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.
No, he was not under the ACA. They were insured through a plan at Goldman Sachs - his wife's employer. It had nothing to do with the ACA. There is a huge difference between the insurance he had under Goldman Sachs and what he will receive under the exchange. Do you honestly think the insurance provided at this ER was a crap plan that would not of been in compliance with the ACA. Come on... Night.
I guarantee you that all Goldman Sachs's subsidized healthcare plans were/ are 100% compliant with the ACA, effective January, 2014.
Without knowing which specific healthcare plan the Cruz family chose from the many ACA compliant plans offered by Goldman and which plan he chose off the exchange, there is no way to compare and contrast.
This family had and continues to have a choice of plans, ranging from high- low deductibles, co-pays and co- insured's.
Goldman, like most main stream large employers, did not offer junk plans to their employees, even in states that allowed such plans before the ACA. These plans became stronger after the ACA.
Good point. However, I think Cruz and the other Republican candidates who are members of Congress also appreciate the political opportunities that having Obamacare will create for them on the campaign trail and during the debates. These guys are resourceful and clever like that.
I, too, would be curious to hear about their experiences with these plans since anyone who has been in Congress since this went into effect would already be on an exchange plan if s/he chose to use employer-based insurance.
I don't recall anyone who was running during the last election season complaining about this provision or about the level of care received via their exchange policies, though I certainly may have missed it.
I would also be curious to know if their opinions are influenced by the fact that those plans are still 80% subsidized by their employer (the Federal government).
I would agree with Mittens and Massachusetts. Romney, Newt and the GOP gang said numerous times that Mitt's plan was the GOP answer to health care. Except when Romney had the chance to sell it, he didn't. And when Obama made it happen, they made poor ole' Mitt disavow it. Too funny.
As for tort reform, many states have it now, including Texas. Guess how much that reduced health costs? None. The insurance companies kept the money for themselves. And Texas has one of the highest rates of uninsured in the country. So much for tort reform.
Of course they kept it all. The beauty of it all, premium paying clients with a low ceiling payout by the insurance company. On top of it all their payouts are around one half of 1%. What a bargain.
Democratic strategy, lets boost welfare rather than jobs, because welfare stimulates...
Lets raise the minimum wage, and then claim this doesnt push jobs oversease
Lets oppose tax credits to create jobs, and then claim we're going to tax companies who move overseas, a laughable strategy since companies overseas dont fall within our taxing jurisdiction.
I want JOBS, not welfare.
If you want to equate welfare to stimulation, then the project areas of the country should be booming economically. Clearly your strategies have FAILED and ALWAYS WILL.
I obviously favor universal healthcare and believe all but the most seriously disabled should have skin in the game. I oppose an increase to Federal Minimum Wage. Like many people I don't buy into partisanship.
Let's dig a little deeper into government influence over job creation , welfare.
The entire industrial military ( welfare) complex is funded by federal government and directly and indirectly employs millions. With the exception of Israel, every cent of foreign military aid is used to pay for military equipment made in the US. For decades we have granted Israel's enemies with $ billions each year so they can better protect themselves from Israel. Then we turn around and grant Israel funds to better protect themselves from their enemies. Decades of picking winners and losers and dictators help keep the ME at eachother's throats. Better that than allow them all to come together and decide to blow off the petrodollar in favor of another existing or to be created currency. And in the meantime, the military industrial complex gets fed by monies borrowed.
The federal and state social welfare complex also directly and indirectly employs millions. Walmart and the manufacturers of junk food are propped up by SNAP.
There is an apparent desire to increase border patrol by an incremental 20,000 and continue to invest $ billions into spiff new surveillance equipment every year by the same people who want smaller government.
Federal tax credit - Increasing the bottom line for those who create jobs come and go, no matter if they are Part or full time or low or high wage.
Both parties are favorable towards increasing H1-B visas.
States, counties and municipalities compete for jobs. 46 states offer more than 200 programs to motivate companies to relocate and / or create jobs. It's a zero sum game for the country in terms of job creation. The movie industry accounts for half of these credits. They create very temporary jobs and don't need the credits so they, like many beneficiaries of state tax credits, sell them to other corporations who have not created new jobs.
Then we have a massive multinational in the state of Washington who decided to bite and reap the benefits of tax credits and relocates a plant to a Southern state. Former employees / typical family of 4 , did not qualify for welfare benefits in Washington were replaced with new employees/ family of 4 in another state who now pay less taxes and qualify for welfare benefits. No new jobs were created. Makers became takers. Go figure.
The WSJ reported that the average cost to the state is $456,000 per job. A few years ago, a small and failing Illinois company was acquired by Bain Capital who intended to outsource the low wage jobs to some country in Asia. At the peak of negotiations, the state was offering $ 500,000 in tax credits per crappy low wage job. Bain took the long view and declined. They understood that every job created in an Asian country helps their emerging economy which in turn creates new markets for their products. They get that the U.S. population is a blip compared to the global population. An isolationist policy is a death march.
It has become more challenging to distinguish between the makers and takers, here, there and everywhere.
Since when is it against the law to pay out of pocket for your health care? Who or what is stopping Cruz from paying for his and his wife's healthcare without the aid of the current health care plan that he's trying to abolish?
Well then, using this logic, Cruz should have done without healthcare insurance in 2014, given the Goldman Sach's plan was ACA compliant. What has changed is the employer who is subsidizing the premium, GS or the federal government.
Why would anyone reject an employer subsidy that predates the ACA?
Why should he have to? Just because he supports overturning Obamacare, it does not follow that he or any Republican has advocated the boycotting of employer paid health insurance.
To be fair, health insurance would ideally not be purchased by a third party (such as an employer) for people, as the detachment from having to pay attention to cost control on an individual basis is one of the primary reasons that healthcare costs continue to spiral out of control. But this is the system we have, flawed though it is.
I suspect Cruz is also signing up for Obamacare so that he can experience it for himself and be able to tell about that experience first hand, which will enable him to criticize Obamacare much more powerfully while on the campaign trail and on national television during the Republican primary debates. From this perspective, his signing up for Obamacare is a brilliant idea.
We need effective reform of our healthcare system now more than ever before, that is for certain. Hopefully Ted Cruz will help to lead the discussion that will cause that to finally happen.
Cruz had Obamacare under his wife's plan. What has changed is the employer who is subsidizing it.
He likely had a Goldman Sachs subsidized plan equivelent to a Platinum Plan. I would be surprised if he chose a Bronze level plan that would have a higher deductible and co- pay/ insure to manufacture a sharp contrast and pander to an audiance that does not understand insurance. I would be very surprised if he would do so. He's not stupid.
If there was an reasonable alternative available to him in his current job situation, I am sure he would take it.
But take note how Cruz obeys the law, even when he is not a big fan of it, unlike Barack Obama.
Exactly! That is the predicament many Americans face today, they have no reasonable alternatives for health care which is why the ACA came into being. Duh..........
Correct, this was because of public outrage that members of Congress were originally getting exemptions from the bill, so to quiet the dissent, they added this into the law.
Outrage was manufactured.
Whole deal is form over substance.
Instead of going to a federal employee insurance portal to sign on for ACA compliant , subsidized healthcare insurance , Congress voted to put themselves into the public exchange while retaining legacy federal employee subsidies.
Regardless of portal the outcome was and remains Congress has subsidized ACA compliant nsurance.
Cruz had Obamacare under his wife's plan. What has changed is the employer who is subsidizing it.
He likely had a Goldman Sachs subsidized plan equivelent to a Platinum Plan. I would be surprised if he chose a Bronze level plan that would have a higher deductible and co- pay/ insure to manufacture a sharp contrast and pander to an audiance that does not understand insurance. I would be very surprised if he would do so. He's not stupid.
You are claiming that Goldman Sachs offered the exchanges for their health insurance benefit?
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.
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.
