Michigan legislative action thread
Posted on 02/28/2014 9:37:09 AM PST by Behind Liberal Lines
A northern-Michigan hospital is cutting 43 positions in part because of costs related to the Affordable Care Act, its CEO says. David Zechman of McLaren Northern Michigan told a local television station the layoffs were “something that we had no choice in doing.”
Zechman cited the changes to Medicaid and Medicare under the health-care law that cut reimbursement rates for the hospital’s services. “We still have the same costs of taking care of patients, but it’s hard to keep doing the same things you’re doing if you’re paid less for the same amount of costs and services you provide — it’s just basic economics,” he said.
McLaren Northern Michigan joins a growing trend of health-care providers and hospital cutting jobs. In January, the Labor Department reported the number of hospital jobs in America, which has been rising steadily for years, dropped by 4,500 jobs.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Wasn’t there a new regulation or decree, which indicated that employers had to certify that any job cuts were not due to Obamacare regulations? I thought that was in the news recently, that the administration in effect wants to ban cutting jobs due to complying with Obamacare regulations.
Dingy Harry and Patty Murray will say that this is a HUGE LIE!
I wonder if the hospital will have to sign the affidavit to the IRS under the penalty of perjury that the job layoffs had nothing to do with Obamacare?
Hey, at least the benefits advisors and healthcare specialists are doing well
THEY’RE LYING!!! Harry Reid said so!
Well, Dingy Reid will just say this is a BIG, FAT lie!!! This isn’t happening...it isn’t true!
They’ll have to certify under penalty of perjury!!
Only to receive an exemption/delay.
I wonder how many of the 43 voted for Barkey.
There is legislation in Michigan that says ACA related costs will have to be itemized and listed on bills.
I think it’s good because it forces people to look at the costs of Obamacare every time they look at their bills.
Ha! You beat me to it. Liars, indeed (per Harry Reid)!
Right. And then, just before the election, that affidavit is - as a result of a "computer glitch" - leaked to the Center for American Progress, and included in a TV ad slamming some Republican candidate who wants to toss ObamaCare.
After the election, a three-line story in the New York Times reports the result of the "internal investigation" into how the IRS came to leak a confidential document to an advocacy group. The investigation finds "no culpability," "no intent to violate privacy rules of the IRS," and "no conspiracy."
When Jay Carney is asked to amplify, he replies that "the findings of the internal investigation are clear, and the President sees no reason to comment further on the matter."
And the GOP-e continues to say we need only fix, not repeal, this monstrosity.
There are no layoffs. The koch brothers paid them to say that /s
Another of these “lies”, according to Obama, Pelosi and Reid. According to them, no one has lost their jobs because of MessiahCare or suffered because their coverage has been canceled.
By the way, is there a Republican website somewhere where there is a running count of jobs lost because of this disaster/ Is there a site that has a running count of all those who have lost their coverage? If not, why not?
Regarding the Mich. hospital, ignorance of the law is no excuse. And despite what activist justices want people to think about the constitutionality of Obamacare Democratcare, the states have never delegated to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific powers to regulate, tax and spend for public healthcare purposes.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. (emphases added)” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
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.