Congress is exempt from Obamacare?

[Jarod]

Will "simply" continue to receive a higher than "expected" subsidy, one they would not get according to the actual schedule in the law... but hey, Dung doesn't care... The people who pass the laws are "special" especially when they pass crap legislation which they don't want to apply to them at all.

First they tried to actually exempt themselves entirely on a weekend vote, but were caught, then when they understood that they would have to pay more, like everybody else will, for crappier coverage they again spasm'd, suddenly they were receiving a subsidy as they had to go to the exchange...

The reality is, they've minimized their own impact with regard to this law. And again, while retirees elsewhere will not get magical coverage above and beyond the coverage at the exchanges... because they're "retired" Congressional turdbuckets these people will...

1) That is assuming its higher than expected.
2) If my employer pays 75% of something, and that something goes up, I still getting what I contracted for, 75% of it.

You guys are playing semantics to try to get away with lying.

 

[zappasguitar]

Yeah. Jarhead asks in p14 to tell where hes wrong....but I never said he was wrong about anything the first place....I just post the WSJ explanation of the issue...




Hence this post...hes still trolling and all he needs to know is in the article already posted in the 2nd post....

You think that comment is somehow me saying he is wrong about something ? If so, learn to fuckin' read
....I never claimed he was wrong about anything, I just showed him a more through explanation of the issue of exemption....

So you are finally willing to admit that JAROD WAS RIGHT.

Good for you

 

[Jarod]

Thanks, Dungheap, for your sanity.

Too bad Nova and others like him refuse to understand.

NOVA and Damocles understand perfectly well, they don't care about the truth. Obamacare MUST be DEFEATED NO MATTER WHAT, who cares if its not what they are pretending it is.

 

[canceled.2021.1]

When people like Rand Paul claim that Congress is exempt from Obama care, what do they really mean?

Its like they believe Obamacare is something everyone has to drop there existing insurance program and sign up for.

I'm honestly asking, what do these Republicans mean when they make this argument?

It means they think they are better than you and you gladly comply and bow down at their feet. You even vote for it. Which means you ask for it. You lefties groan on and on about the elite and plutocracy, but you gladly trade your freedoms for apparent goodies and don't mind the plutocracy to tell you what to do.

 

[Jarod]

Yeah. Jarhead asks in p14 to tell where hes wrong....but I never said he was wrong about anything the first place....I just post the WSJ explanation of the issue...




Hence this post...hes still trolling and all he needs to know is in the article already posted in the 2nd post....

You think that comment is somehow me saying he is wrong about something ? If so, learn to fuckin' read
....I never claimed he was wrong about anything, I just showed him a more through explanation of the issue of exemption....

Ok, NOVA lets play your game...

There is no exemption for CONGRESS, and I wrong?

 

[NOVA]

When people like Rand Paul claim that Congress is exempt from Obama care, what do they really mean?

I'm honestly asking, what do these Republicans mean when they make this argument?

HERE WAS YOUR QUESTIONS.....BELOW WAS MY ANSWER.....

'Exempt' is not quite the right word but it does get your attention....their 'exempt' for the same costs the great unwashed will pay.

the statute means that about 11,000 Members and Congressional staff will lose the generous coverage they now have as part of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Instead they will get the lower-quality, low-choice "Medicaid Plus" of the exchanges. The Members—annual salary: $174,000—and their better paid aides also wouldn't qualify for ObamaCare subsidies. That means they could be exposed to thousands of dollars a year in out-of-pocket insurance costs.

the White House is creating a double standard. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) that runs federal benefits will release regulatory details this week, but leaks to the press suggest that Congress will receive extra payments based on the FEHBP defined-contribution formula, which covers about 75% of the cost of the average insurance plan. For 2013, that's about $4,900 for individuals and $10,000 for families.

How OPM will pull this off is worth watching. Is OPM simply going to cut checks, akin to "cashing out" fringe benefits and increasing wages? Or will OPM cover 75% of the cost of the ObamaCare plan the worker chooses—which could well be costlier than what the feds now contribute via current FEHBP plans? In any case the carve-out for Congress creates a two-tier exchange system, one for the great unwashed and another for the politically connected.

This latest White House night at the improv is also illegal. OPM has no authority to pay for insurance plans that lack FEHBP contracts, nor does the Affordable Care Act permit either exchange contributions or a unilateral bump in congressional pay in return for less overall compensation. Those things require appropriations bills passed by Congress and signed by the President.

But the White House rejected a legislative fix because Republicans might insist on other changes, and Mr. Obama feared that Democrats would go along because they're looking out for number one. So the White House is once again rewriting the law unilaterally, much as it did by suspending ObamaCare's employer mandate for a year. For this White House, the law it wrote is a mere suggestion........http://tinyurl.com/mpawn7h

AND AGAIN...IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, HAVE DUNGHEAP EXPLAIN IT TO YOU....

ITS PRETTY DAMN CLEAR.....

 

[Jarod]

HERE WAS YOUR QUESTIONS.....BELOW WAS MY ANSWER.....




AND AGAIN...IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, HAVE DUNGHEAP EXPLAIN IT TO YOU....

ITS PRETTY DAMN CLEAR.....

OK, so we are in agreement, Congress is not exempted from Obamacare. Sweet, I hope you will consider writing to Ron Paul and many other Republicans to ask them to stop lying to the American People.

 

[NOVA]

Ok, NOVA lets play your game...

There is no exemption for CONGRESS, and I wrong?

No game....read the damn article in post 2....it explains everything you asked.

 

[Jarod]

No game....read the damn article in post 2....it explains everything you asked.

See above, we are in agreement the article explains that there is no Congressional exemption.

I am glad we agree, I was hoping you would write to Ron Paul and his wack pack to ask them to stop lying to the American People. If Obamacare is so bad, have them fight it based on reality.

 

[NOVA]

OK, so we are in agreement, Congress is not exempted from Obamacare. Sweet, I hope you will consider writing to Ron Paul and many other Republicans to ask them to stop lying to the American People.

On second thought....HAVE DUNGHEAP EXPLAIN IT TO YOU....



When Congress first passed the health care reform, known colloquially as Obamacare, three years ago, attached was an amendment requiring all lawmakers and their staffs to purchase health care insurance via the online exchanges. This meant lawmakers would lose the generous coverage they were granted under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program – where the government subsidized as much as 75 percent of the premiums.

Do you understand what this says ?....the part about the original law that passed congress 3 years ago...and how it would affect

the federal workers...you understand that they would lose the gov. subsidized premiums for health care...THIS is the portion of

the law that they will get a pass on....an exemption, if you will....the money....Obama is changing the law that passed congress cause it don't suit him. ....

This is exactly what is explained in the second post also....the one you also don't understand.

Didn't you realize it was all about the money in the first place ?

 

[Jarod]

On second thought....HAVE DUNGHEAP EXPLAIN IT TO YOU....



When Congress first passed the health care reform, known colloquially as Obamacare, three years ago, attached was an amendment requiring all lawmakers and their staffs to purchase health care insurance via the online exchanges. This meant lawmakers would lose the generous coverage they were granted under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program – where the government subsidized as much as 75 percent of the premiums.

Do you understand what this says ?....the part about the original law that passed congress 3 years ago...and how it would affect

the federal workers...you understand that they would lose the gov. subsidized premiums for health care...THIS is the portion of

the law that they will get a pass on....an exemption, if you will....the money....Obama is changing the law that passed congress cause it don't suit him. ....

This is exactly what is explained in the second post also....the one you also don't understand.

Didn't you realize it was all about the money in the first place ?

So we agree, there is no exemption from Obamacare, right. They are not given any different treatment than anyone else, right? In fact, the ACA originally singled them out to be treated worse than the average American, but now Obama has fixed that and they are no longer exempt from Obamacare, they are in the same boat as everyone.... Right?

 

[NOVA]

So we agree, there is no exemption from Obamacare, right. They are not given any different treatment than anyone else, right? In fact, the ACA originally singled them out to be treated worse than the average American, but now Obama has fixed that and they are no longer exempt from Obamacare, they are in the same boat as everyone.... Right?

Wrong...under the original law passed in 2010 lawmakers would lose the generous coverage they were granted under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program

Using the 'exemption', they would not be applying this provision of the law, but EXEMPTING these workers from that provision....changing the law....


Why must I explain the same thing to you over and over and repost the same things again and again.....

Have Dungheap explain it to you.

 

[Jarod]

Wrong...under the original law passed in 2010 lawmakers would lose the generous coverage they were granted under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program

Using the 'exemption', they would not be applying this provision of the law, but EXEMPTING these workers from that provision....changing the law....


Why must I explain the same thing to you over and over and repost the same things again and again.....

Have Dungheap explain it to you.

So what you are calling an "exemption" simply puts public employees back into the same place as any other employee? Right, I understand. Now it does not matter if you work for Congress or the 7-11 you are subject to the same rules.....

 

[NOVA]

So what you are calling an "exemption" simply puts public employees back into the same place as any other employee? Right, I understand. Now it does not matter if you work for Congress or the 7-11 you are subject to the same rules.....

Lets try again....
'
...under the original law passed in 2010lawmakers would lose the generous coverage they were granted under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program

Using the 'exemption', they would not be applying this provision of the law, but EXEMPTING these workers from that provision....changing the law....


Why must I explain the same thing to you over and over and repost the same things again and again.....

Have Dungheap explain it to you.

Do you understand the first 13 words....lawmakers would LOSE gov. paying for coverage under that present law....

using an exemption, they would not lose....the taxpayer will .....

can I put it any simpler than that....

Do you think companies will continue to pay out thousands to cover employees that buy coverage through the exchanges ?....

Why do you think labor unions are asking Obama for waivers and exemptions and extensions .....?

Healthcare costs GM about 7 to 10 thousand dollars per employee and 12 to 14 thousand for a family plan....are they gonna dishing out the money after
Obamacare kicks in ?

 

[Annie]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324665604579080921594857770.html

* September 23, 2013, 7:11 p.m. ET

Bennett and Beach: The Hypocrisy Of Congress's Gold-Plated Health Care
Special subsidies for Hill workers trample on the Founders' code of equal application of the law.

...And so, referring to the members of Congress, James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 57: "[T]hey can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society."

Today, elected officials need to be reminded of these truths. Under pressure from Congress, the White House has carved out a special exemption for Congress and its staffers from ObamaCare—the law it recently deemed necessary for the entire country. No Republicans voted for ObamaCare. Yet it appears that some of them support the exemption President Obama approved on his own—so they would not have to go on record with a vote for or against it.

This is the height of hypocrisy, and worse, a trampling of the Founders' code of equal application of the law. Having forced a health law on the American people, the White House and Democrats now seek to insulate themselves from the noxious portions of the law, and from the implementation struggles, indecision and uncertainty that many other Americans face today.

In other words, Congress's health-care premiums will not rise, but yours may. Members of Congress will be able to afford to keep their health-insurance plan, but you may be kicked off yours. They will be able to afford to keep their doctors, but you may have to find a new one.

Rep. Ron DeSantis, a Republican from Florida, recently put forward legislation—aptly named the James Madison Congressional Accountability Act—which would end the special exemption. In the Senate, Republicans David Vitter of Louisiana and Mike Enzi of Wyoming have also introduced legislation to end the exemption.

In response, several Democratic senators have reacted by drafting legislation that would punish anyone who votes for Sen. Vitter's plan by permanently blocking an exemption from them and their staff, even if Mr. Vitter's law doesn't pass. It doesn't get more vindictive and petty than that.

All this began when Congress passed the Affordable Care Act in 2010. It compelled Congress and its staff to participate in ObamaCare and its insurance exchanges like other Americans who don't have employer-provided plans. But in their haste and confusion over legislation so long that few even read it all, some members of Congress voted for the law without realizing that the final bill had no mention of the very generous premium contributions the government makes to federal employees as part of the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.

Imagine the horror when these elected officials, who make $174,000 a year, realized that not only must they and their staffers be subject to inferior-quality health exchanges like the millions of ordinary Americans, but they might also have to shell out thousands of dollars for increased premiums if they exceed the subsidy income cutoff.

The White House, under heat from Congress, directed the Office of Personnel Management to carve out special rules so that the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program can continue to contribute to the health plans used by Congress and congressional staff.

Congress complains that without its special subsidies the Hill will suffer a "brain drain" as staffers leave their jobs because of increasing out-of-pocket insurance costs. Heaven forbid Congress suffer the same fate as private companies like UPS, which recently had to cut health-care benefits entirely for employees' spouses; or labor unions, like the 40,000 International Longshore and Warehouse Union workers who recently left the AFL-CIO citing as one factor ObamaCare's tax on their "Cadillac" health-care plans.

You'd think that the authors of ObamaCare would have been prepared to cope with its effects. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, has already put money aside in his budget to help supplement his staff's health-care costs in anticipation of the new law. Other congressmen should have done the same.

Regardless of whether or not they support ObamaCare, members of Congress should refuse the special exemption. The law they enacted should apply to them.

 

[Bonestorm]

Still not seeing any "exemption."

 

[Truth Detector]

Silly Republicans, Independents and Libertarians; Obamascare is good because Librul Democrats say so. Now shut up and start paying for all those subsidies Obama lied about claiming they would be revenue neutral!!

 

[evince]

why do you WANT a world were fewer a d fewer people can afford medical care?

 

[Jarod]

There is no "exemption" from Obamacare, unless you call the provision that stripped federal workers of the same rights as other Americans an exemption. In fact what they are calling an exemption simply puts Congressional employees back into the same boat as all other Americans.

 

[tekkychick]

There is no "exemption" from Obamacare, unless you call the provision that stripped federal workers of the same rights as other Americans an exemption. In fact what they are calling an exemption simply puts Congressional employees back into the same boat as all other Americans.

When they have nothing else, they have to resort to lies and misleading language.