And your retarded, utterly moronic post here won't make anything out of these 1,990 pages of sheep $hit anything more than 1,990 pages of sheep $hit either.
The "They do it too defense" won't make this piece of feces smell any better.
NEXT!
1990 pages....
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
And your retarded, utterly moronic post here won't make anything out of these 1,990 pages of sheep $hit anything more than 1,990 pages of sheep $hit either.
The "They do it too defense" won't make this piece of feces smell any better.
NEXT!
When they are the government they should. Sunshine laws are a good thing.
Page 110 speaks to the abortions that will be paid for through this, and it depends on future legislation as well, as it simply states that any abortion that could be legally funded through public means at the time six months before inception of the program (2013) will be funded through this program.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I think the abortions that will be paid for (if any are paid for through government funds) will be in cases that insurance already covers, such as rape. I don't think that's very controversial.
It depends entirely on what laws are passed between now and then. You can "think" based on what may be legal now, but that doesn't change what it says, or the reality that all of it can change even with your thoughts in the way.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
They don't have the votes to pass a bill that pays for at-will abortions. The Democrats for life caucus grows larger, literally, with each passing minute. Pelosi is a liberal but she's also a political realist.
Which may mean that no abortions would be paid for through this means. However I think it is more likely that they hope for a change in the SCOTUS that allows a change in legislation by fiat. (Both sides).
speaking of gobbledygook..
Of course, we're still waiting to see the Palin/Boehner "Game Changer" can you link that for us?
christiefan915
Catalyst
And?? Are they talking about rape or incest? The Hyde Amendment has been in effect for almost 35 years.
TuTu Monroe
A Realist
...and?? Apparently you haven't read it.
christiefan915
Catalyst
From Politico's summary. What point are you trying to make?
Sec. 222. Essential benefits package defined. Outlines the broad categories of benefits required to be included in the essential benefits package, prohibits any cost-sharing for preventive benefits (including well child and well baby care), and limits annual out-of-pocket spending in the essential benefits package to $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 (indexed to CPI) for a family. Defines the initial essential benefit package as being actuarially equivalent to 70% of the package if there were no cost-sharing imposed. Requires the Secretary to assess adding counseling for domestic violence as part of the behavioral health or primary care visit. Prohibits abortion services from being made part of essential benefits package. Prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for abortion (except in cases of rape, incest, and to save life of the woman). Only private premium dollars can be used to provide abortion coverage. Where abortion coverage is provided, funds for this purpose must be segregated from other funds, including affordability credits. Includes a report regarding the need and cost of providing oral health care to adults as part of the essential benefits package. In the developing the essential benefit package, the Secretary shall support the need for assessment and counseling for domestic violence as part of the behavioral health assessment or primary care visit.
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_hcr_section_by_section.html
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
You really ought to read page 110 Christie...it's only one page.....it would make a lot more sense to defend what it says after you read what it says.....
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I recommend you not rely too heavily upon the Politico summary....
for example, it begins....
the difficulty for Politico is that Sec 101 provides as follows
that's $5 billion, not $5 million and the funding doesn't simply terminate....
two significant errors in the first paragraph alone....
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
Yikes!
just ran across Section 343 (Page 252) which discloses the premium costs for the Exchange policy
for a family at 400% of the federal poverty rate (currently at $22,050 for a family of four) premiums are capped at 11% of income.....
so, if you make $88,200 a year, your premiums will be $9702 a year. Since I am currently paying $6876 a year, I am not impressed with my savings.
just ran across Section 343 (Page 252) which discloses the premium costs for the Exchange policy
for a family at 400% of the federal poverty rate (currently at $22,050 for a family of four) premiums are capped at 11% of income.....
so, if you make $88,200 a year, your premiums will be $9702 a year. Since I am currently paying $6876 a year, I am not impressed with my savings.
ib1yysguy
Junior Member
Retard,
The number you quoted was for a family of four, then the number you said you were paying was for yourself. Do you not see how that's retarded?
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
no, but I will ask my wife and two kids who are on the policy with me and see if they can explain it....they're good at that.........(/whispers.....that's why I picked the example of a family of four, ibbie).........