So when people are laid off, the law still requires you to obtain health insurance, how will you pay for it if you have no money coming in to pay for it? You're an instant criminal right then and there.
You really are clueless.
Health Care to "Control The People"
by Yizuman 83 Replies latest jw friends
-
drwtsn32
-
hemp lover
"So when people are laid off, the law still requires you to obtain health insurance, how will you pay for it if you have no money coming in to pay for it? You're an instant criminal right then and there."
False. People more patient than I am spent a lot of time explaining this to you on the other threads. Nothing you've posted on this one is true and I'm not going to bother telling you again why. What would be the point? By the way, where did you find that bogus picture?
-
hemp lover
Never mind, I found it. Still no original source though. You're repeating yourself on multiple message boards - LOL.
http://www.alldeaf.com/war-political-news/76591-what-health-care-reform-means-your-business-5.html
-
restrangled
So when people are laid off, the law still requires you to obtain health insurance, how will you pay for it if you have no money coming in to pay for it? You're an instant criminal right then and there.
Yiz
This argument is getting damn old. Especially from someone who has a family member totally covered by the government. Stop the whining, get the extra coverage you need for yourself, and stop perpetuating a lie.
Those who will be unable to afford coverage will be exempt., and many will receive help.
You are loosing credibility with the above post.
-
beksbks
You know the conservatives are doubling down on crazy when they get whipped into a frenzy because an 85 year old Senator who helped author the civil rights bill misspoke. Yessirreeee he certainly would be my first choice for an inside job in the big brother takeover.
-
Yizuman
Never mind, I found it. Still no original source though. You're repeating yourself on multiple message boards - LOL.
Since when I cannot talk on multiple message boards? Is there a law that states that I can't?
Yiz
-
drwtsn32
Is there a law that states that I can't?
Yes. It was part of the health care reform legislation. Your ramblings cause harm to our well being. Proceed directly to jail.
-
shamus100
Yiz,
For god's sake, if you're going to make such stupid accusations at least try, try, try to get it right. You have all the time in the world, what with your disability and all.
Or maybe you're one of those completely lost nitwits that think they will have death squads for old people. I've heard they're having it for the hearing impared and for adults with developmental disabilities. Pass it on!
-
Yizuman
Health bill may exempt top Hill staffers
Tags:
By ERIKA LOVLEY & PATRICK O'CONNOR | 3/23/10 7:48 PM EDT Updated: 3/24/10 2:15 PM EDTText Size
- -
- +
- reset
- The bill requires 'congressional staff' to buy insurance from the exchanges -- but defines the term narrowly. Photo: AP
Digg/Buzz It Up
POLITICO 44
The Politico 44 / Click Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.
The health care reform bill signed into law by President Barack Obama Tuesday requires members of Congress and their office staffs to buy insurance through the state-run exchanges it creates – but it may exempt staffers who work for congressional committees or for party leaders in the House and Senate.
Staffers and members on both sides of the aisle call it an “inequity” and an “outrage” – a loophole that exempts the staffers most involved in writing and passing the bill from one of its key requirements.
The bill requires “congressional staff” to buy insurance from the exchanges – with a stipend from the Office of Personnel Management But page 158 of the bill defines “congressional staff” narrowly, as “employees employed by the official office of a member of Congress, whether in the district office or in Washington.”
The Congressional Research Service believes a court could rule that the legislation "would exclude professional committee staff, joint committee staff, some shared staff, as well as potentially those staff employed by leadership offices.”
If that’s so, staffers who work for Nancy Pelosi in her capacity as representative from California would go into the exchange program, while staffers who work for her in her capacity as speaker would stay on the government’s plan. Other Capitol employees, like those who work for the clerk of the House or the House historian, would be similarly exempted.
Republican Sens. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who both say they tried to correct the issue last year, are firing at Senate leaders, saying that Democrats purposely exempted upper-level staffers out of the bill.
Last September, the Senate Finance Committee adopted a Grassley amendment into its version of the bill, mandating that members of Congress and their staff get their health insurance through the exchanges. It was agreed to by unanimous consent.
Coburn had earlier filed a similar amendment in the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which passed with some Democratic support.
However, when the combined Senate bill came to the floor, the definition of staff had been narrowed. Both senators filed a second amendment in December restating their original intent, but they say Democrats blocked it.
“The American people will be appalled to learn the health care bill exempts leadership and committee staff. This special deal for unelected staff underscores everything the public detests about the arrogance of power in Washington,” Coburn said. “I tried to fix this inequity along with senators Grassley, Burr and Vitter, but Majority Leader [Harry] Reid obstructed our effort.”
Reid spokesman Jim Manley acknowledged that the bill exempts committee staff but argued that leadership staff is not excluded. As for why committee staff is excluded, Manley said that when leaders merged the health care bills from the Finance Committee and the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, they took Coburn’s language from the HELP Committee rather than Grassley’s Finance Committee proposal because they feared Grassley’s language was so broad that it would have required “people like legislative counsel, Architect of the Capitol, etc.” to participate in the exchanges, too.
Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34900.html#ixzz0j7PaROEx
-
BizzyBee
Comrade Dingell is too old to be allowed in front of a microphone! We should have learned by now! It shall not happen again!
