Obama delays major part of health law: coverage for > 50 workers pushed to 2015 - page 3

by NRSKarenRN 4,686 Views | 41 Comments Admin

Obama delays major part of health law WASHINGTON (AP) - In a major concession to business groups, the Obama administration Tuesday unexpectedly announced a one-year delay, until after the 2014 elections, in a central... Read More


  1. 0
    We still have republicans in Congress wasting time trying to repeal ACA...
    how many times have they voted on that now?
    and how many times have they voted on a jobs bill, or other helpful legislation...?
  2. 2
    Quote from tewdles
    Wow...do you generally make those kind of assumptions when you are working too?
    I disagree with you and so I, and those who think like me are "what's wrong with America" and an insult to our military??? It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you represent a line of thinking that generally goes against the ideas of freedom and liberty that this country is founded on.

    Really? Cuz, see it is not people like me who want to make it more difficult or possibly impossible for the poor and working classes to get a piece of the American Dream. It's people like you who support the idea of forcing Americans, under threat of fines and/or imprisonment, to give their hard earned money away. Americans should be free to spend their money how they choose. How many Americans would rather donate to a charity that helps the poor than pay higher taxes into a corrupt and mismanaged system? I support a free environment in which everyone is able to succeed or fail according to his/her own talents/skills.
    It is not people like me who support draconian policy which puts government in charge of women's reproductive health issues. With government run healthcare who do you think will be in charge of reproductive and other health issues? I want people to be in charge of their own lives.
    It is not people like me who are anxious for the wealthy corporations to pay as little tax as possible while the majority of wage earners pay for those corporate entitlements. You seem to support a political party who claims to be for the mifddle class and the poor. Yet you fail to see how much they have done in the last century to make things more difficult for these groups. Your ignorance helps keep this party in power. Read the book titled The Forgotten Man.
    It is not people like me who want workers to be flexible enough to work without benefit of overtime. An employer and employee should be free to work out an agreement that suits both of them without having to be burdened by government overregulation. People like you support unions who force their way into this relationship enacting rules, for example, that may prevent an honest worker form getting a job because the employer can't fire an unproductive employee to open up a position
    It is not people like me who devise processes that disenfranchise voters and require that citizens wait in lines for hours just to vote Do you support the need for proof of citizenship in order to vote, or do you suport the current system in which anyone can scam their way into a voting booth?
    It is not people like me who believe that 47% of the country are lazy, unmotivated takers. This is a reference to Mit Romeny, he has likely created more jobs in his career than Obama has, also has given more to charity. He has done more to help that 47% than Obama has. So he makes an off comment, you haven't?
    It is not people like me who believe we should cut SS and Medicare in order to preserve our corporate welfare. Didn't Obama make a huge cut to medicare this year? I'm not 100% sure on this issue so you may have me there.

    I am quite certain that quite a number of people who died for this country and who are currently serving disagree with you on some points as well, and may even agree with ME...are they also the worst and an insult? You have a point, I consider them part of the problem as well, if they blindly follow the liberal mantra as you seem to do.

    Geesh.
    Yes indeed, geesh !
    Last edit by shermrn on Jul 4, '13 : Reason: spelling etc...
    Szasz_is_Right and Chlometov like this.
  3. 2
    Friendly admin request: Please debate the topic...leave personal comments out per our Terms Of Service.

    My oldest son starting a new job Monday moving 4 states away. He paid $54.00 biweekly go health insurance. Tried to get single policy to cover him for 1month till new employer policy kicks in and was denied as overweight and hx kidney stones. COBRA policy was $854: entire months pay at previous employer....still we payed it as just stepping into an ER would be way above that cost.
    2015 not here soon enough.
    Esme12 and tewdles like this.
  4. 4
    Quote from meanmaryjean
    I do not understand how a law- passed by the Congress of the United States - can be, in effect 'overturned' (technically, delayed) by the Executive branch. (I am not a fan of Obamacare, just to be clear) Could the President change other laws just be saying so?

    This violates the Constitution and the separation of powers contained therein.
    It has become quite apparent that (yes,) He can, as has been done already. Is it constitutional? Pffft! That does not matter, as long as enough folks follow and believe all this stuff.

    Why would such a utopian effort to achieve nirvana be delayed until after the 2014 elections? Please tell me with a straight and honest face it has nothing to do with those elections, when the stated goal is a trifecta (House, Senate, and White House).

    Sure, it is called the Affordable Care Act, when in truth it is not affordable and has nothing to do with care. It is an act, so I will grant the name is one third accurate.

    If businesses are breathing a sigh of relief, then it will be a short sigh with no relief.
  5. 1
    Politician of any ilk want a trifecta in elections.
    That agenda is evident in EVERYTHING they do and in the amount of time they spend being concerned with elections vs. any other productive activity.
    I am not sure that it is reasonable to blame this POTUS for the state of affairs in government that WE have allowed for a long, long time.
    IowaKaren likes this.
  6. 0
    disappointing
  7. 2
    Quote from tewdles
    Politician of any ilk want a trifecta in elections.
    That agenda is evident in EVERYTHING they do and in the amount of time they spend being concerned with elections vs. any other productive activity.
    I am not sure that it is reasonable to blame this POTUS for the state of affairs in government that WE have allowed for a long, long time.
    Yes, the voters are too wrapped up in, and mesmerized by, the royalty that is politics. They (too) often put party before reason, symbolism over substance, and a politician's promises over reality. Our government - the people we hire at each election - have become the ruling class, and they are reveling in the power we have given them. Too many of us have settled for a belief that more government is the answer to, rather than the cause of, our problems.

    This has continued for several decades as they rule and we have become subjects. Many of us have seen their methods fail elsewhere, but somehow believe they will work here for us. We will most certainly learn otherwise; it may take years or decades, but it will happen as more people choose to simply follow their favorite political party as though it was a favorite sports team.
    IowaKaren and Szasz_is_Right like this.
  8. 0
    I firmly believe that the U.S. is is dire need of healthcare reform. It's disgusting that we are the country we are, and have so many without any insurance. I have so many patients who would gladly pay a ridiculous amount to be able to get ANY type of insurance, but due to pre-existing conditions are not able to find any insurance carrier who will accept them. If you are too young for Medicare and have too much is savings (retirement accounts, life insurance policies, etc) you do not qualify for Medicaid. We need to provide better options.
  9. 1
    I agree xoemmylou the thought of growing older and then possibly not having insurance - why even try to save any money - it almost seems one is better off just to qualify for Medicaid.
    IowaKaren likes this.
  10. 2
    Quote from brandy1017
    I have a feeling these state exchanges insurance premiums will resemble the high risk pools that states set up for people who were denied insurance due to poor health. The end result will be high costs and many people unable to afford the premiums. This is no solution to national healthcare! We need single payer national healthcare like all the rest of the civilized world!
    Obamacare is modeled after New York and other states that have "all in" insurance. That is here you cannot be denied insurance because of pre-existing conditions and so forth. In turn we have some of the highest health insurance rates in the USA, especially for those whom much purchase plans on their own. Not surprisingly this lead to many persons not bothering and those that did take insurance was usually because they or family member required.

    In essence the entire country now is "all in" because insurance companies no longer can deny coverage. However if no one but those who *need* healthcare sign up it will cost insurers big money, hence the individual mandate; that scheme aims to deal with the other part as mentioned above, persons who opt out of health insurance. What the WH and others are hoping is that the number of well/healthy persons with low health insurance needs will pay into the system while making few if any demands, in short subsidizing those with heavy use.
    Szasz_is_Right and marcopollo like this.


Top