Why so many waivers?

[AmericanFirst]

Obamaturd is granting all these waivers because even he knows it is bad legislation. Pretty bad when the idiot that pushed it thru won't even back it up.

 

[RDD_1210]

Obamaturd is granting all these waivers because even he knows it is bad legislation. Pretty bad when the idiot that pushed it thru won't even back it up.

You should have saved yourself the effort and just not bothered posting at all. Especially considering the fact that you have no clue what you're talking about.

 

[Trajan]

why don't you enlighten us then, you can answer any of the above questions anytime, we are open all night.

 

[chanel]

126 more issued in Feb. and 128 in March.

The number of waivers the Obama administration has awarded for a provision of the year-old healthcare reform law grew by 128 in March.

With the new waivers, that means 1,168 businesses, insurers, unions and other organizations have received one-year exemptions from a healthcare reform provision requiring at least $750,000 in annual benefits.

HHS must still bridge the gap until 2014, when the mini-med plans will supposedly be phased out because consumers will be able to shop for affordable and quality coverage on new state-run insurance exchanges. HHS said it is now examining waiver options for 2012 and 2013.

The new numbers were posted on an HHS website Friday night without an announcement from the department. The 128 waivers added in March track closely to the 126 HHS awarded in February.

List of health reform waivers keeps growing - The Hill's Healthwatch

 

[editec]

WE continue to ignore the fact that cost of medicine is increasing much faster than the people's ability to pay for it.

In fact, right now the median family income is declining even as the cost of goods and services is increasing and the increases in medicine are climbing even faster than inflation generally.

WE can keep pretending that this problem is merely one of deciding who pays, but we're kidding ourselves if we think the solution to this trend of increasinly expensive HC is going to be solved by passing the costs onto some other group or system.

Sooner or later we either impose price controls , start rationing HC or just let the market start rationing HC for most of us.

No death panels will be necessary.

We'll just let market forces do that dirty work for us.

 

[chanel]

You are right editec but from everything I've read, this bill will do nothing to contain costs. In fact some say they will rise. Time to start over and get it right. Or at least better. Haste makes waste - to a tune of how many trillion?

 

[RDD_1210]

You are right editec but from everything I've read, this bill will do nothing to contain costs. In fact some say they will rise. Time to start over and get it right. Or at least better. Haste makes waste - to a tune of how many trillion?

The public option would have went a long way in helping to bring down costs. Did you support the public option idea?

 

[AquaAthena]

"We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it”"....Nancy Pelosi

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You are right editec but from everything I've read, this bill will do nothing to contain costs. In fact some say they will rise. Time to start over and get it right. Or at least better. Haste makes waste - to a tune of how many trillion?

The public option would have went a long way in helping to bring down costs. Did you support the public option idea?

I don't think a public option would actually control costs.

 

[hortysir]

Well, ya won't catch me complaining because my company is on that list...

 

[RDD_1210]

You are right editec but from everything I've read, this bill will do nothing to contain costs. In fact some say they will rise. Time to start over and get it right. Or at least better. Haste makes waste - to a tune of how many trillion?

The public option would have went a long way in helping to bring down costs. Did you support the public option idea?

I don't think a public option would actually control costs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The public option would have went a long way in helping to bring down costs. Did you support the public option idea?

I don't think a public option would actually control costs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

You certainly have yours, despite the links that have been posted to prove your assertion that the PPACA is going to lower costs your opinion is that it will magically do so because people believe it. The sad thing is that, when it inevitably fails, you will blame everyone but the actual people responsible.

 

[RDD_1210]

I don't think a public option would actually control costs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

You certainly have yours, despite the links that have been posted to prove your assertion that the PPACA is going to lower costs your opinion is that it will magically do so because people believe it. The sad thing is that, when it inevitably fails, you will blame everyone but the actual people responsible.

So the PPACA makes use of a public option? Thats news to me.

 

[RDD_1210]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

You certainly have yours, despite the links that have been posted to prove your assertion that the PPACA is going to lower costs your opinion is that it will magically do so because people believe it. The sad thing is that, when it inevitably fails, you will blame everyone but the actual people responsible.

So the PPACA makes use of a public option? Thats news to me.

So I take your silence to mean you realize now that the PPACA has nothing to do with the public option.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You certainly have yours, despite the links that have been posted to prove your assertion that the PPACA is going to lower costs your opinion is that it will magically do so because people believe it. The sad thing is that, when it inevitably fails, you will blame everyone but the actual people responsible.

So the PPACA makes use of a public option? Thats news to me.

So I take your silence to mean you realize now that the PPACA has nothing to do with the public option.

My silence is meant to convey contempt for your position. If it makes you feel better to put words in my mouth feel free, just do not expect me to get upset. I do not play stupid games in an attempt to defend strawmen.

 

[RDD_1210]

So the PPACA makes use of a public option? Thats news to me.

So I take your silence to mean you realize now that the PPACA has nothing to do with the public option.

My silence is meant to convey contempt for your position. If it makes you feel better to put words in my mouth feel free, just do not expect me to get upset. I do not play stupid games in an attempt to defend strawmen.

Oh I see, so your failed attempt to switch the conversation about the ability of a public option to lower costs over to what we actually have in place through the PPACA was your way of being either ignorant or an asshole. Got it. You switched our conversation, don't be mad at me it didn't work out for you. LMAO!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So I take your silence to mean you realize now that the PPACA has nothing to do with the public option.

My silence is meant to convey contempt for your position. If it makes you feel better to put words in my mouth feel free, just do not expect me to get upset. I do not play stupid games in an attempt to defend strawmen.

Oh I see, so your failed attempt to switch the conversation about the ability of a public option to lower costs over to what we actually have in place through the PPACA was your way of being either ignorant or an asshole. Got it. You switched our conversation, don't be mad at me it didn't work out for you. LMAO!

What?

If you actually want to discuss the subject provide some evidence to back up your position. If you simply want to assume that you are right, and then attempt to force me to refute your position, then I will continue to have nothing but contempt for your position. I am not refuting it, I am questioning it, and hoping for evidence.

You have not attempted to discuss anything. You simply stated that I was entitled to my opinion I then pointed out that I am rejecting yours because you tend to ignore facts. If I was trying to avoid discussion I would have started with an insult instead of stating my opinion. My contempt for your position is because you never provide any evidence, you just assume you are right. Assume away, just do not expect to make an ass out of me by doing so.

 

[RDD_1210]

My silence is meant to convey contempt for your position. If it makes you feel better to put words in my mouth feel free, just do not expect me to get upset. I do not play stupid games in an attempt to defend strawmen.

Oh I see, so your failed attempt to switch the conversation about the ability of a public option to lower costs over to what we actually have in place through the PPACA was your way of being either ignorant or an asshole. Got it. You switched our conversation, don't be mad at me it didn't work out for you. LMAO!

What?

If you actually want to discuss the subject provide some evidence to back up your position. If you simply want to assume that you are right, and then attempt to force me to refute your position, then I will continue to have nothing but contempt for your position. I am not refuting it, I am questioning it, and hoping for evidence.

You have not attempted to discuss anything. You simply stated that I was entitled to my opinion I then pointed out that I am rejecting yours because you tend to ignore facts. If I was trying to avoid discussion I would have started with an insult instead of stating my opinion. My contempt for your position is because you never provide any evidence, you just assume you are right. Assume away, just do not expect to make an ass out of me by doing so.

And the "facts" you posted arguing that a public option wouldn't work references the PPACA, which has nothing to do with a public option. I posted my opinion, you posted yours. Neither of us posted facts to support our opinions about a public option. Like I said, your entitled to your opinion, but that's all you've provided so far.

 

[theHawk]

Anyone paying any attention to the news knows that the numbers of waivers for Obamacare have now topped 1000. What people might not be aware of is the reason that so many companies are getting waivers.

In order to avoid disruption in the insurance market, the healthcare overhaul gives HHS the power to grant waivers to firms that cannot meet new annual coverage limits in 2011. The waivers have typically been granted to so-called "mini-med" plans that offer limited annual coverage — as low as $2,000 — that would fall short of meeting the new annual coverage floor of $750,000 in 2011.

"We don't want to take away people's health insurance before they have some realistic other choices,” HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in an interview with The Hill earlier this year.

Number of healthcare reform law waivers climbs above 1,000 - The Hill's Healthwatch

Excuse me? I thought that, if I liked my health insurance I could keep it. The plan I used to have was very much like these mini med plans, I just pay for it myself. Since I do not work for a large, politically powerful company, I cannot obtain a waiver, and I not only lost the insurance plan I had, I cannot afford the new ones the law is requiring me to get.

I know the typical people will pop in and tell me I have no idea what I am talking about, that I am totally misinterpreting the way the law is written, and tat I am being lied to when the insurance company tells me that it is the fault of the PPACA that I no longer have insurance. Funny thing is, HHS seems to agree with me that it is the fault of the law.

Welcome to Tyranny. If you're "in" with the regime you get a pass. If not, you're out of luck.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh I see, so your failed attempt to switch the conversation about the ability of a public option to lower costs over to what we actually have in place through the PPACA was your way of being either ignorant or an asshole. Got it. You switched our conversation, don't be mad at me it didn't work out for you. LMAO!

What?

If you actually want to discuss the subject provide some evidence to back up your position. If you simply want to assume that you are right, and then attempt to force me to refute your position, then I will continue to have nothing but contempt for your position. I am not refuting it, I am questioning it, and hoping for evidence.

You have not attempted to discuss anything. You simply stated that I was entitled to my opinion I then pointed out that I am rejecting yours because you tend to ignore facts. If I was trying to avoid discussion I would have started with an insult instead of stating my opinion. My contempt for your position is because you never provide any evidence, you just assume you are right. Assume away, just do not expect to make an ass out of me by doing so.

And the "facts" you posted arguing that a public option wouldn't work references the PPACA, which has nothing to do with a public option. I posted my opinion, you posted yours. Neither of us posted facts to support our opinions about a public option. Like I said, your entitled to your opinion, but that's all you've provided so far.

Idiot.

I did not post any facts concerning the public option, I posted facts about your opinion. If you had half a brain you would understand the difference.