Posted on 10/02/2013 9:42:56 AM PDT by Beave Meister
There’s a reason Republicans have been rushing to try and defund the Affordable Care Act before October 1, when major sections of the law take effect.
Republicans know what polls show — that most Americans don’t know what’s in ObamaCare, but when told what the law actually includes, a strong majority support the law.
Once state health insurance exchanges take effect, and premiums for all Americans go down, Republicans know the law will only become more popular and harder to repeal.
As Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said, “It's a lot harder to undo something than it is to stop it in the first place.”
Exactly.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Do you have any credible sources for this, and can you point me to this law? I thought Grassley's amendment remains in tact.
Thanks.
The number one reason here for loving ACA is that children can be covered on their parent’s insurance plan until they are 26. Will parents be obligated to cover their adult children?
Where have you been. Congressional employees are getting subsidies to offset the added costs to their insurance. This came from a different branch of government. Then they tried to have a vote not allowing that. Dems shut that down with threats. Now it sounds like they will be able to keep their existing plan, which goes directly against the Grassley amendment.
www.nationalreview.com/article/358550/congresss-exemption-obamacare-john-fund
http://spectator.org/archives/2013/08/07/congress-exempts-itself-from-t
http://news.yahoo.com/congress-wins-relief-obamacare-health-plan-subsidies-173241340.html
And she hasn't got a clue.
Okay. I consider the subsidy issue to be separate from participation altogether. I agree it is not fair to have congress treated separately by way of a subsidy in excess of what the average American may enjoy, but your wording above suggests they exempted themselves from Obamacare completely. Have they?
However, forcing the young healthy people to buy insurance that never gets used may drive the costs down. However, all of the other free stuff will probably offset the savings.
On the other hand, they have to buy the insurance and get into the system versus paying the penalty. At least intitially, the penalty will cost way less than the insurance. And like Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, there have to many many more people paying into the system than are taking from it. The demographics are changing in the US — fewer young workers as baby boomers retire.
No doubt... anyone that knows anything about it... hates it.
But that's only part of the story. The Democrats aren't stupid. These changes in the system are lowering premiums for some people also. And the Democrats, political animals that they are, know that the people who benefit are greater in number than the people who will suffer. And the beneficiaries aren't generally moochers either, but desperate people who will be caught in the expanding net of government reliance in the manner as Temujinshordes states in post number ten.
The Republicans great error was a decade ago when could have lowered the burden for everybody by market-based competition increasing reforms that could have lowered the health burden for everybody and the appeal of socialism
There. . .fixed it.
“Sally Kohn....enough said. I wonder what she had to do to get this BS published by Fox News? ...........”
My sentiments exactly. Why on earth does Fox News have her on their payroll? She is so leftwing and anti-Christian. The only way to understand this headline which includes FoxNews, is to look at the author.
It is not worth reading, and I have actually wasted several minutes of my time already on this idiot.
Is this article a record-breaker in terms of number of lies squeezed onto one page . . . ?
That’s a man, baby.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.