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.
It looks like Congress, White House, etc. are not exempt.
The fining aspect is the means to move a bunch of people off of private insurance companies.
ACA is based on an exchange of private insurance.
Oh yeah - throw in the fact that private insurance companies can not deny any claims - meaning people who do not pay into the risk pool can take resources from the risk pool. That will also help drain out insurance companies.
Private insurance companies have been and will continue to deny some claims. No insurance pays 100% of anything and everything.
Did you make this up or have you been misinformed?
The fine basically forces you to buy insurance, whether you want to buy it or not. So either buy insurance and have that, or pay a fine and have nothing. Your choice.
Fine isn't scheduled to kick in for a while though.
Actually, they are the opposite of exempt. They MUST purchase insurancebecause they wrote it into the law. So the members of Congress will be on the exchanges next week with many millions of other Americans who do not have employer provided health insurance. THE "exemption" is that their employer can pay for it. Normally, people who have employer provided care are not eligible to use the exchanges. In this case however, the members of Congress are being forced to use the exchanges and the Obama admin gave them the "exemption" that lets the govt pay the premium on the exchange as an employee benefit. It is just more disinformation from the right.
When ACA was passed into law, Sen. Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican, attached language to the bill that mandated members of Congress and their staffers would have to buy health insurance on thenewly created health insurance exchanges. What nobody accounted for at the time was that members of Congress and their staffers currently have health insurance through their employer – the federal government. No other employer has been legally required to drop its employee’s health care plan and have them buy coverage on the exchanges.
Like most other large employers, the federal government contributes a portion to the premiums of its employees. In fact, the federal government pays most of the premiums for its workers; an average of 72 % on Capitol Hill. The law didn’t account for the continued employer contribution for these federal workers who would now be buying their insurance on the exchanges. The exchanges were designed to help people without health insurance and people with overly expensive health insurance. It became clear that without their employer contribution, members and their staffers would essentially be getting a cut in pay and benefits equal to thousands of dollars. Even Grassley, the provision’s author, had said the government should continue to contribute to lawmakers’ and staffers’ premiums. What the Obama administration has done is ruled that the congressional workers will continue to receive the employer contribution to help them buy their insurance on the exchange.
Congress is no more exempt than any other employer who drops coverage and then helps employees purchase insurance on the exchanges
Private insurance companies have been and will continue to deny some claims. No insurance pays 100% of anything and everything.
Did you make this up or have you been misinformed?
Health insurance companies would be prohibited from denying coverage because of a pre-existing condition, or from charging higher premiums because of current or past health problems, gender or occupation. The rules also would ensure access to catastrophic coverage plans for young adults and others who could not afford coverage otherwise.
Is this true?
The point is people without insurance, who have not paid into the risk pool, can't be denied coverage. How do insurance companies deal with this?
The supreme court ruled it a tax so Obama could go back in time and lie about it not being a tax? Holy crap, he has a time machine!
No, you're being dishonest.
Congress called it a fine, so they could duck the Constitutional requirement that spending and taxation originate in the house. But it was ruled a tax, which did not originate in the House, which means it's unconstituitonal.
Obama lies about everything. He directed his people to call it a tax or a fine, which ever one was expedient at the moment.
You are right the gvt provides members of congress with the best health care and pays for 75% of it. Of course the members would not give up their HC for Obamacare and be in the same boat as the American people.
Pre ACA, the federal government negotiated and coordinated health care plans with multiple private carriers in 50 states. BCBS is one of the major carriers and offers hundreds of different plans to government employees based on the laws of the employee's state of residence.
A Republican attached a bill to the ACA back when, mandating Congress and staffers buy insurance from private carriers in their state exchanges. Their premiums will continue to be subsidized by the government.
Congress and staffers will have more choices and equal or better healthcare insurance than they did pre ACA.
All healthcare, whether group and sponsored and subsidized by employers or purchased from a private insurer within a state exchange will need to comply with the ACA. There's no difference beyond that those willing to pay more will get more- no different than it's always been.
When ACA was passed into law, Sen. Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican, attached language to the bill that mandated members of Congress and their staffers would have to buy health insurance on thenewly created health insurance exchanges. What nobody accounted for at the time was that members of Congress and their staffers currently have health insurance through their employer – the federal government. No other employer has been legally required to drop its employee’s health care plan and have them buy coverage on the exchanges.
Like most other large employers, the federal government contributes a portion to the premiums of its employees. In fact, the federal government pays most of the premiums for its workers; an average of 72 % on Capitol Hill. The law didn’t account for the continued employer contribution for these federal workers who would now be buying their insurance on the exchanges. The exchanges were designed to help people without health insurance and people with overly expensive health insurance. It became clear that without their employer contribution, members and their staffers would essentially be getting a cut in pay and benefits equal to thousands of dollars. Even Grassley, the provision’s author, had said the government should continue to contribute to lawmakers’ and staffers’ premiums. What the Obama administration has done is ruled that the congressional workers will continue to receive the employer contribution to help them buy their insurance on the exchange. Congress is no more exempt than any other employer who drops coverage and then helps employees purchase insurance on the exchanges
An excellent explanation, but I would point out that private employers who are "dropping" coverage like Walgreens are not doing the same as Congress. Those employers are sending employees to private exchanges and not the public exchanges that open up on Tuesday. They are still providing employee insurance but they are doing it through a non-traditional way by having employees go to a third party broker and pick out the policy they want. The company then pays the fees in accordance with their employment policies and the requirements, if any, of the ACA.
Congress called it a fine, so they could duck the Constitutional requirement that spending and taxation originate in the house. But it was ruled a tax, which did not originate in the House, which means it's unconstituitonal.
Obama lies about everything. He directed his people to call it a tax or a fine, which ever one was expedient at the moment.
Not true. The Senate used a tax bill (H.R. 3590, a bill regarding housing tax breaks for service members) which had already passed the House and inserted the Senate healthcare bill into it. So from a parliamentary standpoint the bill did start in the House even though the content of the bill ended up being different than how it started in the House.
No, there will be NO members of Congress buying anything.
You have acquired and are spreading misinformation.
They get "beyond the Cadillac" "you get everything under the sun for free with no limits" health care on OUR dime. No fines, no punishment, no nothing. And their employees the same.
Opinions are not facts. Please provide links from credible sources that demonstrates "Congress gets beyond Cadillac plans where everything under the sun is free with no limits".
And, they aren't following the law, at all. Obama's been tossing exemptions to his buddies and denying them to his enemies. And picking and choosing what to do and when based on political considerations, rather than the law.
Obama has buddies?
Seriously now, do your homework. Congress and their staff will buy their healthcare insurance from a private company they select off their state's healthcare exchange. It will be equal to or better than they currently have, depending on how much they care to spend.
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.
