Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Clearly it is not bull crap. Otherwise, Cruz would have been compelled in 2014 to have purchased an insurance plan through the exchange. He DIDN'T. And he wasn't penalized for not purchasing an insurance plan through the exchange, was he?
Bull crap? Really... That's the best you have to offer to the discussion?
Okay, let me offer my own point... Cruz is saving money and getting better coverage through the ACA. That's the only reason he signed up because he had MANY other options. That's a fact Jack. Get over it.
In other words, Cruz “could purchase coverage in the outside market but would get no subsidy from the FEHBP program.”
I get called a leech here all the time for getting a subsidy. When are all the Conservatives going to call Ted a leech for getting a subsidy?
I love the contortions Conservatives are having to twist themsleves into in an attempt to explain the extreme hypocrisy of vehemently and forcefully campaigning on ending a program for everyone else while happily partaking of its benefits himself.
And on only day two of his campaign. Stick a fork in him.
If I am following you, it appears you are mistaken. The federal government continues to provide a benefit of premium subsidy to all their employees, including senators, reps and their aids.
In 1928, Congress passed legislation that required 24/7 availability of dedicated medical care was necessary for the President and Vice President and their immediate families.
The medical needs of the President and VP and their respective immediate families have been addressed by a teams of MDs, nurses, physician assistants and medics that travel with them at all times.
Do you think the next POTUS will waive this and instead, when necessary, hoof it over to the nearest urgent care center and take a number?
This is correct.
The Office of Personnel Management ruled that the subsidy should continue for those Congress people and their staff who bought coverage via the exchanges because FEHB continued to offer subsidies to other federal employees on other plans.
Now, this particular Senator bought his insurance privately in his home state to forgo the subsidy.
But he does acknowledge that others in his peer group likely did take advantage of this ruling.
(From the link) "Johnson said that he had refused the employer contribution for himself and had purchased private healthcare coverage through a broker in his home state of Wisconsin. He did not know how many lawmakers had done the same.
"I imagine all my staff members, I think most people here in Congress and staff did take the employer contribution," he said."
No doubt for the reasons detailed by one of his GOP colleagues:
"Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, a fellow Republican from Wisconsin, said the new lawsuit is misguided and will only hurt the Capitol Hill employees they rely on.
“Senator Johnson’s lawsuit is an unfortunate political stunt,” he said. “I am committed to repealing Obamacare, but the employer contribution he’s attacking is nothing more than a standard benefit that most private and all federal employees receive — including the President. Success in the suit will mean that Congress will lose some of its best staff and will be staffed primarily by recent college graduates who are still on their parents’ insurance.”"
Hmm, yes, I guess giving concessions and expecting the other side to do the same is a funny way of bargaining... oh, wait, that is the typical way of bargaining.
BBM~~ Please expound of these disastrous affects?? TYIA because by all resources..I have read..I do NOT see Disaster..but instead see releif and thankfulness for expansions of coverages ( prev. conditions etc) which prior were FAR too expensive and or denied coverages..pre-ACA..So please spell out these DISASTERS
Let's see. Deductibles have skyrocketed, those who have to purchase ACA plans without subsidies are getting gouged in order to pay for the subsidies of others, and medical costs are still sky high - even though the ACA was promised as a way to reduce health care costs.
And the biggest disaster of all, the one that will eventually come back to bite every single Obamacare supporter in the backside because it sets a precedent for future legislation, is the fact that the Federal government has forced Americans to purchase a product from private third parties. In one aspect, I'm looking forward to the day that Republicans once again control the government and decide to pass legislation which does something similar, because on that day every single person who thinks that Obamacare is a wonderful thing is going to be losing their minds - and there won't be a thing that they can do about it, because they supported the law which made forcing Americans into business relationships with private parties a precedent.
If you were honest, you would realize and admit that Obamacare is the biggest Ponzi scheme in history, and it was pushed into law by the very same party which supposedly wants to help the poor and middle class. Funny how the money is still going to the 1% once it's all said and done, isn't it?
Hmm, yes, I guess giving concessions and expecting the other side to do the same is a funny way of bargaining... oh, wait, that is the typical way of bargaining.
You mean repeal Obamacare or else we are going to pout and shutdown the gov't?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.