The Finding Out What's In The Bill Thread

[chanel]

Small contractors will have three choices: lay off workers (those who don't have insurance from the spouse), pay the fine (and risk an IRS audit every year) , or raise prices to cover the insurance. My guess is most will pick the first or third. EVERYONE will pay for this debacle, despite the cheers from the takers who think it's only the "rich" that will pay.

Here's a doozie:

...the bill would create 159 new government agencies to regulate insurance and medical care for Americans.

Writing for AOL News, Price says in an op-ed that the healthcare overhaul being contemplated by House Democrats will sacrifice “the quality of health care that has made this nation's practice of medicine the envy of the world.”

Newsmax - Price: Obamacare Means 159 New Gov't Agencies

Maybe all those builders, plumbers, electricians, etc. that have been laid off can get a job with the feds?

 

[Ravi]

Newsmax? Seriously?

 

[chanel]

I'm sorry Ravi Perhaps 159 is off by a few How many new agencies would be an acceptable number? 158, 128, 58?

 

[mudwhistle]

Small contractors will have three choices: lay off workers (those who don't have insurance from the spouse), pay the fine (and risk an IRS audit every year) , or raise prices to cover the insurance. My guess is most will pick the first or third. EVERYONE will pay for this debacle, despite the cheers from the takers who think it's only the "rich" that will pay.

Here's a doozie:

...the bill would create 159 new government agencies to regulate insurance and medical care for Americans.

Writing for AOL News, Price says in an op-ed that the healthcare overhaul being contemplated by House Democrats will sacrifice “the quality of health care that has made this nation's practice of medicine the envy of the world.”

Newsmax - Price: Obamacare Means 159 New Gov't Agencies

Maybe all those builders, plumbers, electricians, etc. that have been laid off can get a job with the feds?

Those in the insurance industry are already going over their resumes because they know that inside of 3 years the government will put them out of business.

Obama, contrary to his rhetoric, wants single-payer. All they have to do is put requirements on private insurance companies that force them to operate in the red. Those companies already know what's in store for them so the first thing you'll see is massive increases in your premiums. People will have to make a choice between keeping their insurance or paying their bills. And guess what.....Obama is gonna be demonising them for it when in fact he and those progressive assholes caused it.

No pre-conditions, 30 million new clients that won't be paying for it, rules and regulations that change the way insurance companies operate is going to force them out of business and the government is going to have to take over the industry completely inside of 3 years....but then they're such a goat-fuck that you can be assured they'll fuck it up. They proved this when they pressured banks into dropping the normal qualifiers needed to secure a loan. Stuff like credit scores, ability to pay back loans, tiny little things like that.

 

[DiamondDave]

As if most of us not blinded by the Obama hype did not already know that this would lead to huge government expansion....

I would like to see another source confirm the number, but I have NO DOUBT that it is a high number of agencies and huge expansion

 

[Valerie]

An article from February...

Fact or fiction? Bill creates 150 new agencies


Fiction. Reading the 2,016-page House bill, we were able to find 32 new agencies, task forces, advisory committees, and other bureaucratic creations. They range from a Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission to a Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel. Some of the bureaucracy seems duplicative: For instance, the bill creates both a Native American Health and Wellness Foundation -- and a Committee for the Establishment of Native American Health and Wellness Foundation. The most important of the new entities will be the Health Choices Administration which will decide on insurance plan standards and administer subsidies to the estimated 20 million people buying insurance through the new electronic marketplaces. Apart from creating agencies, the bill would generate a huge amount of work for the secretary of Health and Human Services with dozens of new projects and grant programs.
Fact or fiction? Bill creates 150 new agencies - Dose of Reality- msnbc.com

 

[DiamondDave]

So the number is incorrect... but I, for one, still find 32 new agencies disturbing and wrong

 

[Valerie]

So the number is incorrect... but I, for one, still find 32 new agencies disturbing and wrong

I know, it sure is a lot of bureaucracy!

I have no idea if that is the correct number but that's what I found...

 

[Immanuel]

i guess that could be conceived as puppetry. the wording empowers exchanges. for these to function in a way which forces competition, they need to force companies to use them, rather than separately sourced options competing with the exchange. thats how i see it. a bit like the stock exchange. rules limit the opportunity to privately place shares of your business, so that it can be done under the existing, guided system with regs and oversight.

still in the bill worded the same, FYI.... see HR4872

Thanks for the info on HR 4872. I had not yet gone to find it.

I don't see the Health Insurance Exchange as anything close the the Stock Exchange. What I see is the government regulating the policies and the costs of private insurance and telling private insurers that they will offer coverage on things like breast enhancement (I hesitate to mention abortion, but that is what I am thinking) and that they will charge no more than X dollars for their coverage and deductibles will be no higher than Y etc. etc. etc.

That in my opinion constitutes puppetry.

And since I do not trust a damned thing said by any politician, them telling me it is a "stock exchange" is not going to fly.

Immie

this is the finding out whats in the bill thread, immie, can you substantiate any of what you are saying is in the bill is actually in there?

there are certainly some differences between the h/c exchanges and the stock exchange. the main difference is that the exchange aims to have a standardized set of coverages as a minimum for qualified plans.

i dont know what it is like for people who get plans offered them from their jobs, having never gone through that. when you look online, however, at the comparison sites for private insurance, it is immediately obvious that aetna sells apples and blue shield oranges. you cant compare these plans side by side, beyond wide-sweeping bases like deductible amount.

if you are hell-bent on seeing everything as puppetry, you will certainly see it, but couldnt standardized coverage for the purposes of an exchange create direct competition in an all-apples market? right now insurers avoid this through diversifying their plans and altering the terms that they use for essentially, but not exactly the same thing.

i got my insurance from having to sit down with sales people. they pitched me on the way their favorite plan worked; they all sneaked around some general requirements (price/deductible) i had, but with many bizarre options clouding real comparison of their offerings.

this exchange bit could be refreshing??

Well according to your previous post the language did make it through to the final bill.

Now, the interpretation of what that language means is up to who? The government.

If you read the language it says that insurance companies cannot write new policies as off today unless they qualify as a qualified plan... hell! Have they even defined what a qualified plan is? They can wait 5 years and not define what a qualified plan is and completely drive all health insurance providers out of business and then they will have succeeded in forcing us all into their "public option" which really is no option at all since there is no other "option".

How will the courts interpret that language? I'm not sure on the answer to that but if they do so literally, no health insurer is allowed to write new policies effective yesterday.

Immie

 

[mudwhistle]

An article from February...

Fact or fiction? Bill creates 150 new agencies


Fiction. Reading the 2,016-page House bill, we were able to find 32 new agencies, task forces, advisory committees, and other bureaucratic creations. They range from a Comparative Effectiveness Research Commission to a Personal Care Attendant Workforce Advisory Panel. Some of the bureaucracy seems duplicative: For instance, the bill creates both a Native American Health and Wellness Foundation -- and a Committee for the Establishment of Native American Health and Wellness Foundation. The most important of the new entities will be the Health Choices Administration which will decide on insurance plan standards and administer subsidies to the estimated 20 million people buying insurance through the new electronic marketplaces. Apart from creating agencies, the bill would generate a huge amount of work for the secretary of Health and Human Services with dozens of new projects and grant programs.
Fact or fiction? Bill creates 150 new agencies - Dose of Reality- msnbc.com

Looking at the deficit reducing government by 32 agencies would be a good start.

That's less white-collar workers collecting benefits for doing next to nothing.

 

[boedicca]

yeah because 50% of Americans just sit arround and do nothing all day huh?

Well, you do post on the internets a lot - that appears to be your sole activity.

 

[boedicca]

those not paying income tax have gotten nothing that the wealthy did not also take advantage of.... it is a fair system for the most part, imo.

Here is where you are wrong: the cost of living varies dramatically across the country.

A couple making $250K in the Bay Area or NYC is middle class. That same income in quite a few red states (ironically) is quite wealthy. CA (thanks to the dupes in our progressive government), receives back only 70% of the taxes it pays to the feds.

The tax code is not fair - it is biased against the middle class in major metro areas (especially along the coasts).

The other aspect of the tax code that is Not Fair is the huge amount of taxes from various taxing entities that are piling up on the taxpayer. Taken as a burden in total, the median family pays more than double the taxes as a percent of income that it did in the 1950s. Middle class families are struggling - the biggest reason why is oppressive government & taxation.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Or overachieving students.

If you define a person at 26 who's still needing mommy and daddy to cover his or her ass on their health plan as "overacheivers" then you're plain fucking stupid.

Why do you hate med students?

I don't hate anyone.

 

[chanel]

We have a small plumbing biz with 8 employees and payroll over 250K. Pay the fine or reduce the payroll? This could hurt many good people.

after joe the plumber, im getting the impression plumbers run their bizs different than the rest of us.

ever thought about raising your prices like any other biz would? that doesnt occur to plumbers? sorry ralph, gotta let you go. we're probably going to incur another 7gs in fees because of you and obama, and we dont know any other way to cover that between now and april 2015.

contributing/covering employees is an option, depending on how much family theyve got, it might not cost too much. Sam will pick up half (for < 10 employees all making less than $80k/yr) according to the bill.

SEC. 45R. SMALL BUSINESS EMPLOYEE HEALTH COVERAGE CREDIT.

the bill

Sorry my name's not Ralph. We currently pay HC for our top guy to a tune of $16K. He kicks in $4K. We can not pay $16K for the others, so... Either we will pay the fine, offer a less expensive plan, or decrease our payroll. Obama promised people they could keep the coverage they have, didn't he? He also said that small businesses would be exempt. But he forgot to mention that he had a particular disdain for the building trades for some reason.

Yes we can raise prices. Now you are making sense. Pass that along to all the Obamamites that think that only the rich will pay for this entitlement.

It ain't just the taxes folks. People will lose jobs and the PRICE OF EVERYTHING will go up.

 

[NYcarbineer]

NOW you're reading the bill? lol, the Senate bill has been online since January.

More proof that most of the bozos who've been slamming the bill didn't even know what was in it.

 

[chanel]

House Republicans claimed Monday that the health care reform bill pushed by Speaker Nancy Pelosi would create a whopping 111 new "federal bureaucracies."

In its latest attempt to portray the Democrats' reform package as an unwieldy expansion of federal government in the health care sector, the House Republican Conference circulated what it called a list of "new boards, bureaucracies, commissions and programs" created in the House health care bill.

Among some off the new agencies, the list cites a Health Insurance Exchange; the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation; the Public Health Investment Fund; the Public Health Workforce Corps; an Assistant Secretary for Health Information; the Food and Drug Administration Office of Women's Health; grant programs for alternative medical liability laws, infant mortality programs and other issues; and about 100 other government-sponsored creations.

FOXNews.com - House Republicans Find 111 New 'Bureaucracies' in Health Care Bill

Well. We can argue back and forth about what the correct number is, but how FUCKING PATHETIC that no one even knows for sure. !6,000 new IRS agents or 15,000? 200,000 new federal employees or 100,000? THIS SHIT MAKES ME NUTZ!!!!!!

How many private sector employees are being laid off right this very minute?

 

[Ravi]

We have a small plumbing biz with 8 employees and payroll over 250K. Pay the fine or reduce the payroll? This could hurt many good people.

after joe the plumber, im getting the impression plumbers run their bizs different than the rest of us.

ever thought about raising your prices like any other biz would? that doesnt occur to plumbers? sorry ralph, gotta let you go. we're probably going to incur another 7gs in fees because of you and obama, and we dont know any other way to cover that between now and april 2015.

contributing/covering employees is an option, depending on how much family theyve got, it might not cost too much. Sam will pick up half (for < 10 employees all making less than $80k/yr) according to the bill.

SEC. 45R. SMALL BUSINESS EMPLOYEE HEALTH COVERAGE CREDIT.

the bill

Sorry my name's not Ralph. We currently pay HC for our top guy to a tune of $16K. He kicks in $4K. We can not pay $16K for the others, so... Either we will pay the fine, offer a less expensive plan, or decrease our payroll. Obama promised people they could keep the coverage they have, didn't he? He also said that small businesses would be exempt. But he forgot to mention that he had a particular disdain for the building trades for some reason.

Yes we can raise prices. Now you are making sense. Pass that along to all the Obamamites that think that only the rich will pay for this entitlement.

It ain't just the taxes folks. People will lose jobs and the PRICE OF EVERYTHING will go up.

I'm pretty sure that if you offer health care coverage to one employee you are required by law to offer it to all employees...unless the others are all part timers. At least that has been the law up until now.

 

[Immanuel]

after joe the plumber, im getting the impression plumbers run their bizs different than the rest of us.

ever thought about raising your prices like any other biz would? that doesnt occur to plumbers? sorry ralph, gotta let you go. we're probably going to incur another 7gs in fees because of you and obama, and we dont know any other way to cover that between now and april 2015.

contributing/covering employees is an option, depending on how much family theyve got, it might not cost too much. Sam will pick up half (for < 10 employees all making less than $80k/yr) according to the bill.

SEC. 45R. SMALL BUSINESS EMPLOYEE HEALTH COVERAGE CREDIT.

the bill

Sorry my name's not Ralph. We currently pay HC for our top guy to a tune of $16K. He kicks in $4K. We can not pay $16K for the others, so... Either we will pay the fine, offer a less expensive plan, or decrease our payroll. Obama promised people they could keep the coverage they have, didn't he? He also said that small businesses would be exempt. But he forgot to mention that he had a particular disdain for the building trades for some reason.

Yes we can raise prices. Now you are making sense. Pass that along to all the Obamamites that think that only the rich will pay for this entitlement.

It ain't just the taxes folks. People will lose jobs and the PRICE OF EVERYTHING will go up.

I'm pretty sure that if you offer health care coverage to one employee you are required by law to offer it to all employees...unless the others are all part timers. At least that has been the law up until now.

I'm not 100% certain of this, but I do not think that is law, but rather what insurance company insist on. They require it because... well, because it boosts their bottom line.

I do not think health insurance is like qualified retirement plans where to be qualified the company has to offer it to all employees.

Don't quote me on that and please don't hold me to it if I am wrong, but I think that is how it works.

Immie

 

[Ravi]

Sorry my name's not Ralph. We currently pay HC for our top guy to a tune of $16K. He kicks in $4K. We can not pay $16K for the others, so... Either we will pay the fine, offer a less expensive plan, or decrease our payroll. Obama promised people they could keep the coverage they have, didn't he? He also said that small businesses would be exempt. But he forgot to mention that he had a particular disdain for the building trades for some reason.

Yes we can raise prices. Now you are making sense. Pass that along to all the Obamamites that think that only the rich will pay for this entitlement.

It ain't just the taxes folks. People will lose jobs and the PRICE OF EVERYTHING will go up.

I'm pretty sure that if you offer health care coverage to one employee you are required by law to offer it to all employees...unless the others are all part timers. At least that has been the law up until now.

I'm not 100% certain of this, but I do not think that is law, but rather what insurance company insist on. They require it because... well, because it boosts their bottom line.

I do not think health insurance is like qualified retirement plans where to be qualified the company has to offer it to all employees.

Don't quote me on that and please don't hold me to it if I am wrong, but I think that is how it works.

Immie

It's usually a state and/or federal law. If you offer one class of employees benefits you must offer all the employees in that class the same benefits. You can get them to sign a statement saying they were offered it and opted out.

 

[Immanuel]

I'm pretty sure that if you offer health care coverage to one employee you are required by law to offer it to all employees...unless the others are all part timers. At least that has been the law up until now.

I'm not 100% certain of this, but I do not think that is law, but rather what insurance company insist on. They require it because... well, because it boosts their bottom line.

I do not think health insurance is like qualified retirement plans where to be qualified the company has to offer it to all employees.

Don't quote me on that and please don't hold me to it if I am wrong, but I think that is how it works.

Immie

It's usually a state and/or federal law. If you offer one class of employees benefits you must offer all the employees in that class the same benefits. You can get them to sign a statement saying they were offered it and opted out.

That is for qualified benefits as in tax exempt benefits. In other words, I believe that if Chanel is giving this employee health insurance and not other employees, then the benefit would be taxable to the employee whereas if it were given to all employees it would not be taxable to anyone of them.

I do not believe that there is any law that prevents a company from providing insurance in the manner that Chanel mentioned although I may be incorrect in that, but I don't think I am.

Immie