So all those that claimed it was “socialism” coming, now complain that the plan isn’t socialist enough to be directly employing people, full-time, with paid benefits, using taxpayer money?
And then the report misses that the part timers will have a chance of getting subsidies.
Actually, they’ll more likely be on Medicaid
And one should notice that that result is also thanks to the reforms made possible by the ACA.
Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to introduce you to the Refuse to Enroll campaign.
From the link:
*With time running out, opponents of the Affordable Care Act have taken to the airwaves in Ohio and elsewhere with ad campaigns not only attacking the bill's merits but also actively encouraging uninsured Americans not to sign up for coverage under the health care law.
The Obama administration has acknowledged the success of the law, commonly referred to as Obamacare, depends in large part on broad-based participation in federal and state-run health exchanges that will begin selling government-subsidized health plans to the uninsured on Oct. 1.
The anti-enrollment campaigns reflect the resignation and desperation of many Obamacare opponents who have given up hope of a government repeal or court-ordered injunction to stop full implementation of the law beginning next year.
I could comment further, but I think the lunacy of this entire effort speaks for itself. Like I said earlier, the GOP is downright desperate now in its attacks against the ACA, and so they’ve finally resorted to one of the most fucking insane efforts yet.
I think this is more insane - crash the economy unless the ACA is defunded.
… and the Grassley clause in Obamacare just keeps providing amusement:
Under a wrinkle that dates back to enactment of the law, members of Congress and thousands of their aides are required to get their coverage through new state-based markets known as insurance exchanges.
But the law does not provide any obvious way for the federal government to continue paying its share of the premiums for the comprehensive coverage.
…
With the exchanges scheduled to open in just nine weeks, the Obama administration is struggling to come up with a creative interpretation of the health care law that would allow the federal government to kick in for insurance as private employers do, but so far an answer has proved elusive.
The issue is politically charged because the White House and Congress are highly sensitive to any suggestion that lawmakers or their aides are getting special treatment under the health law. The administration is already under fire from Republicans for delaying a requirement that larger businesses offer insurance to their full-time employees.
…
David M. Ermer, a lawyer who has represented insurers in the federal employee program for 30 years, said, “I do not think members of Congress and their staff can get funds for coverage in the exchanges under existing law.”
“Perhaps,” he said, “they could buy coverage on an exchange, pay for it on their own and be reimbursed later by the government. You would need a law to appropriate money for that.”
fun fun fun. Maybe they should have read the law before passing it?
Since this also affects the Republican aides, I do not think that they would like to hear that their leaders are using them as a reason to not clear the confusion, they would also not be amused for long that the republicans are using them as a tool to embarrass the makers of the plan. So, yeah I do think it is fun.
Also I don’t think that bit of the Republicans as the ones that proposed that rule will be also forgotten by the republican aides.
It is very much fun to watch the politicians - both Democrats and Republicans - squirm when the law they didn’t read before they passed it bites them and their staff’s butts. Hilarious.
By the way, we were told when the law was being passed that politicians never read the thousands of pages of the laws they pass, that’s what they have the aides for. Well apparently the aides failed on their jobs 
Why is this thread in Elections?
One thing that I want to point out about the Grassley amendment fiasco is this:
Nobody cares.
Seriously, public approval of Congress is so embarrassingly low that the press (and perhaps the GOP) is definitely miscalculating that running these stories about panicked members of Congress is somehow going to incite widespread outrage amongst the general public. If anything, most people are going to hear these stories and think, “damned right, those fuckers SHOULD be paying more for their health insurance,” rather than, “fuck, down with Obamacare because members of Congress might have to pay more for health care.” :smack:
The whole thing is absurdly stupid in any case.
I agree. The whole story, from the introduction of the stupid amendment to the incorporation to the implications of it, points to “Congress (both parties included) are a bunch of stupidheads who shot themselves in the foot while trying to be clever”. To blame it on Obamacare is to have some sympathy for Congress, and ain’t nobody got time for that.
It’s a dumb amendment and part of the selling of the bill was that “if you like your insurance now, nothing changes…”. I understand why federal employees would be upset if they are forced to use the new exchanges as that is a switch from the FEHB exchange that people seem to like… and the only reason to force them to do this is out of spite.
What would be awesome (IMO) is by forcing these federal employees to buy off the exchange, and then reimbursing them for the cost (or just paying them more) it leads to large employers and other federal departments doing the same thing.
Because if the ACA can lead to a decoupling of insurance from employment and the added exchange members drive down the cost, it would be a huge win for market-based solutions like Obamacare. I’d be thrilled if my employer just paid me more and I could buy affordable insurance off a regulated marketplace that met my family’s needs rather than picking between the 2 or 3 plans offered by my company (which I understand is way more than most companies offer).
You really can’t make this shit up:
Inside the Obamacare Resistance
*
“The whole scheme is enlisting young adults to overpay, so other people can have subsidies,” Clancy says. “That unfairness reminded us of the military draft.”
While the military has draft cards, the Affordable Care Act does not. Instead, FreedomWorks took an image of the Vietnam draft cards and grafted the word “Obamacare” to the top. The hope is that students will film themselves burning these cards and upload the videos online.
…
Phillips is mulling setting up kiosks at Universal Fighting Championship matches and at college football games, where they’ll warn young men about the pitfalls of enrolling in Obamacare coverage. He hopes to give them some pause before enrolling.
…
“I’m burning my Obamacare card because Obamacare is turning full-time jobs into part-time jobs,” the 19-year-old college student from West Virginia said, as the mock government document smoldered.
“Do I just, like, throw it on the ground when I’m done?”*
I think I got dumber just reading that article. :dubious:
I’m burning my Tea Party ID card, as soon as I make it. That’ll teach 'em.
“I’m burning this piece of paper I wrote some words on because I want to appear politically engaged on television even though I don’t really understand the subject because thinking is hard.”
“Would you like to burn this ObamaCare card to protest the unfairness of it?”
“Dunno, do I have to put down my beer?”
Thanks Obama!
To update a comment I made upthread, I just got a letter and a $333 check in the mail from our insurance company.
We just used it to book a night at a hotel on our upcoming vacation, putting that money into the hands of a mega-corporation, a local business, and an array of day-to-day staff. Is it going to pay for more than a night out? No, but it’s a start in bringing costs down. Sure is a great day to be a small business owner!
Though while I’m glad to be getting money back (as opposed to putting it directly into the insurer’s profit), I’d rather we had a single-payer (or similar) setup here, even if it means we wouldn’t have gotten this rebate. So as glad as I am for this tiny inroad into the malignant mess that the healthcare system is/was, I would have strongly preferred that a *broader *law were passed. So I guess the simple-minded, disingenuous and wilfully ignorant (or some combination thereof; there are no other options) will skullfuck logic and rational though to include me in the percentage of people who are ‘unhappy’ with Obamacare.
Thanks Obama!
ETA: Forgot to mention. The previous year our premiums did not go up, and in most areas of the plan our benefits increased. Thanks Obama!
Latest dispatches from the batshitquackery:
Grover Norquist wants ACA delay
I’m sure he’d love that wouldn’t he? :smack:
Would it be “sabotage” for us to point out that if you use the online exchanges that you are taking a big risk, since the government is unlikely to have their security up to snuff?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/06/us-usa-healthcare-security-idUSBRE9750YH20130806
Here’s the hilarious part:
Before the hub or any other federal information system can open, a 2002 law requires that it obtain a “security authorization package,” which is essentially the roadmap for keeping out hackers and preventing security breaches.
But of course it will open anyway, this administation doesn’t have time for things like laws.