Obama Care Crisis Solved for Congress and Staffers!

[Trajan]

You still don't get, boedicca. Their employer will pay the employer contribution, just as my company did for our employees health care and will continue to do so.

But why can't the government opt to move their employees on the cheaper Obamacare plan?

The same argument private companies use: our talented employees will leave if they have to pick up a bigger share.

so?

they are not private companies and its part of the bill, obama just gave out what amounts to a waiver...why do they rate again? will a private co. be afforded the same exemption for its benefit?

 

[boedicca]

But why can't the government opt to move their employees on the cheaper Obamacare plan?

The same argument private companies use: our talented employees will leave if they have to pick up a bigger share.

so?

they are not private companies and its part of the bill, obama just gave out what amounts to a waiver...why do they rate again? will a private co. be afforded the same exemption for its benefit?

It's more than a waiver...it's a BAIL OUT with taxpayers footing the bill for the political class.

 

[Sunshine]

Federal employees receive their health insurance through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. They have been for a long time.

The FEHBP premiums are employer-subsidized, just like any other employer-sponsored health insurance is. If you have employer-sponsored health insurance, you are receiving, on average, about a $12,000 tax free subsidy from your employer. It just so happens the employer of Congressional staffers is the American taxpayer. Their wages come from tax dollars, as does their employer's share of their health insurance premiums.

Understand? Tax dollars have been going to them for decades as part of their wages and benefits.

The problem is that there is no provision in ObamaCare for someone who switches from FEHBP to an insurance exchange to receive the same premium subsidy they have been receiving for decades. They only get a subsidy if their income is less than 400 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). And for a lot of them, that is not the case.

So they are not attempting to add some new cost to taxpayers. They are trying to maintain the same thing they have always gotten.


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/30/us/politics/wrinkle-in-health-law-vexes-lawmakers-aides.html

The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the nation’s largest employer-sponsored health insurance program, covers more than eight million people, including government employees and their family members. It offers dozens of competing plans and has been cited as a model by members of both parties.

In battles over the health care law in 2009-10, Republicans proposed a requirement for lawmakers and aides to join the exchanges, and Democrats accepted it.

So Congress is getting booted out of the FEHBP and must buy their insurance through the exchanges.

Bye-bye employer-sponsored (and thus subsidized) health insurance. Hello insurance exchange. That is a substantial jump in cost to each of them.

It would be like your own employer booting you off your company's health insurance and making you buy it from the exchange. If you earn more than 400 FPL, that would be a giant cost increase to you.

That is what small companies do. I worked for one when I was traveling. They just tacked $300 onto my paycheck to pay for insurance.

 

[daveman]

No, daveman, I take it personally when you falsely criticize me, a mainstream GOP member who is tired of your far reactonary right ******* up my party.

Your party is supposed to be conservative, kid.

We have one liberal party. We don't need two. Stop ******* up the GOP.

 

[Trajan]

The same argument private companies use: our talented employees will leave if they have to pick up a bigger share.

so?

they are not private companies and its part of the bill, obama just gave out what amounts to a waiver...why do they rate again? will a private co. be afforded the same exemption for its benefit?

It's more than a waiver...it's a BAIL OUT with taxpayers footing the bill for the political class.

well it appears to me that when obama said you could keep your coverage etc. something doesn't add up if those folks screamed bloody murder to keep theirs ( and too the unions, the new IRS head etc. etc. etc.) , ipso, it would have changed?....

 

[daveman]

But why can't the government opt to move their employees on the cheaper Obamacare plan?

The same argument private companies use: our talented employees will leave if they have to pick up a bigger share.

so?

they are not private companies and its part of the bill, obama just gave out what amounts to a waiver...why do they rate again? will a private co. be afforded the same exemption for its benefit?

If they're big Dem donors -- probably.

 

[Care4all]

I thought the exchanges are ONLY for those people who can not get their insurance policies through their employment, and for people whose employers do offer Health Insurance Policies, but the employee contribution is too high for the employee....and if this employee has to go to the exchange to get their insurance from one of the many private insurance companies offering plans on the exchange and qualifies for subsidies, then the employer will be fined for not providing affordable health insurance for their employees, or something like that...?

So, these plans on the exchange, are probably the very same policies that the employer provided insurance carries....the only difference is that if you are having to get your insurance on the exchange without any help from your employer, or if you are self employed, then the gvt subsidies will come in and help you pay for these private insurance policies if you qualify, because you make too little....then the employer is zapped with some kind of fine for every employee that does not buy in to the employee health plan due to not being able to afford it because the employer is not contributing enough towards your health plan.....

 

[boedicca]

The actual ObamaCare law required Congress and Staffers to use the exchanges, so Obama changing it now is a violation of the law (not that he cares about the rule of law).

 

[Pop23]

'let them eat cake'.....yea I think that can work


so, the IRS chief ( and his Treas. Union) say they'd rather stick with their Federal plan and not go thru 'the/a change'...well hello? Who wouldn't? But then again even the loyal foot soldiers of the admin. understand, and if they can avoid getting on 'the train', they will ...

The deal or carve out for the Unions is coming too, bet on it.

The only issue being when and whom; if Obama wasn't pathological about needing everyone less fortunate than him to love him, he'd set up Hillary as the go to on this, boosting her 2016 cache amongst the Unions, keeping them fully engaged, in line and loyal to her for the campaign.

Hill gets Obamacare fix

Lawmakers and staff can breathe easy — their health care tab is not going to soar next year.

The Office of Personnel Management, under heavy pressure from Capitol Hill, will issue a ruling that says the government can continue to make a contribution to the health care premiums of members of Congress and their aides, according to several Hill sources. …

Just Wednesday, POLITICO reported that President Barack Obama told Democratic senators that he was personally involved in finding a solution. …

Obama’s involvement in solving this impasse was unusual, to say the least. But it came after serious griping from both sides of the aisle about the potential of a “brain drain.” The fear, as told by sources in both parties, was that aides would head for more lucrative jobs, spooked by the potential for spiking health premiums.

snip-

The problem was rooted in the original text of the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) inserted a provision which said members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans “created” by the law or “offered through an exchange.”

Read more: Hill gets Obamacare fix - John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com




Politico naturally does its best to cover for Obama ,example-; " the problem was rooted in text " that Grassley inserted...., no, thats a grasping, vapid and dishonest counter factual, the problem IS the Plan......

Those staffers are a bunch of idiots

Why get out of obamacare when it's such a good deal?

Oh wait, what was I thinking!

 

[Care4all]

I don't think many of you understand how the ACA works and the exchanges are set up, and who they are set up for....and they are NOT set up for ANYONE that has insurance provided to them through their employer, unless their employer does not offer to pay for a significant portion of the policy.

Exchanges are set up primarily for those employees who can not get employer contributed health insurance policies through their work place.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

'let them eat cake'.....yea I think that can work


so, the IRS chief ( and his Treas. Union) say they'd rather stick with their Federal plan and not go thru 'the/a change'...well hello? Who wouldn't? But then again even the loyal foot soldiers of the admin. understand, and if they can avoid getting on 'the train', they will ...

The deal or carve out for the Unions is coming too, bet on it.

The only issue being when and whom; if Obama wasn't pathological about needing everyone less fortunate than him to love him, he'd set up Hillary as the go to on this, boosting her 2016 cache amongst the Unions, keeping them fully engaged, in line and loyal to her for the campaign.

Hill gets Obamacare fix

Lawmakers and staff can breathe easy — their health care tab is not going to soar next year.

The Office of Personnel Management, under heavy pressure from Capitol Hill, will issue a ruling that says the government can continue to make a contribution to the health care premiums of members of Congress and their aides, according to several Hill sources. …

Just Wednesday, POLITICO reported that President Barack Obama told Democratic senators that he was personally involved in finding a solution. …

Obama’s involvement in solving this impasse was unusual, to say the least. But it came after serious griping from both sides of the aisle about the potential of a “brain drain.” The fear, as told by sources in both parties, was that aides would head for more lucrative jobs, spooked by the potential for spiking health premiums.

snip-

The problem was rooted in the original text of the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) inserted a provision which said members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans “created” by the law or “offered through an exchange.”

Read more: Hill gets Obamacare fix - John Bresnahan and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com




Politico naturally does its best to cover for Obama ,example-; " the problem was rooted in text " that Grassley inserted...., no, thats a grasping, vapid and dishonest counter factual, the problem IS the Plan......

They are blaming the Republicans for something they voted against, why am I not surprised?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What exemption? The OPM determined that OPM that the federal government could help pay the cost of premiums on the exchanges for congressional employees. They are part of ACA, gang.

I thought the exchanges were supposed to be affordable, if someone making over $100,000 a year can't afford the premiums how can regular people afford them?

 

[Trajan]

I don't think many of you understand how the ACA works and the exchanges are set up, and who they are set up for....and they are NOT set up for ANYONE that has insurance provided to them through their employer, unless their employer does not offer to pay for a significant portion of the policy.

Exchanges are set up primarily for those employees who can not get employer contributed health insurance policies through their work place.

I understand Care, I also understand that making those that craft the plan should live with their handi work, is fair, that is the point in this, they should not get it thru the feds......thats why Grassleys measure was made part of the bill. If they wanted to fight this point, they should have then but they knew that would not fly.

I understand too that even Pelosi stated that they would be treated like others and use the exchanges...they knew it.

And as a related question, same can be said in counter context for those municipalities like Chicago and Detroit who are about to offload their pensioners from the medical plans they retired with, the cost they ( the cities) are supposed to bear....thats not fair either.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, daveman, I take it personally when you falsely criticize me, a mainstream GOP member who is tired of your far reactonary right ******* up my party.

If you are a mainstream Republican I am Fidel Castro.

 

[Care4all]

Mountains out of mole hills are abound. If your employer offers health insurance as a benefit, then you are NOT going to use the Exchange....the Exchange is for people who can NOT get employee contributed health insurance through their employer, or can not get an affordable health insurance policy through their work place because the employer is not contributing a certain percentage of the cost.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No. The government will be a huge chunk of the costs of their care instead of them having to use the exchanges the way the poor will have to.

You still don't get, boedicca. Their employer will pay the employer contribution, just as my company did for our employees health care and will continue to do so. Those who do not have employer insurance will purchase theirs through the cooperatives. Many independent contractors outside of the employer health care system will do the same.

Is it really that simple, or are you just covering for your Democratic employers?

 

[Trajan]

Mountains out of mole hills are abound. If your employer offers health insurance as a benefit, then you are NOT going to use the Exchange....the Exchange is for people who can NOT get employee contributed health insurance through their employer, or can not get an affordable health insurance policy through their work place because the employer is not contributing a certain percentage of the cost.

then why did they not make that point THEN.....?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You still don't get, boedicca. Their employer will pay the employer contribution, just as my company did for our employees health care and will continue to do so.

But why can't the government opt to move their employees on the cheaper Obamacare plan?

The same argument private companies use: our talented employees will leave if they have to pick up a bigger share.

Employees who don't like the pay are free to find another job.

 

[MeBelle]

I don't think many of you understand how the ACA works and the exchanges are set up, and who they are set up for....and they are NOT set up for ANYONE that has insurance provided to them through their employer, unless their employer does not offer to pay for a significant portion of the policy.

Exchanges are set up primarily for those employees who can not get employer contributed health insurance policies through their work place.

fFrom the OP link:
...the original text of the Affordable Care Act. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) inserted a provision which said members of Congress and their aides must be covered by plans “created” by the law or “offered through an exchange.”

"The OPM’s move is illegal. Congress passed an amendment to Obamacare that mandated that Congress and staff had to abide by it themselves. OPM doesn’t have the power to change the law any more than Obama had the power to delay the employer mandate."
The PJ Tatler » Congress Gets Its Own Obamacare Waiver

 

[Care4all]

Making Federal employees lose their health benefits of their employer, by their employer not contributing towards their health insurance is utterly ridiculous and has nothing to do with the ACA....

Remember the quote that if you have insurance now, your insurance does not have to change or will not change?

Same goes for federal employees....they get to keep their insurance provided by their employer.... simple as that....and since we all get to keep getting our insurance through our employers, they should be allowed to continue to get their employer contributed insurance through their work place....PERIOD.

we, nor the ACA can't just cut employer contributed health care policies that are part of gvt employee's compensation....? that's simply as wrong as it would be for us to tell IBM that their employees CAN NOT HAVE health care as part of their benefit compensation.

It was good that it was clarified, and a good decision and outcome....fair is fair and that was fair.