Rubio enrolls in Obamacare, takes federal subsidy

[Antares]

I told you my fellow GOP would get over all of this.

It's a done deal.

Now we work on reform and adjustment. No repeal, squeal.

I wish you were right but, just like Rubio, they'll keep pretending to "repeal/defund" while offering nothing AND, we'll pay for their coverage.

And, all the time we're paying his damn subsidy he'll whine about it.

Well, watch, Antares, and you will see the rear guard at the bridge of extinction.

They will be gone in real life politically by June.

Let us take it to November....Repubs win you leave, they don't don't I do.

You up for it Fakey?

 

[GreenEggsNSpam]

i thought the part of the website that speaks spanish, and the websites for states 51-57 haven't been built yet.

lol, how about the part of the site for americans who speak austrian? has that been built yet?

 

[Flopper]

I meant Florida Senator in the US Congress.
Why should not he take the subsidy if he qualifies?

I thought conservatives considered anyone taking government handouts were just sucking off the government tit.

I am not responsible for your delusions.

if the government takes FROM me what it considers I owe it, I will make sure to take back anything the damn government may give me back.

Well, that's very conservation of you

 

[Little-Acorn]

While I don't expect these folks to go "dead ender" on this, someone could at least have the grace to come out and say, "Look, I was against this, but now? I am going to give it a try. I may have been wrong and I am going to approach it with an open mind."

On the other hand, if he wanted to tell the truth, he could say, "I'm enrolling in it because the law says I have to, or else pay stiff penalties."

Looks like that explanation (obeying the law) isn't one that occurs to liberals, especially the more fanatical ones.

It's especially entertaining to see them complaining about his signing up for subsidies as he does it.

These liberal fanatics seem to feel that, where the government has been taking money from him for years for things he doesn't want them to take it for... and then generously gives him a chance to get some of it back... his acceptance of the rebate somehow means he approved of the original thefts in the first place.

Such a weird, strange world these liberal fanatics live in. And they claim to be astonished when they find someone who DOESN'T live in their bizarro world.

 

[Flopper]

Meaning Rubio gets NO subsidy.

Size of family-6

400% poverty level-126,360

And he make how much?

Please correct me if I'm wrong!

Pretty sure Congress members still get subsidies. Maybe under a different category. I don't know the details. Just another one of the ways Obama changed the unchangeable law and people are whomping mad about it.

If Grassley's (Charles Grassley R-IA) Amendment had included all government employees then-----then
all gov't employees would be eligible for coverage under Obamacare but-----but Grassley didn't include
all gov't employees in his amendment, Grassley only included members of congress and their staffs therefore-----therefore, gov't employees fall under the "large employer" provision(s) of Obamacare. If you find that confusing - blame Chuck Grassley R-IA for your cognitive difficulties.
.

Government like most employers subsidies healthcare insurance. The healthcare law required that congress and staff get their insurance from the exchange. It did not change the subsidy that government employees receive therefore they receive the same subsidy they have always received.

 

[g5000]

Pretty sure Congress members still get subsidies. Maybe under a different category. I don't know the details. Just another one of the ways Obama changed the unchangeable law and people are whomping mad about it.

If Grassley's (Charles Grassley R-IA) Amendment had included all government employees then-----then
all gov't employees would be eligible for coverage under Obamacare but-----but Grassley didn't include
all gov't employees in his amendment, Grassley only included members of congress and their staffs therefore-----therefore, gov't employees fall under the "large employer" provision(s) of Obamacare. If you find that confusing - blame Chuck Grassley R-IA for your cognitive difficulties.
.

Government like most employers subsidies healthcare insurance. The healthcare law required that congress and staff get their insurance from the exchange. It did not change the subsidy that government employees receive therefore they receive the same subsidy they have always received.

'Zactly!

 

[Vox]

I thought conservatives considered anyone taking government handouts were just sucking off the government tit.

I am not responsible for your delusions.

if the government takes FROM me what it considers I owe it, I will make sure to take back anything the damn government may give me back.

Well, that's very conservation of you

it is MY money. and I will get it back, no matter you like it or not

 

[Vox]

While I don't expect these folks to go "dead ender" on this, someone could at least have the grace to come out and say, "Look, I was against this, but now? I am going to give it a try. I may have been wrong and I am going to approach it with an open mind."

On the other hand, if he wanted to tell the truth, he could say, "I'm enrolling in it because the law says I have to, or else pay stiff penalties."

Looks like that explanation (obeying the law) isn't one that occurs to liberals, especially the more fanatical ones.

It's especially entertaining to see them complaining about his signing up for subsidies as he does it.

These liberal fanatics seem to feel that, where the government has been taking money from him for years for things he doesn't want them to take it for... and then generously gives him a chance to get some of it back... his acceptance of the rebate somehow means he approved of the original thefts in the first place.

Such a weird, strange world these liberal fanatics live in. And they claim to be astonished when they find someone who DOESN'T live in their bizarro world.

leftard expropriators would like all of us to pay our "fair share' to their beloved government and then not get what is OURS.

not going to happen. I am being ripped off to pay for the freeloaders ( including the government) - I am going to get every penny I can back.

It is MINE. It is my FAIR SHARE

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

so is the web site up and running in canada?

 

[Flopper]

Members of congress are getting subsidies. I don't know the nature of them. But they're getting some sort of subsidy, which Obama specifically okayed. A subsidy which ordinary Americans with congress-level wages would not get on the exchanges.

Some legislators are turning down the subsidy; some are taking the subsidy. According to the OP, Rubio is taking the subsidy.

hahahaha - "I don't know the nature of them. But"-----but whatever the heck it is, it's Obama's fault.
ODS much?


No ‘Special Subsidy’ for Congress
Just like other employers, the federal government pays a portion of premiums of the health plans it offers to its workers. There was concern on Capitol Hill this year, however, that the employer contributions wouldn’t be made to the health exchange plans when members of Congress and their staffs made the switch in January 2014 to their new insurance. The relevant provision in the law didn’t address the federal government’s employer contribution, which is currently 72 percent of premiums on average. So no employer contribution would be quite a blow to many congressional workers — just as it would be to other workers who get health insurance through their jobs. (While employer contributions vary from firm to firm, the overall average employer contribution was 82 percent for single insurance plans and 71 percent for family plans in 2013, according to the latest employer survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research & Educational Trust.) ~ FactCheck.Org - August 30, 2013
.

I'll tell you what I told Rightwinger -- jump on the OP Sallow for calling them subsidies.

That is what they're being called. MeBelle said that congress members make too much money to qualify for subsidies. I pointed out to her that these subsidies are in a different category from the typical ones people think of as associated with the ACA and are available to members of congress in spite of their higher wages. And, yes, they were made available by Obama in what appears to be a way different from the intention of the Grassley amendment.

Hack much?

It is a subsidy, the subsidy the government pays for government employee's health insurance, not to be confused with the healthcare exchange subsidy which Congress and staff or not eligible.

 

[Zander]

I'm Fauxtraged!!

 

[freedombecki]

Did he somehow not pay for it?

People have been barking about both houses opting out of Obamacare. He's just showing he will do it to keep people happy if that's what they're driving at. Maybe there's a plan to undo private care for elected officials?

You are missing the point Ms. Becki.

While I don't expect these folks to go "dead ender" on this, someone could at least have the grace to come out and say, "Look, I was against this, but now? I am going to give it a try. I may have been wrong and I am going to approach it with an open mind."

Speaking out against ObamaCare THEN going behind everyone's back and actually enrolling is pretty audacious, don't you think?

I mean these folks have been having "don't enroll" parties at colleges.

They've been telling OTHER people NOT to enroll.

Very few of us on the right side of the aisle care for ACA, Mr. Sallow. #1 It's not affordable, #2 It's unfriendly to insurance, pharmaceutical, and some medical practices, because it's too comprehensive but has no comprehension, and #3 it's not only one of the most expensive acts ever penned, it tramples the Constitution's Bill of Rights, and it tramples them to death.

However, as a Republican, we believe in the rule of law, and he was merely accepting obedience to the law as one would expect of us as citizens, and I would not speculate on any touchy-feely issues in a man's mind on Capitol Hill after that.

If the American people want their Constitutional laws back, a lot of the ACA will have to be changed, and if Republicans are called upon to change it we will start with removing the word "affordable" from the title, and when we are done, it will not be used to force religious medical professionals of the Christian faith to do procedures that are against their religion; it will neither encourage nor discourage unionization of the medical field; and people will have other options than the act for their health care choices for everyone, including Congressional opponents.

And that's what I think.

Except, I didn't know this thread was still going.

 

[Flopper]

I think, the requirement that congress and staff buy insurance off the exchange is the only contribution that Republicans made to the law. Democrats should have rejected it and taken the heat because it's really a stupid requirement.

The ACA says that starting in 2014, members of Congress and their staffs can no longer get their health insurance through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, as they have in the past. Instead, these federal employees will have to get insurance through the exchanges. Other Americans with work-based insurance aren’t subject to such a requirement. They can continue to get health insurance through their employers. Other federal workers, too, can continue to select health insurance plans through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. But not Congress and staff.

Why the unusual requirement for lawmakers and congressional staffers? This provision was added when health care bills were being debated, out of Republican concern that Congress get the same insurance that would be offered to some Americans through this legislation — insurance sold through state-based and federal exchanges. Those exchanges are for individuals who buy their own insurance, including the now uninsured, and small businesses.

If the logic of the legislation was to show voters that congress is willing to buy insurance off the exchanges just like everyone else, then if fails because only 1 in 7 purchase insurance off the exchanges; most people get their insurance through their employer. Or maybe it's meant to punishment congressmen for voting for law. If that was their feeling why would they vote for it and why would they include thousands of government employees who didn't?

Republicans should have never proposed this legislation and the Democrats shouldn't have never voted for it. I think when the ACA is amended, this section will be struck out. Including it in the law was a pure political move by Democrats to avoid criticism.

 

[Star]

which is totally different from dems and their aides getting waivers to keep from going on it while forcing people to join by taking their hci away.


It's far more ruthless and evil to harm people like that.

thumbs, you have been screaming about the Democrats in Congress getting waivers and NOT having to sign up for ACA. Yet you have not provided a single shred of evidence proving your claim. Please give us a link which proves your argument or stop posting opinions.

reid aides get waivers - Search Yahoo Search Results

take your pick and then try and recall that this is a well known fact and not my opinion.

would you like a link to all the companies and unions that got waivers as well or do you recall those well know facts?

"this is a well known fact and not my opinion." - LOL


Wanna try again Two Thumbs - your link is to an article posted on Yahoo on 4/24/13 lots-o-water under the bridge since then (try to keep up, K) and-----and nice try on removing the word "may" from the title, but as Al Sharpton would tell you "we gotcha". Changing the title isn't a big deal unless it's done to change the meaning of the title, then-----then it becomes another example of Republican dishonesty -pewsh!-

Actual title of the article Two Thumbs linked to ☞ Lawmakers, aides may get Obamacare exemption - John Bresnahan ...
Click the link at the end of the article to see where your lawmaker stands on ACA for her/himself and their staffs.


What every member of Congress is doing about his/her healthcare, in 1 chart

By Ed O'Keefe and Sean Sullivan
December 9

With the start of the Affordable Care Act just weeks away, lawmakers and their staffs have until the end of Monday to enroll in new health-care exchanges established by the law, or decide to pay out of pocket for a different public or private insurance plan.

<snip>

For some lawmakers, the decision is wrought with political consequences, because the new health-care law requires lawmakers and most congressional staffers to leave their current plans and join the District’s new health-care exchange in order to continue receiving their taxpayer-funded employer contribution. (All federal employees receive employer contributions, as do many private-sector workers.) Many of the lawmakers who have been railing against the new health plan in their home districts may face questions back home once they sign up for the exchanges they have criticized.

Over the past several days, The Washington Post has been canvassing House and Senate offices to determine what lawmakers plan to do. As of today, most Senate offices have responded to our inquiry, and we’re continuing to compile information from the 435 House offices.

Some highlights:
– All top congressional leaders — Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — and their leadership deputies will receive coverage through the District’s exchange, known as DC Health Link. (Boehner recently documented his rocky enrollment experience on his personal blog.)

– At least 55 senators are enrolling in DC Health Link. At least two senators, Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), will join Health Link but waive the taxpayer-funded employer contribution.

– Three senators will remain on Medicare — Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Joe Manchin III (D-W. Va.) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). (Manchin is enrolled in Medicare Part A for hospital visits but is obtaining the rest of his coverage through Health Link.)

– At least 11 senators are waiving their employer contribution and joining a state-run exchange or the federal exchange. Sens. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), John Hoeven (R-N.D.), Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) are enrolling in the federal exchange because their states don’t operate an exchange.

– Two senators, John Cornyn (R-Tex.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.), are enrolled in state government employee health-care plans. Cornyn is a former Texas judge and attorney general, while Kaine’s wife works for the Virginia Community College System.

– At least five senators are insured by their family or spouse’s private insurance plan: Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

– And what about prospective 2016 Republican presidential candidates serving in Congress? Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) are joining the D.C. exchange, while Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) hadn’t announced his plans by Monday morning. Cruz, as mentioned above, receives health-care coverage from his wife’s employer, Goldman Sachs.

Scan the tables [here] below to see what your lawmaker plans to do.
<snip>

.

 

[eagle1462010]

TV ads misrepresenting Grassley amendment to 2010 health care law

TV ads misrepresenting Grassley amendment to 2010 health care law

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Reporters and Editors
RE: TV ads misrepresenting Grassley amendment to 2010 health care law
DA: Friday, October 19, 2012

Senator Chuck Grassley issued the comment below following a New York Times story today that a provision in the 2010 health care law is being distorted in fall campaign ads.

Grassley comment:

&#8220;Remember, it was Republicans who made this law apply to Congress, not the Democrats who wrote the law. The Democrats were perfectly fine with applying Obamacare to the entire economy but leaving themselves out. Despite passage of my amendment, Democrats still carved out exemptions for high-level staff, despite Republican efforts to undo the carve-outs, and Democrats refused to make Obamacare apply to the White House itself.&#8221;

Background information:

The provision in question stemmed from an amendment Grassley authored and for which he won Finance Committee approval in September 2009. The Grassley amendment said that members of Congress and their staff must get their health insurance coverage from the exchanges that would be established in the health care overhaul. This congressional coverage initiative built on many years of work by Senator Grassley to have Congress live under the laws it passes for the rest of the country. In 1995, legislation authored by Grassley to apply 12 civil rights, labor and employment laws to Congress for the first time.

The story in today&#8217;s New York Times reports that TV commercials being run on behalf of Democratic candidates for Congress assert that members of Congress who voted to repeal the 2010 health care law have voted to give themselves taxpayer-funded health care for life.&#8221; Senator Grassley said his provision, even in the final form it took in the law that was enacted makes no changes to the employer contribution to federal employee health care coverage and no changes to federal retiree health care.

 

[eagle1462010]

Democraps fought hard to not have Congress, the Senate, and the President have to live under the same Laws as they forced to the Population.

Republicans such as Grassley, fought time and time again to make them, through Amendment, have the same coverage as the rest of the people.

Democraps LIE about Grassley and Rubio................They are going to exchanges as a matter of PRINCIPLE. Something the Dems don't care about.

The Op is a Lie................It orignially stated that Rubio was taking Subsidies............No post that I've seen has proven this.........................

Show me the proof.......................

He makes $174,000 as a Senator.............The cut off for Subsidies under Obamacare as Mac Belle corrected me on, is 126k.................So then the Op shifted as it was caught in it's LIES..............We really meant his staffers...............That wasn't the initial Op. Deflection posts....................

Then it shifted to he's keeping his Company plan and the tax payers are paying for it............LOL.........He's a Federal employee and so is his staff............If he's receiving EMPLOYER INSURANCE then he need not go to the exchanges...................

I wish the hell you Democraps could at least coordinate your lies.

 

[Sallow]

Democraps fought hard to not have Congress, the Senate, and the President have to live under the same Laws as they forced to the Population.

Republicans such as Grassley, fought time and time again to make them, through Amendment, have the same coverage as the rest of the people.

Democraps LIE about Grassley and Rubio................They are going to exchanges as a matter of PRINCIPLE. Something the Dems don't care about.

The Op is a Lie................It orignially stated that Rubio was taking Subsidies............No post that I've seen has proven this.........................

Show me the proof.......................

He makes $174,000 as a Senator.............The cut off for Subsidies under Obamacare as Mac Belle corrected me on, is 126k.................So then the Op shifted as it was caught in it's LIES..............We really meant his staffers...............That wasn't the initial Op. Deflection posts....................

Then it shifted to he's keeping his Company plan and the tax payers are paying for it............LOL.........He's a Federal employee and so is his staff............If he's receiving EMPLOYER INSURANCE then he need not go to the exchanges...................

I wish the hell you Democraps could at least coordinate your lies.

No there are not.

Grassley tried to inject a poison pill into the mix. And he got jujistused.

Pretty sure ol' Rubio found out it's a pretty good deal for him..otherwise he'd be complaining to anyone who'd listen.

And if Grassley were so interested in getting congress to live like Americans, there are a plethora of conflict of interest things he could have addressed.

He didn't.

 

[Kosh]

This thread is more proof that the far left love to argue just to argue no matter how wrong they are.

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

This Just In From NBC. The part of the health-care website that is designed to assist dead people, pets, mythical creatures and illegal aliens will not be ready until June 2025.

 

[LoneLaugher]

This Just In From NBC. The part of the health-care website that is designed to assist dead people, pets, mythical creatures and illegal aliens will not be ready until June 2025.

How long did you work on that one?