Some Reid staffers exempt from Obamacare

[RDD_1210]

going from 70% to 75% is not an increase? is that teachers union math?

Quote me the part of the article that says they are getting an increase from 70% to 75%. Do you always flat out lie about things? The article doesn't say that. What the fuck is this childish behavior about? Be honest, for once in your life.

I hate to ask you to reread the thread, but that has been shown several times already. you can choose to ignore it if you like, I really don't care what you believe.

Exactly. You made it up. You're a liar and it's why you refuse to quote from the article that YOU posted.

 

[RDD_1210]

read it, then either apologize or just go away:

Congress wins relief on Obamacare health plan subsidies | Reuters


from the cite "But Wednesday's proposed rule from the OPM, the federal government's human resources agency, means that Congress will escape the most onerous impact of law as it was written"

From your link.

The OPM said the federal contributions will be allowed to continue for exchange-purchased plans for lawmakers and their staffs, ensuring that those working on Capitol Hill will effectively get the same health contributions as millions of other federal workers who keep their current plan.

They are getting the SAME subsidy as before. No more. Nowhere in your "proof" does it say anything about getting an increased subsidy. You're literally a brain dead idiot.

Thanks for proving my point. Do you even read the shit you post?

It is funny to watch the far left grasp at straws when even things they quote show that they are 100% wrong.

The far left does not get it.

Funny, since you've already admitted to being wrong.

 

[Redfish]

Quote me the part of the article that says they are getting an increase from 70% to 75%. Do you always flat out lie about things? The article doesn't say that. What the fuck is this childish behavior about? Be honest, for once in your life.

I hate to ask you to reread the thread, but that has been shown several times already. you can choose to ignore it if you like, I really don't care what you believe.

Exactly. You made it up. You're a liar and it's why you refuse to quote from the article that YOU posted.

"But it soon became apparent the provision contained no language that allowed federal contributions toward their health plans that cover about 75 percent of the premium costs.

This caused fears that staff would suddenly face sharply higher healthcare costs and leave federal service, causing a "brain drain" on Capitol Hill.

But Wednesday's proposed rule from the OPM, the federal government's human resources agency, means that Congress will escape the most onerous impact of law as it was written."

 

[Redfish]

RDD

I don't know if you have any basic math skills, being a liberal you probably don't, but give it a try

"The congresswoman and her family living next door makes $174,000. Her income is 739% of poverty level and her insurance plan, at the Silver level, would also cost $15,481. But the congresswoman would qualify for a subsidy of $10,048.76.

(The Kaiser calculator uses the Silver tier plan for its calculations and the OPM rule requires Congress to purchase at the Gold tier, but the federal subsidies are applicable to either tier plan: Gold, Silver, Bronze.)

Unlike the D.C. family that gets no tax-credit subsidy under Obamacare, the member of Congress gets more than $10,000 because of the deal arranged among the congressional leadership, the White House, and the OPM in early August 2013.

Congressional staff members would also qualify for subsidies even if their income exceeds the 400% of poverty level.

It is one set of subsidy rules for the electorate, and a different set of subsidy rules for those who work in Congress.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/174k-year-congressmen-will-get-special-obamacare-subsidy#sthash.CXgepLaz.dpuf"

 

[RDD_1210]

I hate to ask you to reread the thread, but that has been shown several times already. you can choose to ignore it if you like, I really don't care what you believe.

Exactly. You made it up. You're a liar and it's why you refuse to quote from the article that YOU posted.

"But it soon became apparent the provision contained no language that allowed federal contributions toward their health plans that cover about 75 percent of the premium costs.

This caused fears that staff would suddenly face sharply higher healthcare costs and leave federal service, causing a "brain drain" on Capitol Hill.

But Wednesday's proposed rule from the OPM, the federal government's human resources agency, means that Congress will escape the most onerous impact of law as it was written."

Yet again none of that says anything about an increase in subsidy, especially from 70 to 75% as you've lied about here.

Point proven again. Keep trying though. It's comical at this point.

 

[RDD_1210]

RDD

I don't know if you have any basic math skills, being a liberal you probably don't, but give it a try

"The congresswoman and her family living next door makes $174,000. Her income is 739% of poverty level and her insurance plan, at the Silver level, would also cost $15,481. But the congresswoman would qualify for a subsidy of $10,048.76.

(The Kaiser calculator uses the Silver tier plan for its calculations and the OPM rule requires Congress to purchase at the Gold tier, but the federal subsidies are applicable to either tier plan: Gold, Silver, Bronze.)

Unlike the D.C. family that gets no tax-credit subsidy under Obamacare, the member of Congress gets more than $10,000 because of the deal arranged among the congressional leadership, the White House, and the OPM in early August 2013.

Congressional staff members would also qualify for subsidies even if their income exceeds the 400% of poverty level.

It is one set of subsidy rules for the electorate, and a different set of subsidy rules for those who work in Congress.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/174k-year-congressmen-will-get-special-obamacare-subsidy#sthash.CXgepLaz.dpuf"

You're talking about two different things. What she is getting is her employer health insurance subsidy. It's not increasing, it's staying the same. Her employer happens to be the federal government, but she was already getting that subsidy as a part of her compensation package. No different than what I get from my employer as a part of my compensation package. That is a subsidy from the employer, not a income based subsidy. She's getting exactly the same amount she was getting before.

Your example highlights the federal income based subsidy given out to individuals who purchase on the exchanges and qualify based upon income level. Congressional staffers are NOT getting any subsidy through this.

 

[Trajan]

so...anyway, ..... the topic is; reids giving some of his staff an out, that is they will be getting a subsidy that they may not qualify for, to wit, they get to collect a subsidy despite being outside the poverty line reg.s the ACA has established.....

Then let someone show us in black and white that the staff is not compliant with the law.

I did that on another thread, I posted the grassley amendment pulling the FEHBP (fed. employee health benefits plan) from everyone form the president to congress and staff, instead obama told the OPM, to give them the subsidies they had there anyway....*shrugs* now if you are asking for the man or womans names on his staff that are now getting it and how much, you realize thats a critical thinking fail, ......there would be zero point in giving it to them and risking the bad press if there was no there- there....

 

[Trajan]

RDD

I don't know if you have any basic math skills, being a liberal you probably don't, but give it a try

"The congresswoman and her family living next door makes $174,000. Her income is 739% of poverty level and her insurance plan, at the Silver level, would also cost $15,481. But the congresswoman would qualify for a subsidy of $10,048.76.

(The Kaiser calculator uses the Silver tier plan for its calculations and the OPM rule requires Congress to purchase at the Gold tier, but the federal subsidies are applicable to either tier plan: Gold, Silver, Bronze.)

Unlike the D.C. family that gets no tax-credit subsidy under Obamacare, the member of Congress gets more than $10,000 because of the deal arranged among the congressional leadership, the White House, and the OPM in early August 2013.

Congressional staff members would also qualify for subsidies even if their income exceeds the 400% of poverty level.

It is one set of subsidy rules for the electorate, and a different set of subsidy rules for those who work in Congress.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/174k-year-congressmen-will-get-special-obamacare-subsidy#sthash.CXgepLaz.dpuf"

You're talking about two different things. What she is getting is her employer health insurance subsidy. It's not increasing, it's staying the same. Her employer happens to be the federal government, but she was already getting that subsidy as a part of her compensation package. No different than what I get from my employer as a part of my compensation package. That is a subsidy from the employer, not a income based subsidy. She's getting exactly the same amount she was getting before.

Your example highlights the federal income based subsidy given out to individuals who purchase on the exchanges and qualify based upon income level. Congressional staffers are NOT getting any subsidy through this.

but thats not what the law says,Section 1312(d), they got kicked from the FEHBP to the Obamacare exchanges, that employer health insurance subsidy ( the FEHBP) is no longer available to them, and they are to use the obamacare exchange and the calculus there in, 400% of the poverty line.

 

[Redfish]

RDD

I don't know if you have any basic math skills, being a liberal you probably don't, but give it a try

"The congresswoman and her family living next door makes $174,000. Her income is 739% of poverty level and her insurance plan, at the Silver level, would also cost $15,481. But the congresswoman would qualify for a subsidy of $10,048.76.

(The Kaiser calculator uses the Silver tier plan for its calculations and the OPM rule requires Congress to purchase at the Gold tier, but the federal subsidies are applicable to either tier plan: Gold, Silver, Bronze.)

Unlike the D.C. family that gets no tax-credit subsidy under Obamacare, the member of Congress gets more than $10,000 because of the deal arranged among the congressional leadership, the White House, and the OPM in early August 2013.

Congressional staff members would also qualify for subsidies even if their income exceeds the 400% of poverty level.

It is one set of subsidy rules for the electorate, and a different set of subsidy rules for those who work in Congress.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/174k-year-congressmen-will-get-special-obamacare-subsidy#sthash.CXgepLaz.dpuf"

You're talking about two different things. What she is getting is her employer health insurance subsidy. It's not increasing, it's staying the same. Her employer happens to be the federal government, but she was already getting that subsidy as a part of her compensation package. No different than what I get from my employer as a part of my compensation package. That is a subsidy from the employer, not a income based subsidy. She's getting exactly the same amount she was getting before.

Your example highlights the federal income based subsidy given out to individuals who purchase on the exchanges and qualify based upon income level. Congressional staffers are NOT getting any subsidy through this.

but thats not what the law says,Section 1312(d), they got kicked from the FEHBP to the Obamacare exchanges, that employer health insurance subsidy ( the FEHBP) is no longer available to them, and they are to use the obamacare exchange and the calculus there in, 400% of the poverty line.

It is a constant source of amazement to watch the dems and libs try to defend the terrible law that is obamacare.

If they had any honesty, they would admit that it is a mess and should be scrapped before it completely destroys the economy and the best medical system in the world.

But they won't. Because to do so would be to admit that liberalism is a fraud and that would cause their heads to implode.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

 

[Redfish]

RDD

I don't know if you have any basic math skills, being a liberal you probably don't, but give it a try

"The congresswoman and her family living next door makes $174,000. Her income is 739% of poverty level and her insurance plan, at the Silver level, would also cost $15,481. But the congresswoman would qualify for a subsidy of $10,048.76.

(The Kaiser calculator uses the Silver tier plan for its calculations and the OPM rule requires Congress to purchase at the Gold tier, but the federal subsidies are applicable to either tier plan: Gold, Silver, Bronze.)

Unlike the D.C. family that gets no tax-credit subsidy under Obamacare, the member of Congress gets more than $10,000 because of the deal arranged among the congressional leadership, the White House, and the OPM in early August 2013.

Congressional staff members would also qualify for subsidies even if their income exceeds the 400% of poverty level.

It is one set of subsidy rules for the electorate, and a different set of subsidy rules for those who work in Congress.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/174k-year-congressmen-will-get-special-obamacare-subsidy#sthash.CXgepLaz.dpuf"

You're talking about two different things. What she is getting is her employer health insurance subsidy. It's not increasing, it's staying the same. Her employer happens to be the federal government, but she was already getting that subsidy as a part of her compensation package. No different than what I get from my employer as a part of my compensation package. That is a subsidy from the employer, not a income based subsidy. She's getting exactly the same amount she was getting before.

Your example highlights the federal income based subsidy given out to individuals who purchase on the exchanges and qualify based upon income level. Congressional staffers are NOT getting any subsidy through this.

What are you smoking?

 

[Redfish]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

should congress be subject to the same laws and regulations as the general public?

yes or no.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

should congress be subject to the same laws and regulations as the general public?

yes or no.

As long as we understand that law has various interpretations, including the subsidy, sure.

Court will have to decide this, yes.

 

[Trajan]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

administrative decision....

his order to the OPM, contravenes the obamcare law (aca) as written and passed........ So basically anything obama or any president orders the federal gov. to do, is legal till hes told its not by a court? .

so, his naming of the recess appointments during pro forma session of the senate, was that 'legal'?

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is easy to prove, just like I pointed out numerous times in this thread.
you did?...numerous times?.....Taz was proved wrong by a bunch of people and i think he realized that Sherlock....now you called the guy a partisan hack.....all i said was something like ...how can you call a guy a hack who as bad mouthed both sides?.....and then you fell apart....why did you start stomping your feet?....because ole Harry the asshole, had the gall and audacity to question the bigger Asshole named RDD....you are the one who made the statements RDD back it up.....prove what you said about me that i back Conservatives right or wrong or go back to doing what you do best......beating your pud.....your similarity to Dean and Rabbi is amazing....they get upset when you question them too....

LOL, maybe if you repeat the same thing another 10 times it will somehow make what I said go away. Unfortunately it doesn't. You came to this thread to bash me, and not the OP who I pointed out was wrong and a hack for not returning to own up to his mistake.

You defended his hack behavior, making you a hack. Get it yet? Of course you don't, you're a hack.

i came to this thread just to bash you?.....really?.......you are pretty full of yourself aint ya?.....oh and it doesnt look to bright when a genuine REAL hack calls someone else a hack......like i said.....i dont think you know what a hack is.......

Harry the Dresden, Lord Slayer of Board Weirdoes!

And I have to point to some, apparently, that this is a compliment.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

administrative decision....

his order to the OPM, contravenes the obamcare law (aca) as written and passed........ So basically anything obama or any president orders the federal gov. to do, is legal till hes told its not by a court? .

so, his naming of the recess appointments during pro forma session of the senate, was that 'legal'?

Yell all ya want, my friend. The court will decide this if anyone files.

 

[Trajan]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

should congress be subject to the same laws and regulations as the general public?

yes or no.

As long as we understand that law has various interpretations, including the subsidy, sure.

Court will have to decide this, yes.

interpretations? it as simple as the ole dog that doesn't bark- " interpretation" if this law was NOT passed and in the bill, he would never have had to do anything because they would not have had an issue....see how that works?


The Grassley amendment ends eligibility of members of the pres., VP, Congress and staff for the pre-existing federal health-care program, pre- Obamacare exchange, as stipulated………





now , go read the amendment, to wit;

(i) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, or any provision of this title--

`(I) the President, the Vice President, each political appointee, each Member of Congress, and each Congressional employee shall be treated as a qualified individual entitled to the right under this paragraph to enroll in a qualified health plan in the individual market offered through an Exchange in the State in which the individual resides; and

`(II) any employer contribution under such chapter on behalf of the President, the Vice President, any political appointee, any Member of Congress, and any Congressional employee may be paid only to the issuer of a qualified health plan in which the individual enrolled through such Exchange and not to the issuer of a plan offered through the Federal employees health benefit program under such chapter.

In short- members of Congress and their staffs are required to procure their health-care coverage on the Obamacare exchange, and- they are no longer entitled to get employer subsidies ( via chapter 89 , fed health ins. plan) to contribute to the cost of their exchange policy, the only subsidy they qualify for is the very same you or I in similar positions would qualify for, via whatever subsidy ( if any) the Obamacare exchange calculates for them.…….

 

[Trajan]

That's the law. Was the administrative decision to permit the previous subsidies illegal?

That is what you can't answer, Trajan. The decision is legal until the courts say otherwise.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion as is anybody.

administrative decision....

his order to the OPM, contravenes the obamcare law (aca) as written and passed........ So basically anything obama or any president orders the federal gov. to do, is legal till hes told its not by a court? .

so, his naming of the recess appointments during pro forma session of the senate, was that 'legal'?

Yell all ya want, my friend. The court will decide this if anyone files.

hallucinating ? were did I yell?


now, as to the pro forma sessions, you want to answer the question or is your 'moderacy' preventing you from telling the truth by your own yardstick?

 

[blackhawk]

Wait a minute, if ObamaCare is better and more affordable why would he feel the need to exempt his staff?

Some Reid staffers exempt from Obamacare - CNN.com

Because government lives by the motto do as we say not as we do.

 

[Claudette]

RDD

I don't know if you have any basic math skills, being a liberal you probably don't, but give it a try

"The congresswoman and her family living next door makes $174,000. Her income is 739% of poverty level and her insurance plan, at the Silver level, would also cost $15,481. But the congresswoman would qualify for a subsidy of $10,048.76.

(The Kaiser calculator uses the Silver tier plan for its calculations and the OPM rule requires Congress to purchase at the Gold tier, but the federal subsidies are applicable to either tier plan: Gold, Silver, Bronze.)

Unlike the D.C. family that gets no tax-credit subsidy under Obamacare, the member of Congress gets more than $10,000 because of the deal arranged among the congressional leadership, the White House, and the OPM in early August 2013.

Congressional staff members would also qualify for subsidies even if their income exceeds the 400% of poverty level.

It is one set of subsidy rules for the electorate, and a different set of subsidy rules for those who work in Congress.
- See more at: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-boland/174k-year-congressmen-will-get-special-obamacare-subsidy#sthash.CXgepLaz.dpuf"

Your oh so right. Thats exactly what they did.

Our tax dollars covered Congress and staffers before the ACA. The ACA took away the subsidies. The president returned them basically making them immune to the ACA. Oh they have to use the exchanges but they don't have to pay out of pocket like so many other will.

Congress and staffers won't feel the pinch at all.

Gotta wonder how the rest of the country feels about that little factoid.

I get RD though. He feels they are just back to the status quo. Unfortunately the ACA removes the status quo by law. It is the law and its must be kinda nice to exempt people from the laws that everyone else has to follow.

All hail Barry.