcrowding in US emergency rooms over the next few years.

Hopefully, folks currently without insurance will now have access to health care instead of using emergency rooms (the costliest form of health care) as their primary care physicians.

Hopefully, folks currently denied health insurance (or whose premiums are astronmically high) will now have access to the care they need.

Hopefully, some states (think Alabama) will now open their markets to other insurance companies and the cost of insurance premiums will go down. Alabama is only serviced by Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Now you see why the insurance companies are so against any reform?

And, finally, hopefully US taxpayers at the local level will pay reduced taxes when indigent care costs in local hospitals goes down.

I don't see any problems with this. I see a lot of Americans benefitting from it.

Oh and finally - some of us will soon see a rebate in our premiums because insurance companies must now rebate excess premiums to policy holders rather than keeping our money and distributing this excess money to shareholders.

It costs way less money for preventative care than it does to treat folks after a catastrophic illness like heart disease, stroke, cancer, etc. Screening works - we've seen the incidences of cancer rates in some cancers go down over the last 10 years in this country. Folks are living longer with cancer than they ever have and, hopefully, this trend will continue with reformed health care. They are living longer thanks to screening which catches cancer at earlier, more treatable stages.

Jest my two cents...

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:13 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Republican ‘Patriots’ Terrorize America with Calls for Armed Insurrection
By: Rmuse June 30, 2012

The sole reason humans progressed beyond cave dwelling was their ability to learn, reason, and communicate to form communities and eventually civilizations. Unless a person is born with a genetic brain defect or are developmentally retarded, they should have the capacity to think rationally and assess situations critically to make choices in their own best interests. Of course, there are circumstances where ignorance plays a role in making bad choices, but unless a person is stupid, there is really no reason to continue reaching conclusions with no basis in fact. There is a notable difference between ignorance and stupidity, but both can lead to unwise acts, and in combination, there are few outcomes that do not produce disastrous results for the person and anyone connected with them.

In their quest to transform the country into a corporatist theocracy, Republicans are using the ignorance and stupidity of a significant segment of the population to incite violent reactions to every policy proposed by President Obama. Americans got a glimpse of the stupidity in the teabagger movement during the healthcare reform debate two years ago, and despite the availability of information about the myriad benefits of the health law, it appears that, coupled with racism, that particular group is still stupid and becoming a hazard to the security of the entire population. In the 24 hours after the Supreme Court’s ruling that the Affordable Care Act is constitutional, the combination of ignorance, stupidity, and racism exposed the threat of a violent uprising against the government of the United States.

There are Americans openly discussing armed insurrection to overthrow the government based on the notion that the worst form of tyranny this country has ever witnessed is the Affordable Care Act’s constitutionality. A list of comments labeled “Hilarious Reactions to the High Court’s Ruling” on a liberal website are not remotely humorous, and only serve to inspire more hatred toward President Obama among stupid Americans who lack the ability to discern between a legally passed law upheld by the High Court and tyranny against the citizens of the United States. A Michigan lawyer emailed numerous media outlets asking, “Is Armed Rebellion Now Justified? There are times government has to do things to get what it wants and holds a gun to your head. I’m saying we have to ask when do we turn that gun around and say no and resist.” A Breitbart activist claimed, “This is the greatest destruction of individual liberty since Dred Scott… the end of America as we know it. No exaggeration.” A conservative blogger Tweeted, “We don’t just need a new president. We need a revolution.” The Christian extremist Bryan Fischer said Chief Justice Roberts “is going down in history as the justice that shredded the Constitution and turned it into a worthless piece of parchment,” and the teabagger group Freedomworks said, “the power to tax is the power to destroy.” Another conservative blogger wrote that “someone got to Roberts and told him he has to vote this way or members of his family – kids, wife, parents, whoever – were going to be killed.”

Now, any semi-conscious American with a rudimentary understanding of the legislative process may find these assertions hilarious, but there are plenty of angry, racist, stupid, and extremely well-armed Americans who perceive the court’s ruling as a threat to themselves and their ignorant concept of American liberty. Their perception of tyranny is being co-opted by Republicans who use coded language and sometimes overt proclamations that the only solution to President Obama’s tyranny is a “2nd Amendment remedy” and armed rebellion. A Republican in the House of Representatives, Michele Bachmann, told residents of Minnesota that she wants them to be “armed and dangerous” if the federal government attempted to implement laws she felt were impinging on their freedoms, and the infamous 2nd Amendment remedy solution to a Democratically-controlled Congress originated with a candidate for the U.S. Senate from Nevada. However, there are less overt buzz-words and catch-phrases being used on a daily basis by Republicans that are instigating violence-tinged reactions across the country from seriously stupid and tragically ignorant Americans.

snip//


It is a travesty that the divisiveness raging across America for the past three years has its basis in racism, ignorance, and stupidity, because it is not health insurance reform, consumer protection from predatory banks, less government spending, lower taxes, or the jobs President Obama created. Republicans have seized on America’s racism and stupidity and parlayed them into a perpetual campaign of hate and vitriol to implement their Libertarian vision of America. America is being torn apart by Republicans and their hate-filled teabagger and evangelical bootlickers, and the real shame is that this country could be a truly exceptional nation for all the right reasons, and not because Republicans want to kill Muslims, Liberals, gays, and non-Christians. The proliferation of guns among evangelicals, teabaggers, and Mormons is no accident and there are specific reasons they stockpile assault rifles, machine guns, and a two-year supply of food and ammunition, and it is not for hunting rabbits and pheasants. The lot of the religious super patriots are on standby for a signal that the nation is ripe for armed insurrection and the Supreme Court just gave the “on your mark” warning by ruling that a brilliantly beneficial health insurance reform law is constitutional. Americans are going to need all the healthcare they can get when the shooting starts and one thing is certain, there will not be one Republican on the front line. They will be hiding out in corporate or church-provided bunkers to pick up the pieces and if any American thinks it is a joke, then they are as ignorant and as stupid as those who fire first.

Read more here: http://www.politicususa.com/republican-patriots-terrorize-america-calls-armed-insurrection.html

Yes, this article is inflammatory but it is also filled with some very good points, IMHO.

One of them:

Quote:
What is most tragic is that if any of these so-called patriots or religious sycophants ever took the time to peruse the Affordable Care Act provisions, they would be hard-pressed to find anything they would not benefit from. Willard Romney understands this because his similar healthcare reform in Massachusetts is extremely popular and covers 98% of adults and 100% of the state’s children. His opposition and constant criticism of the Affordable Care Act is not because it kills jobs, increases the deficit, or intrudes on Americans’ personal freedoms, it is because he is pandering to the stupid teabaggers who hate anything the African American President promoted, and that a Black man is in the Oval Office fuels their rage and drives them toward armed insurrection to “take back America.”


Think about that for just a moment - "98% of adults and 100% of Massachusett's children are covered now by healthcare reform initiated by Mitt Romeny when he was governor.

Think about this for just a moment - "is extremely popular" in the great State of Massachusetts.

So why is Mittens sooooo opposed to this same reform now? Hmmm? Because he is owned heart and soul by insurance companies and others who stand to lose in healthcare reform. That's why. When you sell yourself to the highest bidder, it is difficult to come out later and say you support something proposed by a Black President, now isn't it?

Why is it folks find it so hard to support something that benefits them?

Time to stop listening to the lies and start investigating this on your own. Do the research and come back here and discuss. See for yourself how you benefit from the reforms.

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:39 am
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 2775
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
U.S. lawmakers secretly negotiating to exempt themselves from Obamacare

Top lawmakers on Capitol Hill are negotiating a secret deal to exempt themselves from Obamacare. The Obamacare mandate is a total nightmare, of course, and it doubles health insurance rates while providing nothing resembling actual "health" care. It's such a nightmare that the very people who passed it now want to exempt themselves from it.

That would leave it in a state where only the constituents are subjected to its onerous costs and mandates, not the lawmakers who passed it into law. How's that for hypocrisy in America?

According to a report from Politico, "Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, sources in both parties said."

Con. http://www.naturalnews.com/040075_Obama ... akers.html

_________________
"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." ~ Albert Einstein


Fri Apr 26, 2013 6:03 am
Profile YIM
GT Truther
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:31 pm
Posts: 2831
Location: Fennell bay N.S.W. (AUS)
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Thank god I don't live in America!

Land of the inmates!

_________________
I am a HIGHLY STRUNG PRIMA DONNA (atari)


Fri Apr 26, 2013 1:00 pm
Profile YIM
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 2775
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
House passes Bachmann's 'Obamacare' repeal bill (But it will die in the Senate)
By Devin Henry | 05/16/13

The U.S. House voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act on Thursday night, its 37th vote to defund or dismantle the law, or portions of it, since Republicans took control of the House in 2011.

U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann sponsored the legislation this time around, the first time one of her ACA (“Obamacare”) repeal bills has seen floor action, though she has co-sponsored several others. Her argument against the law had a new angle to it this week: In the wake of the Internal Revenue Service’s admission that it had targeted conservative political groups’ tax-exempt status applications, the American people shouldn’t give the agency more power, she said (the IRS issues health care subsidies and imposes penalties under the law).

“Could there potentially be political implications regarding health care — access to health care, denial of health care — will that happen based upon a person’s political beliefs or their religiously-held beliefs?” she said at a press conference Thursday morning. “These questions would have been considered out of bounds a week ago, but today these questions are considered more than reasonable and more than fair for the American people.”

con. http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2 ... epeal-bill

_________________
"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." ~ Albert Einstein


Fri May 17, 2013 7:50 am
Profile YIM
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Yep, for the 37th time!

Yet they cannot seem to address:

1. Carbon pollution reaching historic heights.

2. The impact of sequestration on kids, cancer patients etc., etc.

3. Massive cuts to food stamps for vulnerable Americans.

4. 1100 garment workers (who BTW make clothing for AMERICAN firms) dying in Bangladesh.

5. 4,150 gun deaths in the US since Sandy Hook.

A pox on all of them! BAH!

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Fri May 17, 2013 8:41 am
Profile
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:21 am
Posts: 2775
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare

Unions break ranks on ObamaCare

By Kevin Bogardus - 05/21/13 05:00 AM ET

Labor unions are breaking with President Obama on ObamaCare.

Months after the president’s reelection, a variety of unions are publicly balking at how the administration plans to implement the landmark law. They warn that unless there are changes, the results could be catastrophic.

The United Food and Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW) — a 1.3 million-member labor group that twice endorsed Obama for president — is very worried about how the reform law will affect its members’ healthcare plans.

Last month, the president of the United Union of Roofers, Waterproofers and Allied Workers released a statement calling “for repeal or complete reform of the Affordable Care Act.”

UNITE HERE, a prominent hotel workers’ union, and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters are also pushing for changes.

In a new op-ed published in The Hill, UFCW President Joe Hansen homed in on the president’s speech at the 2009 AFL-CIO convention. Obama at the time said union members could keep their insurance under the law, but Hansen writes “that the president’s statement to labor in 2009 is simply not true for millions of workers.”

Republicans have long attacked Obama’s promise that “nothing in this plan will require you to change your coverage or your doctor.” But the fact that unions are now noting it as well is a clear sign that supporters of the law are growing anxious about the law’s implementation.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/ ... health-law

_________________
"The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those who watch them without doing anything." ~ Albert Einstein


Wed May 22, 2013 8:57 am
Profile YIM
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
OP/ED | 1/31/2013 @ 3:41PM
Rick Unger
Unions Seeking Special Treatment Under Obamacare Now Want Government Subsidies For Lower Paid Union Members

In a column posted here a few months ago, I took Walmart to task for seeking to avoid their obligations under the Affordable Care Act by taking steps to move employees off the company’s health care benefits program and into state Medicaid programs where the taxpayer ends up picking up the tab.

While Walmart is certainly not the only company scheming to thwart the intent of the law by changing the status of employees to avoid their intended responsibilities under the ACA—despite having ample funds to handle the cost of providing health care benefits to all employees—what makes the Walmart effort so disturbing is the fact that the company had publicly supported the law only to now turn around and seek to subvert it.

Today, we learn that big business has not cornered the market on this type of hypocrisy as we discover that organized labor—a key and critical supporter of the Obama administration’s efforts to pass healthcare reform— is now seeking special treatment via modifications to the law to benefit a particular class of union membership—modifications that would also come at great taxpayer expense.

At issue are the subsidies that will be available through the healthcare exchanges for those who do not receive healthcare benefits through employment and whose household earnings fall below 400 percent of the federal poverty level—currently $90,200 for a family of four.

Unhappy that important improvements in insurance benefits resulting from the healthcare reform law will now cost employers with union workers a bit more—improvements such as no longer permitting insurance policies to place the yearly and lifetime caps on benefits that leave beneficiaries high, dry and broke should they suffer a serious and expensive illness—some labor unions are now asking the government to change the rules to allow low-earning union workers access to the government subsidies so that their employers will not be disadvantaged when competing with companies who have non-union employees.

Were the unions to succeed in these efforts, millions of Americans who were never intended to qualify for healthcare subsidies would suddenly become eligible, adding a huge amount of cost to the program. This would not only do untold damage to the prospects of success for Obamacare, it could prove to be the final nail in the coffin for a union movement already hanging on by a thread.

Simply put, efforts to subvert the law or seek special treatment at taxpayer expense is just as offensive when it comes from labor as it is when coming from the employer side of the bargaining table—and I say that as a longtime supporter of the labor movement in this country.

Reporting on this story today, the Wall Street Journal spoke with Randy Beall—political director of Sheet Metal Workers Local 85 in Atlanta—who is one of the union leaders seeking the subsidies for his lower-earning union members.

Mr. Beall is concerned that the provisions of Obamacare requiring the removal of an annual cap on benefits totaling $250,000 that is currently a part of the insurance policy provided to his membership—an amount that would likely not get a worker through a cancer experience or a heart bypass operation—will add fifty cents to one dollar to the hourly costs of a member’s compensation package. Beall worries that this added cost will make companies who employ his members less competitive against non-union contractors who employ less than 50 employees and are, therefore, not required to provide their employees with health care benefits.

While Mr. Beall might have reason for concern, one would think that his issues would have been taken under consideration when his international union—Sheet Metal Workers International Association—actively pushed for passage of the Affordable Care Act, even after the Administration said ‘no’ to a union request that low-earning union workers be permitted to benefit from the subsidies.

Now, despite having lost on this issue—and after deciding that the law was still beneficial to the nation and to union members even without the desired subsidies—Mr. Beal and other union leaders in a similar circumstance want to take another shot at getting a better deal for their members at the expense of the taxpayers who would have to pay the cost.

By any standard of fairness, this is simply wrong.

If the unions are not willing to stand by the bargains they made, and the support that was given, how can we expect any better from an employer such as Walmart who also supported the law and now seeks to subvert the intentions of healthcare reform?

Whether you support the Affordable Care Act or not, the law is here to stay and deserves to be given a chance to either succeed or fail. And that simply cannot happen if special interests from either side of the political divide seek to except themselves from the requirements of the law or make a late play to improve their own self-interest at great cost to all other Americans.

Just as business must face up to their responsibilities and stop attempting to find ways to avoid the purpose and objectives of Obamacare, so too much organized labor step up to their own obligations. Much like businesses playing games to avoid the law, any attempts by labor to seek special favors for their membership will only serve to undermine the opportunity to bring healthcare to all Americans and destroy any opportunity we have to see what the ACA can do to improve American healthcare.

Any willingness on the part of the Administration to consider this union request, and write regulations that make subsidies available to union workers who receive their healthcare coverage through employment, will only serve to pervert the intent of the law and play into the hands of the many who are looking for any opportunity to undermine any chance for success the reform law might have.

The unions need to back off on this—and do so immediately—as nothing will kill health care reform faster than even the perception of this administration knuckling under to any special interest group—even if that group is a close friend and supporter.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/31/unions-seeking-special-treatment-under-obamacare-now-want-government-subsidies-for-lower-paid-union-members/

Ahhh so! Unions want a special exemption to their "low income" workers because Obamacare will add fifty cents to one dollar on their compensation packages. This, in turn, would make union shops employing less than 50 workers less competitive than non-union shops.

Why should American taxpayers pick up the tab for this?

Just because this is labor does it make it any less outrageous than Walmart seeking to shift its healthcare costs to the taxpayer?

Ummmm - no.

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Wed May 22, 2013 10:08 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Thanks To Obamacare, Major Insurers Have To Give Back $36 Million To California Small Businesses

By Sy Mukherjee on Jun 5, 2013 at 9:00 am

On Tuesday, Golden State small businesses and their employees got some great news: two of the state’s largest insurers will have to give them over $36 million in insurance rebates because of an Obamacare consumer protection.

The health law forces insurers to spend at least 80 percent of the premiums they charge on paying for actual medical services, rather than administrative overhead or profits. That means more money for ordinary consumers — and less for profitable insurance companies.

The so-called “80/20 rule” put $1.5 billion back into Americans’ pockets in 2011 alone. The average rebate was $151 per family across all insurance markets, and in states where insurers blatantly gouged prices, average rebates topped a whopping $500 per family.

Now, the benefits for Californians with small business health plans are beginning to materialize. Blue Shield of California will be forced to pay back $24.5 million in rebates. Anthem Blue Cross will have to pay back another $12 million. :crylaugh :clap

While cheering the latest numbers as a victory for California small businesses and their employees, consumer advocates argue that the insurance industry should try harder to proactively lower costs for companies and individuals.

“Health insurers should work to cut upfront premiums rather than reimburse consumers afterward,” said Jon Fox, consumer advocate at the California Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, in an interview with the Los Angeles Times. “Millions of dollars in rebates are a clear sign that health insurers are overcharging consumers.”

Large insurers like Anthem Blue Cross have tried their best to circumvent Obamacare protections like the 80/20 rule by threatening outlandish premium rate hikes. The health law requires state insurance regulators to review any premium hike request above 10 percent, but it leaves the decision of whether or not reject those rates with the states. Although 37 states can negotiate or reject insurers’ rates, some large-population states — including California — can’t.

snip

Read more here: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/06/05/2101831/thanks-to-obamacare-major-insurers-have-to-give-back-36-million-to-california-small-businesses/

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:33 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:54 am
Posts: 4952
Location: Canada
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Awesome post Blue :clap

_________________
Image Please Obey the Golden Rules viewtopic.php?f=31&t=3563&p=40912#p40912


Wed Jun 05, 2013 7:36 pm
Profile WWW
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Obamacare funding fight splintering GOP

by Joan McCarter .
Fri Jul 26, 2013 at 12:52 PM PDT

Fight! Fight!

Quote:
A growing number of Republicans are rejecting calls from leading conservatives, including Sens. Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, to defund the president’s health care law in the resolution to keep the government running past Sept. 30. The rift exposes an emerging divide over how the GOP can best achieve its No. 1 goal—to repeal Obamacare—while highlighting the spreading fears that Republicans would lose a public relations war if the dispute leads to a government shutdown in the fall.

The debate is happening behind closed doors and over Senate lunches, as well as during a frank meeting Wednesday with House leaders in Speaker John Boehner’s suite where fresh concerns were aired about the party’s strategy. On Thursday, the dispute began to spill into public view, most notably when three Senate Republicans—including Minority Whip John Cornyn—withdrew their signatures from a conservative letter demanding defunding Obamacare as a condition for supporting the government funding measure.


The Senate fight is quite public, with one GOP senator calling the defunding plan the “dumbest idea” he had ever heard. Senate GOP leadership, now that Cornyn has slunk back under his rock, will likely just ignore the nihilists, and can probably slap the idea down between now and the fall, when the funding debate happens. House Speaker Boehner and Minority Leader Cantor, however, might have a bigger problem on their hands. They've got a letter from more than 60 members telling them to have this fight.

Lest you wonder where the impetus is coming from for the yahoos:


Quote:
Atop the letter it reads “supported by Heritage Action and Club for Growth,” in all capital letters, and highlighted in yellow, referring to the conservative outside groups.


The Republican Party made its bed with these groups, or lined their pockets with them anyway. And now they're feeling the pain. Doesn't it just make your heart bleed for them?

2:05 PM PT: It gets even better. Here's Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK).

Quote:
“You’re going to set an expectation among the conservatives in our party that we can achieve something that we’re not able to achieve,” Coburn continued. “It’s not an achievable strategy. It’s creating the false impression that you can do something when you can’t. And it’s dishonest.” [...]

“The strategy that has been laid out is a good way for Republicans to lose the House.”


Popcorn, anyone?

3:13 PM PT: Game most definitely on.


Quote:
I agree with my friend Dr. Coburn: "Tom Coburn: Campaign to defund Obamacare 'dishonest,' 'hype'" http://t.co/...

— @SenJohnMcCain


http://www.dailykos.com/blog/Joan%20McCarter/

:mrgreen:

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Sat Jul 27, 2013 7:41 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 8:59 am
Posts: 6532
Location: Friendswood, TX
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
Maryland issues insurance rates that are among lowest in U.S.
By Lena H. Sun, Published: July 26


Maryland insurance officials approved final rates Friday for health plans to be sold in the state’s new online marketplace that are among the lowest in the country. The plans, which are for individuals, will be sold beginning Oct. 1.

The Maryland Insurance Administration approved premiums at levels as much as 33 percent below what had been requested by insurance carriers. For a 21-year-old non-smoker, for example, options start as low as $93 a month. Insurance Commissioner Therese Goldsmith reduced the premium rates proposed by every insurance carrier in the individual market, including some by more than 50 percent, according to an analysis by Maryland officials who will be operating the marketplace.

The rates offered by nine carriers are among the lowest of the 12 states that have proposed or approved rates for comparison to date, and among the lowest in the D.C. area.

“We are pleased that Maryland is among the lowest in the country,” said the state’s health secretary, Joshua Sharfstein. He said the rates were an important step for the launch of the online marketplace, the Maryland Health Connection.

According to the analysis, a 25-year-old buying the cheapest “bronze” plan — with the lowest premium but higher out-of-pocket costs — would pay $119 to $129 a month in Maryland, compared with $151 in Washington and $134 in Virginia. A 50-year-old could buy a “silver” plan and pay $260 to $269 a month in Maryland, compared with $319 in New York and $329 in Virginia.

Officials said the state’s analysis also showed that a majority of Marylanders expected to purchase health insurance through the marketplace will be eligible for tax subsidies to reduce the cost of coverage under the federal health-care law, known as the Affordable Care Act. Subsidies would be available for Americans who earn less than 400 percent of the poverty line, about $45,000 for an individual.

Dan Mendelson, chief executive of Avalere Health, a health-care consulting firm tracking implementation of the health-care overhaul, said Maryland’s low rates are consistent with states where there is strong competition among insurance carriers and among hospitals and other provider networks. Nationally, the rates approved or proposed so far have been below analysts’ expectations, Mendelson said.

snip

Read more here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maryland-issues-insurance-rates-among-lowest-in-us/2013/07/26/724e55f2-f612-11e2-a2f1-a7acf9bd5d3a_story.html

:yamon

_________________
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. - FDR


Sat Jul 27, 2013 7:46 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:54 am
Posts: 4952
Location: Canada
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
I heard on Bill Mayer's show last night that Retards, I am sorry that's too good for them, Republidicks voted to repeal Obamacare for the 30th time even though most states are showing that it is costing both the states and the end user's less money as the system gets set into place.

How long will it take before American's wake up and throw the Tea Party and ultimately Corporate America out of politics for good :huh :roll :crazy

_________________
Image Please Obey the Golden Rules viewtopic.php?f=31&t=3563&p=40912#p40912


Fri Aug 09, 2013 5:06 pm
Profile WWW
GT Truther
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:31 pm
Posts: 2831
Location: Fennell bay N.S.W. (AUS)
Post Re: Supreme Court decision on Obamacare
L2L wrote:
I heard on Bill Mayer's show last night that Retards, I am sorry that's too good for them, Republidicks voted to repeal Obamacare for the 30th time even though most states are showing that it is costing both the states and the end user's less money as the system gets set into place.

How long will it take before American's wake up and throw the Tea Party and ultimately Corporate America out of politics for good :huh :roll :crazy


I call them Republitards! L2L!! Over here L2L we have "Liberal/National party" the LNP are Our version of the republicans F :censor ing batshit nutty asswipes every single one of them and Tony "The Crony" Abbot John Howards A$$-buddy is a nutcase that would like revert us back to the Middle Ages FFS you know what he said about the NBN

A Tale Of Two NBNs The Coalitions Broadband Policy Explained!

Your in the Telecommunications biz are you not L2L so you should understand what Labor is doing compared to what Our Republitards are doing! Labors is Good Liberal / Nationals is bad Am I right!

Liberals ancient FTTN Fiber to the Node or Labors FTTH Fiber to the House I know which one I prefer FTTH!

Image

Agh hahahahahahahahaha Tony "THE CRONY" Abbott and his Railway project!

_________________
I am a HIGHLY STRUNG PRIMA DONNA (atari)


Fri Aug 09, 2013 7:30 pm
Profile YIM
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.