Skip to comments.Exclusive: Rand Paul wants Chief Justice Roberts, all federal workers, to enroll in Obamacare
Posted on 09/23/2013 1:21:46 AM PDT by markomalley
Arguing federal workers should not get special treatment, Rand Paul says he does not want taxpayers subsidizing the personal health care plans of any federal employee including Chief Justice John Roberts anymore.
With some in Congress arguing lawmakers and their staff should not get subsidies to cover their health insurance as President Obamas health care law goes into effect, the Republican senator from Kentucky told The Daily Caller on Sunday that hes going to start pushing a constitutional amendment that goes even further.
Pauls proposal outlawing any special exemptions for government employees would mean all federal workers would have to purchase health insurance on the new Obamacare exchanges instead of getting taxpayer-funded subsidies. Some critics say those subsidies amount to special treatment. The Obamacare health insurance exchange opens Oct 1.
My amendment says basically that everybody including Justice Roberts who seems to be such a fan of Obamacare gets it too, Paul told TheDC by phone on Sunday from Mackinac Island in Michigan, where he won a straw poll of potential Republican candidates for president in 2016.
See, right now, Justice Roberts is still continuing to have federal employee health insurance subsidized by the taxpayer, Paul said. And if he likes Obamacare so much, Im going to give him an amendment that gives Obamacare to Justice Roberts.
Roberts famously voted to uphold the constitutionality of Obamas unpopular health care law when it went before the Supreme Court last year.
Pauls constitutional amendment says no federal employees should get special exemptions from laws. The senator also plans to push a proposal requiring that Congress and all federal employees rely on Obamacare for their insurance.
His proposal comes after outrage from conservatives about a so-called exemption for members of Congress and their staff from Obamacare.
Whats being referred to as the Obamacare fix for lawmakers and staff was made because the Affordable Care Act includes an amendment from a Republican senator that changes how the government currently covers most of the cost of health care premiums for members of Congress and their staffers. The new law mandates that members and staff must enter into exchanges or be covered by insurance created by law.
But after concerns about the cost of health care going up for congressional employees, the Office of Personnel Management announced in August that it would provide a subsidy of about 75 percent of the cost for the health care of members and staff.
Paul revealed his new amendment push on Sunday after TheDC inquired about a proposal from Louisiana Sen. David Vitter, who has proposed killing those federal Obamacare subsidies for lawmakers and their staff. I support any effort to make all laws applicable to Congress that we pass, Paul said.
But Paul says his proposal goes even further.
I think mine is a little more inclusive, Paul explained. Mine compared to Vitters would include all federal employees, and save billions of dollars.
He added: Why dont we do it for all federal employees? And mine would save quite a bit more money.
Lawmakers, including Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, have defended the special Obamacare exemptions being made for lawmakers and their staff. Earlier this month, the Nevada Democrat flatly stated, Thats what the law says, and well be part of that.
Well be treated like the rest of the federal employees, Reid said. Its nothing unique that employers help pay for health care.
So does Deacon. . . . . .
Unfortunately for Sen Reid there is a lawsuit working its way to the Fed Courts which challenges the change without a Congressional vote. If Congress and the Exec can change a law without a vote, then can Congress be exempt from rape and murder??!!!
Whatever happened to, “Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country”?
I don’t understand Paul’s amendment. The law requires that all large employers provide health insurance for their employees. The federal government is a large employer. How is it special treatment for the government to do for its employees what outfits like IBM do for theirs?
The government does it with other peoples money so money is no object and government employees get cadillac plans with almost no contribution. Same with their retirement pensions.
IBM cannot exempt their employees from the increased costs of Obamacare as Congress did for federal government employees.
IBM can contribute more of its own money to its sponsored health plans but Congress did not allocate more of its appropriation for federal health plans, it simply wrote the increased cost of Obamacare out of federal health plans (exempting them from the law); IBM cannot do that.
I do not want Rand Paul or any lawmaker advocating Obamacare for anyone including federal government employees.
His proposal or amendment to deny Congress or any federal employee any special exemptions or subsidies in general is a valid action but it should not address specifically Obamacare.
I want Paul to defund Obamacare.
How about joining Cruz and Defund ObamaCare....Sen Paul?
Extending ObamaCare is just supporting ObamaCare
That’s what I’ve been saying for 3 years...”YOU GUYS FIRST”....if it works out fine, then MAYBE we’ll try it....but not only should they NEVER GET EXEMPTIONS, they should have been on it FIRST!
Congress and staffers exempted the subsidy cap from their salaries. So Justice Roberts can earn $300K and still get his insurance 75% paid for under the exemption they carved out for the more equal pigs on the farm.
Geesh....he’s making a GREAT POINT....give him some credit! he doesn’t want Obamacare anymore than we do, but in EXPOSING the HYPOCRISY of the ELITES in GOVT, he’s making a point for the LOW INFO VOTERS.
What part of LAW don’t you understand?
A LAW is applicable to ALL. However, in our wonderful system of government “all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.” Orwell.
Ever see the picture of the lady holding the scales of law? Notice that the scale is balanced. That means something.
Lets start that conversation by acknowledging we arent going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants... bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society. Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors. [but hes not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
...by softening its edge on some volatile social issues and altering its image as the party always seemingly "eager to go to war... We do need to expand the party and grow the party and that does mean that we don't always all agree on every issue" ... the party needs to become more welcoming to individuals who disagree with basic Republican doctrine on emotional social issues such as gay marriage... "We're going to have to be a little hands off on some of these issues ... and get people into the party," Paul said.
Might make Roberts think twice if another chance to get rid of Obamacare comes up and he’d be stuck with what he voted for. This bill by Rand Paul sounds small, but if it passes it really messes with the heads of those who vote against US citizens, whenever they get the chance.
“How about joining Cruz and Defund ObamaCare....Sen Paul?”
He already said that he won’t vote for any bills that fund Obamacare.
***The law requires that all large employers provide health insurance for their employees.***
The Federal Govt. is NOT a Company - it is a group of contracted workers. 300 million taxpayer/citizens are forced to pay them to function. They are truly self-employed freelancers, answerable to no-one - so they should pay for their own health insurance, food, transportation and taxes.
Doesn’t sound small to me...it sounds FAIR!
Seeing your screen name, are you related to “Deacon Blues”?
I agree. Our nation has been corrupted and hijacked via the use of such double standards by the elite.
“The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.”
Because the democrats control the Senate and will not defy Obama, the chances of a direct repeal of Obammacare are below slim and probably zero.
Paul takes one aspect of the law that DOES enrage voters—of ALL political stripes—and brings it INTO the debate.
The media and democrats don't want to talk about such things as laws they pass that they are exempt from. They'd much rather talk about those racist Republicans who hate Obama so much they'd shut down the government so that Granny doesn't get her social security check and little babies on welfare die from starvation. The template has been written and all they have to do now is run the tear-jerker stories and articles...
And then along came Paul pointing out the MASSIVE hypocrisy.
......hes making a point for the LOW INFO VOTERS”
Making a point for Low info voters? They will never hear about this amendment and that is why we call them such. Come on.
Hostage, I am going to agree with you. Any amendment is showing that Obamacare can be fixed and it cannot. Defund it into oblivion or until it can be removed as a very terrible law.
This is the fastest way to defund obamacare. It stinks and the rich and powerful have exempted themselves. Let them be forced to use it and it will go away.
“This is the fastest way to defund obamacare.”
Pull out that quote today, and the Dems will tell you that it means you belong to the government, and therefore should do everything for the government’s good.
I understand that but LIVs will only remember that he advocated for Obamacare.
I am also non-plussed regarding Paul’s recent defeatism and futility expressions regarding defunding Obamacare.
Because of these ambiguous statements by Paul, also his view on immigration reform earlier in the year, I do not think he is the presidential candidate we need in 2016. I think Cruz is.
The only thing of note by Paul that made a lasting impression relates to his comment regarding Hillary Clinton’s dereliction during the Benghazi hearings. In that he was clear. He should endeavor to be so clear in all his opinions.
You miss my point entirely.
Yes, pass an amendment or propose a bill IN GENERAL to deny special exemptions or subsidies for any federal employee.
BUT DON”T MENTION IT IN THE CONTEXT OF OBAMACARE!
Because it will be misconstrued as an endorsement of Obamacare.
It’s all about the message and Cruz knows that better than practically anyone.
Yes, pass an amendment or propose a bill IN GENERAL to deny special exemptions or subsidies for any federal employee.
BUT DONT MENTION IT IN THE CONTEXT OF OBAMACARE!
Because it will be misconstrued as an endorsement of Obamacare.
Its all about the message and Cruz knows that better than practically anyone.
You have a point. Of course I would want this surrounded with information on how the feds have exempted themselves regarding obamacare.
Ron Paul will never be President.....he;s too short.....sorry....but true. In today’;s TV age you have to have certain attributes.....height is one of them.
It might be helpful to bring up the SCOTUS ruling as well. Roberts said it was a tax, so how are exemptions for a select few possibly legal?
Uh.....we are talking about Son of Paul, namely Rand.
Also Ronald Reagan was not tall. But his spirit made him a giant.
On health insurance most federal emplyee premiums are 50% of the total cost for basic plans. If we get the cadillac plans we pay more than 50%.
The retirement pensions you are complaining about are mostly nonexistent now. Civil Service Retirement system ceased to exist for new employees as of about January 1985. Not many folks are left who are covered by it.
All employees hired after that are covered by Federal Employees Retirement system which is mostly social security coupled with a thrift saving plan. FERS is a defined contribution plan, not a defiend benefit plan. It also raised the retirement age for federal workers.
Socialists/psychopaths get indignant when YOU tell THEM what to do.
Enrolling in ObamaCare is not always something to fear... The VA automatically enrolled me although I have primary coverage with Coventry, secondary Tricare, Medicare on 1 November and the Department of Veterans Affairs also pays 100% if I go there. For myself, it just means the different Insurance plans share the “Wealth”.
The old Republican Party Mantra: “Always surrender before you fight for the Republic.”
The New Republican Party Mantra: “BRING IT !”
I see no new Dr Ron Paul on the horizon!!!!!
Not that Rand Paul is not a well qualified lesser of evils...in fact, a top notch LOE!!!!!
I met President Reagan several times at private parties during his two campaigns. I was 5'10" at the time. Standing next to him I estimated he was a little over 6' tall, maybe 6'1". Probably about 175-180 in weight. He carried himself erectly and his physique conveyed strength.
What I remember mostly is the fact he had that rare attribute....that certain "aura" that some notables exude when they walk in through a door. With Reagan, the room seemed to light up and become charged, all eyes became transfixed on him, men and women alike. I've heard say that Clinton at his peak had that same aura.
At any rate, I'm with a previous poster who alluded that Rand Paul may be a little too pipsqueak-ish to attain the presidency. Unfortunately, the voting public does pick up on certain physical attributes when assessing presidential candidates, especially in this television age.
I KNOW which Paul we are talking about...he’s short....Reagan wasn’t short.
I once knew a woman while living in Ohio, who was an unashamed Clinton lover - not just a supporter, a lover.
She shook his hand once at a rally, and she gushed orgasmically about how he made her feel like she was the only woman in the room, etc.
That was the secret of William The Impeached. Women fell in lust with him, and catapulted him twice into office. Of course he had the black vote as the "first black president", but it was women who voted with their lady parts and kept a serial rapist in power.
Geesh, I just looked him up...he was 6'1"......WHY in the world did you think he was short???
“Arguing federal workers should not get special treatment, Rand Paul says he...”
...while he exempts himself from Obamacare...
Good for Rand Paul.
I shook hands on several occasions with Ronald Reagan at the Belair Presbyterian Church and he was nowhere near six feet tall. He was not much taller than Nancy and she is petite.
With the defunding battle uncertain, the BEST way to repeal Obamacare is to force those who passed it, forced it on us and now seem to want NO PART of it, to also participate in it.
Sen. Paul offer an amendment to the CR, that if the Senate Democrats insist on funding Obamacare, they SHALL be subject to its rules!
"The effort [to defund ObamaCare], spearheaded by Sen. Mike Lee, Utah Republican, has attracted support from rising stars in the party, including Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida, Ted Cruz of Texas, and Rand Paul of Kentucky.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/jul/25/dozen-senate-republicans-pitch-plan-defund-obamaca/#ixzz2fiywiAyV Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
I don't think so. I wanted to be Deacon Blue but that name was taken, I am a BIG ALABAMA fan. Stealy Dan does Deacon Blue. "They call ALABAMA THE CRIMSON TIDE. . . "
In 1988 I started off being Stop Blaming Starr, Then Voter#537, Then Deacon Red. (for Red States).
He should not tie any amendment to deny exemptions and subsidies to federal employees to Obamacare. He should offer the bill, amendment or proposal without reference to Obamacare.
Obamacare must be defunded. Rand Paul doesn’t think it possible to defund it. He is not a leader. He’s a quipster.
Here’s a photo of Ron and Nancy the way I saw them at Bel Air Presbyterian.
Nancy was 5’4” and I would say those are 3” heels she is wearing making her 5’7” in the photo absent the hair pile. Ronald’s boots are western dress boots giving him at least 2” in height.
Nancy’s brushed hair gives her about 3” extra height and Ronald’s about an inch at most.
In the photo Ronald stands about 3” taller than Nancy.
After all adjustments take 3” off Reagan and 6” off Nancy and add 3” that Ronald has over Nancy in the photo. Ronald stands about 6” taller than Nancy’s 5’4”. That’s about how tall I remember him, maybe even an inch shorter.
Remember too that Ronald was an actor and likely wore height increasing shoes, hence the western style boots. Many Hollywood actors of his era were made to look taller than they actually were. Humphrey Bogart had to practically wear stilts in films with his leading ladies. Tom Cruise is only 5’7” but he is made to look taller in his films.
Ronald also colored his hair. All of these things were done in his day to look the part, and I don’t mind these vanities. Earlier presidents also had cosmetics or hairpieces to enhance their image with the public.
It’s not about appearance so much as about spirit but of course appearance helps a great deal. Newt Gingrich is tall but many think him fat and short probably because his spirit doesn’t often resonate with the public (although I like him, at times). I’ve stood next to Newt and he is a big man, tall and stocky.
Also looking at the photo you can see Michael Jackson about the same height as Ronald Reagan. Michael was said to be 5’11” and that may or may not be true. But his hairpile is about an inch and his shoes likely added an inch. Subtracting 2” for Michael and 3” off RR would leave RR at 5’10” if in fact Michael was 5’11” which I somehow doubt.
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.