Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
But they're exempt from the law, right?
Was Reid lying in September when he said they "are going to be part of exchanges, that's what the law says and we'll be part of that."?
No, they're not exempt from the law. I don't know how many different ways you need to be told. I know you're not THIS dumb Frank.
The exchanges are part of the LAW!
Which part of the law are they exempt from?
Don't be lazy and say the whole thing. Because that will only prove you don't know what you're talking about.
I mean I know you don't, but you'd remove all doubt if thats how you respond.
it is not that they are exempt from the law.
Instead, they will be subsidized by the tax payer for any increase in cost for insurance caused by the ACA....even if they do not financially qualify for the subsidy.
To me, that is a slap in the face.
That's a totally different situation. But thanks for agreeing they are not being exempt from Obamacare.
it is not that they are exempt from the law.
Instead, they will be subsidized by the tax payer for any increase in cost for insurance caused by the ACA....even if they do not financially qualify for the subsidy.
To me, that is a slap in the face.
Who says that their subsidy for health insurance will increase? Where do you get your information from?
hat was what was decided. If, in fact, staffers premiums rise due to the ACA, the government will pay the entire increase...even if they do not qualify for a subsidy.
In essence, their employer, the government, will continue to pay their entire premium.
All employers have the option to do that, of course. Most wont because it is financially not feasible...so employees will have to foot the increase...
But the government has unlimited funds to be a "good employer".....
Sadly...this is the law that was going to decrease premiums for all...
instead?
Those that don't pay in the system have no increase......thanks to the subsidy....
and...
those hat DO pay into the system pay the increase.
Such is
it is not that they are exempt from the law.
Instead, they will be subsidized by the tax payer for any increase in cost for insurance caused by the ACA....even if they do not financially qualify for the subsidy.
To me, that is a slap in the face.
That's a totally different situation. But thanks for agreeing they are not being exempt from Obamacare.
I didn't say they were exempt.
What bothers me is that they are getting the equivalent to a "subsidy" to pay for the increase in insurance cost, even if they make more than the subsidy ceiling.
That is not right in my eyes.
That's really how healthcare works. We always pay for things we don't need but others due. When we go to the emergency room with a bad cut that needs stitches, our bill includes the hospital's cost of unpaid bills, emergency room equipment that's rarely needed, and on-call staff. Every medical bill contains contains costs that benefits others. In regard to premiums, a number of states don't allow insurance companies to charge people more for additional risks such as smoking, hazardous work environments, or obesity thus increasing premiums for everyone. There are over 2200 state mandates in regard to healthcare benefits. In fact, most of the 10 essential benefits are already included in the laws of many states. So when it comes to healthcare, we always pay for stuff we don't think we need.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
Why don't you just create a signature that proclaims your woeful ignorance about what exactly the ACA is, and who signs up for it through the exchanges? The point is this: People who already have insurance don't need the exchanges although they too will benefit by new minimum standards and other parts of the law which prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage for previous conditions.
Simply not true. Millions will pay higher premiums for coverages they don't even need.
Wow. You found one trivial measure from republicans that was stiffed into that mess. A provision that the elite will eventually get around to elimination, if they don't ignore it outright like Reid.[MENTION=46151]HelenaHandbag[/MENTION] [MENTION=29100]bripat9643[/MENTION]
So where did this requirement in the ACA for congressional staffers to get their insurance through the exchanges come from?
Oh yeah. Republicans! It was their amendment to the ACA. The same ACA some dingbats claim the GOP were not allowed to have any input on!
This is one of the better amendments. These staffers should have the same health insurance experience their bosses expect everyone else to have.
The employer subsidy problem was an unintended consequence, and I have no problem with them continuing to receive the employer share of their premiums. But they should still have to get their insurance from whatever is offered on the exchange for their geographical area. Abso-posituvely.
The biggest factor is whether you have an employer sponsored plan or buy individual plan. Most employer sponsored plans already include the 10 essential benefits plus they have limited or no pre-existing condition requirement. Since employer sponsored insurance in general, is more robust that individual plans, regulations allow employer plans to selectively implement some of the requirements based on actuarial data; that is benefits in relation to premiums. Most employer sponsored plans will have few changes in benefits and only minor changes in premiums due to ACA requirements.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
Why don't you just create a signature that proclaims your woeful ignorance about what exactly the ACA is, and who signs up for it through the exchanges? The point is this: People who already have insurance don't need the exchanges although they too will benefit by new minimum standards and other parts of the law which prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage for previous conditions.
How will I, a 55 year old retired individual with grown children and a wife who loves an empty nest benefit from maternity care, pediatric care, birth control, etc.
My policy is a $19,000 a year policy that covers every single thing I need. I have not yet seen what my new premium will be....but seeing as it will need to cover those extra things I mentioned above....it will most certainly increase dramatically.
Not to mention the deductible.
Right now I am at 500....
Their insurance is 70% subsidized because they are federal employees. They are not eligible for the ACA subsidies which are based on income.it is not that they are exempt from the law.
Instead, they will be subsidized by the tax payer for any increase in cost for insurance caused by the ACA....even if they do not financially qualify for the subsidy.
To me, that is a slap in the face.
That's a totally different situation. But thanks for agreeing they are not being exempt from Obamacare.
I didn't say they were exempt.
What bothers me is that they are getting the equivalent to a "subsidy" to pay for the increase in insurance cost, even if they make more than the subsidy ceiling.
That is not right in my eyes.
Wow. You found one trivial measure from republicans that was stiffed into that mess. A provision that the elite will eventually get around to elimination, if they don't ignore it outright like Reid.[MENTION=46151]HelenaHandbag[/MENTION] [MENTION=29100]bripat9643[/MENTION]
So where did this requirement in the ACA for congressional staffers to get their insurance through the exchanges come from?
Oh yeah. Republicans! It was their amendment to the ACA. The same ACA some dingbats claim the GOP were not allowed to have any input on!
This is one of the better amendments. These staffers should have the same health insurance experience their bosses expect everyone else to have.
The employer subsidy problem was an unintended consequence, and I have no problem with them continuing to receive the employer share of their premiums. But they should still have to get their insurance from whatever is offered on the exchange for their geographical area. Abso-posituvely.
Big whoop. I stand corrected.
Let's say that the republicans had no input of any importance with that steaming heap of cow flop. You happy now?
In any case, O-care received zero (R) votes. Meanwhile, democrats have called them terrorists, hostage takers, bomb throwers, teabaggers, and worse. Now, they're supposed to play all nice and help those miserable dirtballs out of the massive pit they've dug for themselves?
Whatever.
Fact remains the republicans had no input of any importance and not a one of them voted for it. The reason that you say they didn't is your say-so and irrelevant.
The republicans should tell democrats to suck it and nobody with half a brain would blame them.
yea Taz is a strange kind of Partisan....the kind who has questioned and bad mouthed both sides.....can you say that?....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
They're not exempt from Obamacare. Nice twist.
They're not being forced to buy from the exchanges like others are (incorrectly) being forced to.
But then again, you're too partisan to understand what "exempt" from Obamacare even means.
Continue the hackery.
They are already covered.
Your attempts at outrage are comical and pathetic.
Republicans aren't even talking about repeal any longer. They know they've been beaten by public opinion, and a president who is just smarter than them.
What's amusing about that swill is the willingness of liberals to tacitly admit that they're so lacking in any original thought, that they have to steal the worst of the worst ideas of republicans and claim them for their own. Then they turn around and blame their stupidity on republicans.
Would be laugh-out-loud funny if you creeps weren't destroying the nation and the lives of so many people, as you carry on with your buffoonery.
yea Taz is a strange kind of Partisan....the kind who has questioned and bad mouthed both sides.....can you say that?....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
They're not exempt from Obamacare. Nice twist.
They're not being forced to buy from the exchanges like others are (incorrectly) being forced to.
But then again, you're too partisan to understand what "exempt" from Obamacare even means.
Continue the hackery.
