Durbin and Reid block bill that to remove congressional ACA subsidy

[Redfish]

Democrats Act to Stop Vitter Amendment, Keep Obamacare Exemptions for Congress

In yet another hypocritical move, Reid and Durbin blocked Sen Vitter's bill that would have made congress subject to ACA provisions with no subsidy.

You must live with it, but they do not

 

[RDD_1210]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

 

[Edgetho]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

Then they should have written that part of the bill properly.

Shows to go you how stupid dimocraps are.

I agree it's a technicality but it still sucks.

Nobody else making what they make gets subsidized by the gumint. Nobody.

Nobody.

And I mean -- Nobody.

Got it?

Good, now put some butter on it and stuff it.

 

[Redfish]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

congress is subject to ACA, except they voted themselves, and their staffers a larger subsidy so they will not be affected financially by it.

Who else in the country can vote themselves a subsidy? forget the staffers, lets talk about the senators and congressmen who passed this law but exempted themselves from the financial impact of it.

They and their staffers got a RAISE in compensation so that the law would not impact them like it is impacting the rest of america.

and you condone that?

 

[Wehrwolfen]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

Greed is good according to Democraps. Their elitist attitude claims they are entitled to this exemption. While they exempt themselves from using financial insider information while going after those people on Wall St.

 

[RDD_1210]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

Then they should have written that part of the bill properly.

Shows to go you how stupid dimocraps are.

I agree it's a technicality but it still sucks.

Nobody else making what they make gets subsidized by the gumint. Nobody.

Nobody.

And I mean -- Nobody.

Got it?

Good, now put some butter on it and stuff it.

They did write the bill properly you idiot. But a Republican thought he would make an issue where there wasn't one and force congressional staffers to be booted off of their employer subsidized insurance that met all Obamacare requirements and on to the exchanges. Just to prove some sort of imaginary point.

You people are idiots and it's threads like this that just reinforce it further.

 

[Redfish]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

Then they should have written that part of the bill properly.

Shows to go you how stupid dimocraps are.

I agree it's a technicality but it still sucks.

Nobody else making what they make gets subsidized by the gumint. Nobody.

Nobody.

And I mean -- Nobody.

Got it?

Good, now put some butter on it and stuff it.

They did write the bill properly you idiot. But a Republican thought he would make an issue where there wasn't one and force congressional staffers to be booted off of their employer subsidized insurance that met all Obamacare requirements and on to the exchanges. Just to prove some sort of imaginary point.

You people are idiots and it's threads like this that just reinforce it further.

they raised the subsidy (gave themselves and their staffers a raise) so that they would effectively be exempt from the impacts of the law.

if you are too stupid to comprehend that, then you need to log off and pound sand.

 

[RDD_1210]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

congress is subject to ACA, except they voted themselves, and their staffers a larger subsidy so they will not be affected financially by it.

Who else in the country can vote themselves a subsidy? forget the staffers, lets talk about the senators and congressmen who passed this law but exempted themselves from the financial impact of it.

They and their staffers got a RAISE in compensation so that the law would not impact them like it is impacting the rest of america.

and you condone that?

No one else was forced off of their insurance plan that MET all ACA standard requirements except for congressional staffers and it was only done by Republicans out of spite to try and prove some imaginary point that you loons believe that they were somehow "exempt" from Obamacare. They weren't. They already had a compliant insurance plan.

But now they are forced onto the exchanges anyway and would take a large compensation hit to pay for their healthcare plan which was subsidized by their employer up until now. All that is doing is shifting the same subsidy from their previous plan (which was already ACA compliant) to the healthcare exchanges.

Only an asshole would be against this. And only an idiot wouldn't grasp the concept. Which one are you?

 

[RDD_1210]

Then they should have written that part of the bill properly.

Shows to go you how stupid dimocraps are.

I agree it's a technicality but it still sucks.

Nobody else making what they make gets subsidized by the gumint. Nobody.

Nobody.

And I mean -- Nobody.

Got it?

Good, now put some butter on it and stuff it.

They did write the bill properly you idiot. But a Republican thought he would make an issue where there wasn't one and force congressional staffers to be booted off of their employer subsidized insurance that met all Obamacare requirements and on to the exchanges. Just to prove some sort of imaginary point.

You people are idiots and it's threads like this that just reinforce it further.

they raised the subsidy (gave themselves and their staffers a raise) so that they would effectively be exempt from the impacts of the law.

if you are too stupid to comprehend that, then you need to log off and pound sand.

No they didn't. You're making that up because you know you have no valid point.

Prove me wrong though. Link to anything that shows that their compensation package is now higher than it was before. I'll wait.

 

[Redfish]

They did write the bill properly you idiot. But a Republican thought he would make an issue where there wasn't one and force congressional staffers to be booted off of their employer subsidized insurance that met all Obamacare requirements and on to the exchanges. Just to prove some sort of imaginary point.

You people are idiots and it's threads like this that just reinforce it further.

they raised the subsidy (gave themselves and their staffers a raise) so that they would effectively be exempt from the impacts of the law.

if you are too stupid to comprehend that, then you need to log off and pound sand.

No they didn't. You're making that up because you know you have no valid point.

Prove me wrong though. Link to anything that shows that their compensation package is now higher than it was before. I'll wait.

I gave you the link in the OP. Their gross income has increased because they voted themselves a larger insurance subsidy payment paid by our tax money.

WE are their employer, did you vote for that? I sure didn't.

They passed the law (er, the dems did) and then made themselves exempt from the financial impacts of it.

I repeat, and you condone that?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

I don't even know how you tie your shoes.
To be this dumb....thank God I am not.

 

[RDD_1210]

they raised the subsidy (gave themselves and their staffers a raise) so that they would effectively be exempt from the impacts of the law.

if you are too stupid to comprehend that, then you need to log off and pound sand.

No they didn't. You're making that up because you know you have no valid point.

Prove me wrong though. Link to anything that shows that their compensation package is now higher than it was before. I'll wait.

I gave you the link in the OP. Their gross income has increased because they voted themselves a larger insurance subsidy payment paid by our tax money.

WE are their employer, did you vote for that? I sure didn't.

They passed the law (er, the dems did) and then made themselves exempt from the financial impacts of it.

I repeat, and you condone that?

Swing and a miss!

Your link doesn't say a thing about them getting any extra compensation.

Thanks for confirming the fact that you need to resort to outright lying to try and make a point.

Another thread started by and filled with uneducated, irresponsible "conservatives" who haven't amounted to shit with their lives and feel the need to lie on the internet to feel better about their shitty existence.

Be proud. Be Conservative.

 

[RDD_1210]

This concept is obviously above your head. We've been through this before but congressional staffers should not have to take a compensation cut so that some Republican can pass a "talking point" bill.

But you're too dumb and partisan to understand that.

I don't even know how you tie your shoes.
To be this dumb....thank God I am not.

Ouch?

Solid response. Truly.

 

[Redfish]

No they didn't. You're making that up because you know you have no valid point.

Prove me wrong though. Link to anything that shows that their compensation package is now higher than it was before. I'll wait.

I gave you the link in the OP. Their gross income has increased because they voted themselves a larger insurance subsidy payment paid by our tax money.

WE are their employer, did you vote for that? I sure didn't.

They passed the law (er, the dems did) and then made themselves exempt from the financial impacts of it.

I repeat, and you condone that?

Swing and a miss!

Your link doesn't say a thing about them getting any extra compensation.

Thanks for confirming the fact that you need to resort to outright lying to try and make a point.

Another thread started by and filled with uneducated, irresponsible "conservatives" who haven't amounted to shit with their lives and feel the need to lie on the internet to feel better about their shitty existence.

Be proud. Be Conservative.

If they were subject to the higher premiums caused by ACA, then they would have seen a reduction in net pay. they offset that by increasing the subsidy paid by the taxpayers for their insurance-------effectively giving them a raise.

I don't know how congressional benefits are treated for tax purposes, but if this was done by a corporation, the employee would have a larger taxable income as a result of the larger employer contribution.

 

[RDD_1210]

I gave you the link in the OP. Their gross income has increased because they voted themselves a larger insurance subsidy payment paid by our tax money.

WE are their employer, did you vote for that? I sure didn't.

They passed the law (er, the dems did) and then made themselves exempt from the financial impacts of it.

I repeat, and you condone that?

Swing and a miss!

Your link doesn't say a thing about them getting any extra compensation.

Thanks for confirming the fact that you need to resort to outright lying to try and make a point.

Another thread started by and filled with uneducated, irresponsible "conservatives" who haven't amounted to shit with their lives and feel the need to lie on the internet to feel better about their shitty existence.

Be proud. Be Conservative.

If they were subject to the higher premiums caused by ACA, then they would have seen a reduction in net pay. they offset that by increasing the subsidy paid by the taxpayers for their insurance-------effectively giving them a raise.

I don't know how congressional benefits are treated for tax purposes, but if this was done by a corporation, the employee would have a larger taxable income as a result of the larger employer contribution.

Again, you're making this up. None of this is what is happening and you know it.

Again, site something that actually says what you claim. The link in the OP certainly doesn't.

Face it, you're a hack and a liar. You've been exposed yet again.

 

[BluesMistress]

Congress was given an exemption ~

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.” Until now, OPM had not said if the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program could contribute premium payments toward plans on the exchange. If payments stopped, lawmakers and aides would have faced thousands of dollars in additional premium payments each year. Under the old system, the government contributed nearly 75 percent of premium payments.

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

 

[JakeStarkey]

Congress was given an exemption ~

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.” Until now, OPM had not said if the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program could contribute premium payments toward plans on the exchange. If payments stopped, lawmakers and aides would have faced thousands of dollars in additional premium payments each year. Under the old system, the government contributed nearly 75 percent of premium payments.

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

Grassley is offering legislation that would hurt staffers if passed, knowing the legislation has no chance of being passed.

 

[Dot Com]

If Reid(D) is right & we are going to end up w/ Single Payer anyway than what diff does it make? I'm w/ the Senate Majority Leader on this

 

[Redfish]

Swing and a miss!

Your link doesn't say a thing about them getting any extra compensation.

Thanks for confirming the fact that you need to resort to outright lying to try and make a point.

Another thread started by and filled with uneducated, irresponsible "conservatives" who haven't amounted to shit with their lives and feel the need to lie on the internet to feel better about their shitty existence.

Be proud. Be Conservative.

If they were subject to the higher premiums caused by ACA, then they would have seen a reduction in net pay. they offset that by increasing the subsidy paid by the taxpayers for their insurance-------effectively giving them a raise.

I don't know how congressional benefits are treated for tax purposes, but if this was done by a corporation, the employee would have a larger taxable income as a result of the larger employer contribution.

Again, you're making this up. None of this is what is happening and you know it.

Again, site something that actually says what you claim. The link in the OP certainly doesn't.

Face it, you're a hack and a liar. You've been exposed yet again.

OK, this is for RDD who sent me a nasty PM last night.

Lets say that a senator's monthly net take home pay is $3000, its probably more but just for drill.

That net is what he gets after taxes, medicare, his share of the insurance premium, etc are deducted from his gross pay. Got it so far?

lets say that his total insurance premium is $500/month and the govt pays (subsidizes) $400 of it and he pays $100. Ok?

Now, after ACA is passed the total premium goes to $1000/month. If the govt continued the $400 subsidy, the senator would now be paying $600 out of his paycheck instead of $100.

Congress voted to increase the govt subsidy to $900 so that the $100 paid by them would not increase due to ACA. Got it?

So the net result is a $500 per month increase in gross pay to offset the financial impact of the ACA law.

I know that this kind of simple math is a challenge for you, but thats what happened.

Now, what other "employee" is able to vote themselves an increased employer subsidy to offset the impact of ACA?

 

[Redfish]

If Reid(D) is right & we are going to end up w/ Single Payer anyway than what diff does it make? I'm w/ the Senate Majority Leader on this

you want the govt, who can't even create a working website, to be in charge of your medical care? really?