Because you say so.
Your point being “not fair”? It is fair, because Congress IS different.
Nope. It is eating what it cooked. And really doesn’t like the taste.
I care and like you, I saw this as a late in the game ‘Hail Mary’ play. Last June, a Cato Institute forum reported this as :
IIRC, several other cases on the same point are also working their way through the courts.
No, because there is no logical connection.
You’re welcome to try to explain why there is. Go ahead.
Oh, dear God.
It’s not fair to compare two things that are different.
No, because–as you have already finally admitted–it’s NOT the same thing that was cooked.
You ignored my food stamp analogy again, so let’s try yours. Congress fed America some blueberry pie. Then it fed its own staff some cherry pie. If the staff complain that the cherry pie is bad, it’s not fair to say the blueberry pie is bad too.
It didn’t work, at least not here. Give it up.
Those Americans who have been pushed into more expensive plans mostly see it as an imposition and if supporters of ACA think they’ll get anywhere explaining to them that their old insurance was inadequate, then they deserve to have the law repealed and then be made to eat all 2000 pages of it.
These people had doctors they liked under their inadequate insurance. They had access to the finest hospitals. Now many of them don’t. And a lot of these people were in the middle of treatment for expensive conditions, which shockingly, their inadequate insurance was paying for, with less of a deductible.
Be interesting to see what happens when nearly half the small business plans get cancelled this October. We’re talking about a lot more people than were in the individual market.
I think it’s very possible that there exists some small number of people who actually have worse and more expensive insurance due to the ACA. But from everything I have read, this number is way, way smaller than the number of people who have better and cheaper insurance due to the ACA.
In any case, most supporters are, like me, open to improving the law and improving coverage for the small number of people actually hurt by the ACA. But we’re not willing to get rid of it because that would hurt far, far more people.
It is fair to treat something differently when it is, in fact, different.
The Congrass and their staffers have to enroll in plans that they are forcing millions of Americans into. And they are complaining about it. You may not see it as “fair”. I bet a huge majority of Americans do.
Just like those who have no plans at all might. Yes, the mandate, and the requirements that insurance plans live up to minimum standards, is indeed an imposition, by definition.
But that’s a small subset of those who already had (adequate) insurance.
Oops, I just did.
LOL. Listen to yourself. You’re claiming that making people get BETTER plans gave them LESS access to good doctors and hospitals?
And? You’re saying they have less coverage or their treatment was interrupted? By having better insurance? Sure, some may have larger deductibles or higher premiums, but are you trying to say some had their care interrupted? Can you show evidence of that?
The survey also found that people, by a 2-to-1 margin, felt Obamacare had had a more negative than positive impact on their own, individual health care. The poll questioned 1,005 adults, and had a margin of error of 3.6 percentage points.
Oh, dear God again.
But you’re not saying that. You want to treat the ACA as it applies to congressional staff as the same as how it applies to everyone else. It doesn’t.
No they aren’t.
They are complaining that they a forced to do so after being forced to give up employer-provided group coverage. Which no other Americans are forced to do.
Like I said, this crap may work out there, but not here.
Doesn’t mean it actually did have a negative impact, just that they perceive. Plenty of people are confused about health insurance, even their own. Please show evidence that something has actually happened, not just opinion polls.
No one is being forced to sign up for Obamacare. Anyone may buy an individual policy on the free market. Anyone but Congressional staffers, that is. Not fair.
Those are the same exact plans that they are foisting on others.
No other Americans have had as much responsibility for creating Obamacare - something that they really don’t want applied to themselves.
Yep. A typical liberal’s plaintive cry of “people are stoooopid”.
But that’s not the nature of their complaint. They are complaining that they were forced to give up their employer-sponsored plan. No other Americans are having that “foisted” on them.
You are smart enough to understand this. Please stop pretending.
See above. This is a false statement. What was applied to congressional staff is not the same thing as what was applied to everyone else.
That’s a really disappointing response. You don’t know my political ideology, and I didn’t call anyone stupid.
If you’d like, I can go dig up the poll where most people said they opposed Obamacare – but then, when asked about whether they support aspects of the law without being told it was the same thing as Obamacare, most said they did. PROOF that people’s perceptions about what is actually in the law vs. what they think of when they hear the label don’t line up. And that’s not stupidity, it’s just human nature.
And if you want to go down this route, google the Public Affairs Act of 1975.
Again, an opinion poll doesn’t prove something happened, only that people think it did. Please show some hard evidence.
Their employer changed the employer-sponsored plan. By law (that lots of them had a big hand in drafting and pushing through).
And your insistence that no employees ever get dropped from their employer-sponsored plans shows that you know nothing about how things work out there.
How many people are exposed to these problems? 60 percent of Americans have private-sector health insurance—precisely the number that Jay Carney dismissed. As to the number of people facing cancellations, **51 percent of the employer-based market **plus 53.5 percent of the non-group market (the middle of the administration’s range) amounts to 93 million Americans.
https://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/37591/more-small-businesses-might-drop-health-benefits
However, the portion of small employers that say they’re likely to eliminate health benefits within five years jumped from 22% in 2012 to 31% in 2013.
Disney World promotes 427 to full time. Yippeee! Right? Of course the last line in the article is: “But union officials say they expect the resort to simply stop offering health insurance to part-timers, matching moves made by Universal Orlando and SeaWorld.”
That’s about 22,000 people to be dropped. Vs. 427 that get full time and benefits. Yay for Obamacare.
If it was a decision by their employer, they can’t complain that it was ACA, can they? Nice try.
I didn’t say that. Read what I actually said.
How many were simply signed up with new plans that complied with ACA from the same insurer?
FINALLY you find a legitimate complaint about the ACA.
Yep. It was ACA that forced their employer to change their plan.
So, are you dropping your “argument” that Congress is being treated “unfairly” because employees are getting dropped from the previous plan they had? Seeing how thousands (more probably millions) of Americans are getting the same treatment?
An easy fix would be to get rid of most of the coverage mandates. It’s too late now to get people their old insurance back, but we can at least make those types of plans available again. Not the cheapy ones with lifetime limits, but the ones that were pretty darn good but may have left out a few things, in exchange for a better network and access to tertiary care centers.
Most importantly, removing the bulk of the coverage mandates will mean that no one will lose their employer health care or see its price go way up due to those coverage requirements.
The employer health care system is not broken. It doesn’t need fixing.