Congress wants special treatment to keep their "Cadillac" healthcare plan

[Bomboozle]

RealClearPolitics has two news stories today reporting how lawmakers are trying gauge how much support they have on the Hill to write legislation that would exempt themselves and their staff from being required to buy their healthcare from a health insurance exchange starting next year. With the reality of Obamacare around the corner, these guys apparently are getting nervous because they will lose their "Cadillac" benefits and will see huge increases in their healthcare premiums, just like the rest of us. So now they want special treatment from the very provision they wrote into the bill.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

 

[Underhill]

Who cares?

They are the equivalent of executives in the worlds largest corporation and we are going to nit pick over their healthcare? Really?

If I have one complaint it is the policy of giving them free healthcare for life after a relatively short term.

But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

 

[Bomboozle]

Actually, I care. I might be the only one, but last I checked this is a democracy, not a corporation. Elected officials are there to govern; not pass laws they aren't themselves willing to live by. What's particularly offensive about this attempt is Obamacare mandates that health plans for Congress and their staff must comply with the provisions of the bill and are offered through an Exchange -- it's at section 1312(d)(3)(D) if you are interested. And "nit pick" over healthcare? This bill threatens to harm many people financially, so yes, I'm willing to "nit pick" over healthcare. If Congress gets an exemption, then everyone should get an exemption.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Who cares?

They are the equivalent of executives in the worlds largest corporation and we are going to nit pick over their healthcare? Really?

If I have one complaint it is the policy of giving them free healthcare for life after a relatively short term.

But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

They voted for this shit shut the fuck up bitch.

 

[waltky]

underhill wrote: But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

Hasn't worked so far...

... what's the definition of insanity?...

... doin' the same thing over and over...

... expectin' different results.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

RealClearPolitics has two news stories today reporting how lawmakers are trying gauge how much support they have on the Hill to write legislation that would exempt themselves and their staff from being required to buy their healthcare from a health insurance exchange starting next year. With the reality of Obamacare around the corner, these guys apparently are getting nervous because they will lose their "Cadillac" benefits and will see huge increases in their healthcare premiums, just like the rest of us. So now they want special treatment from the very provision they wrote into the bill.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

You knew this was coming?

 

[skye]

RealClearPolitics has two news stories today reporting how lawmakers are trying gauge how much support they have on the Hill to write legislation that would exempt themselves and their staff from being required to buy their healthcare from a health insurance exchange starting next year. With the reality of Obamacare around the corner, these guys apparently are getting nervous because they will lose their "Cadillac" benefits and will see huge increases in their healthcare premiums, just like the rest of us. So now they want special treatment from the very provision they wrote into the bill.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

I agree. Congress want to let themselves off the hook ...and quick .... but all the rest have to go along with the disaster? Unbelievable!

 

[Rozman]

Congress doesn't want any part of this mess....

 

[lynn63]

They obviously don't believe that the exchange will benefit them so why should we?

 

[Underhill]

underhill wrote: But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

Hasn't worked so far...

... what's the definition of insanity?...

... doin' the same thing over and over...

... expectin' different results.

My recipe for success is simple.

Triple their pay and term limit them all to two terms. How is that the same thing? We have never paid them well and 80% of them are career politicians who aren't worth the seats they sit on.

But yeah I'm insane...

 

[Bomboozle]

underhill wrote: But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

Hasn't worked so far...

... what's the definition of insanity?...

... doin' the same thing over and over...

... expectin' different results.

My recipe for success is simple.

Triple their pay and term limit them all to two terms. How is that the same thing? We have never paid them well and 80% of them are career politicians who aren't worth the seats they sit on.

But yeah I'm insane...

Until your recipe becomes law, we still have to work with the existing system. If you are familiar with how term limits have affected California politics, you already know it's not a solution. How about if enough people weighed in with their elected officials about these sorts of issues, maybe we'd get some traction instead of having to wait until the next election cycle. I doubt it's a coincidence that so many Democrats are retiring from Congress this year.

 

[boedicca]

Who cares?

They are the equivalent of executives in the worlds largest corporation and we are going to nit pick over their healthcare? Really?

If I have one complaint it is the policy of giving them free healthcare for life after a relatively short term.

But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

No, they are not like corporate executives. They Work For Us. And for them to pass laws for which they provide themselves exemptions undermines a free society.

 

[dblack]

Who cares?

They are the equivalent of executives in the worlds largest corporation and we are going to nit pick over their healthcare? Really?

If I have one complaint it is the policy of giving them free healthcare for life after a relatively short term.

But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

No, they are not like corporate executives. They Work For Us. And for them to pass laws for which they provide themselves exemptions undermines a free society.

Corporate executives work for the shareholders. ... Just sayin'.

In any case, I agree with you in principle. Law should apply equally to everyone. That fact that it doesn't, that everyone gets a different deal depending on what class they belong to, is the biggest hypocrisy of American democracy.

 

[tjvh]

Who cares?

They are the equivalent of executives in the worlds largest corporation and we are going to nit pick over their healthcare? Really?

If I have one complaint it is the policy of giving them free healthcare for life after a relatively short term.

But I would rather we pay them well. Hell, triple their pay. Then we might actually get some decent people in there.

Last I checked they work for the people, they don't rule over them.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

RealClearPolitics has two news stories today reporting how lawmakers are trying gauge how much support they have on the Hill to write legislation that would exempt themselves and their staff from being required to buy their healthcare from a health insurance exchange starting next year. With the reality of Obamacare around the corner, these guys apparently are getting nervous because they will lose their "Cadillac" benefits and will see huge increases in their healthcare premiums, just like the rest of us. So now they want special treatment from the very provision they wrote into the bill.

What a bunch of hypocrites.

They won't lose their "Cadillac" benefits. Nor will anyone as a result of this law. The only difference is the benefits are now taxes like the rest of income.

 

[lynn63]

The corruption going on behind the scenes with this mandate gets worse by the day. States that agreed to the expansion have received waivers allowing them to reduce the mandated benefits under the ACA for people on Medicaid. Many states kicked out many of their medicaid members blaming budget cuts only to re-enroll them later in 2014.

They are doing this so it appears they are complying and getting everyone insured when in reality they are only going to re-enroll the ones they cut. So while all of us working population are getting increases on premiums and higher out of pocket expenses, the State and Federal government will not see increase in cost but decreases across the board.

It is obvious that the government doesn't want to pay for upcoming last generation baby boomers since they are 49 years and older right now. As long as employers are replacing their 49-64 age group with younger people and making it impossible for this group to regain employment, this is great for government.

Social security is based on the last 10 years of employment and if you don't have much history for that 10 years, benefits are reduced. If the 49-64 age group cannot find employment at all, they will not qualify for Medicaid unless they are seen at a emergency room. No income means you are exempt from the insurance mandate.

This isn't new and while this type of behavior has been going on for some time, it has increased with our poor economy. The death rates for this age group is anywhere from 300 to 400 thousand per year and it is due to the reasons mentioned above.

The government cannot pay for benefits for the last of the baby boomers to move into retirement so they have a motive for wanting to reduce the older population. By mandating healthcare and by having a updated computer system in place in every state that reports our medical history to the government's database is not in our best interest.