Posted on 01/05/2015 8:08:27 PM PST by PROCON
House GOP seeks to change Affordable Care Act full-time work definition from 30 hours to 40
House Republicans will hold a vote this week to change Obamacares definition of full-time work from 30 hours a week to the traditional 40, setting up an early test to see how many Democrats are willing to buck President Obama and his signature overhaul now that they are in the minority.
Its part of the early agenda taking shape on Capitol Hill, where the GOP in both the House and Senate is planning votes on issues that have earned bipartisan support before, but which stalled as Democrats circled wagons to protect Mr. Obama politically.
Now, with the president a lame duck and the GOP controlling both chambers, Republicans hope for better results.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Let them dismantle it piece by piece if they have to. Then it can cave in under it’s own weight.
Hours worked provision, individual mandate, business mandate, court cases.
Because nibbling it to death is more fun?
“Laws” don’t become laws until signed into law by the US President.
“Laws” don’t become laws until signed into law by the US President.
Doesn't changing the work week back to 40 hrs make it easier for obamacare to survive? Businesses will cap their hours at 39 and not have to deal with this oppressive law. As more and more people get signed up on obamacare it will be harder to get rid of. Also, because 85% of people who have health insurance get it through their employer the majority of people won't have a personal experience dealing with govt run healthcare and the momentum to kill it will subside.
It looks more and more like the GOPe want to make it easier for businesses to not be impacted by obamacare while leaving it in place.
Go GOP!
A lot of people, esp. young people, are going to need the extra ten hours a week to pay the damned penalty for being unable to afford Obamacare insurance, due to the heavy ‘subsidies’ of the artists/musicians/gibsmedats crowd.
Why the scare marks? The word “subsidies” is like the words ‘tax credits’— these are things given to people who don’t pay income taxes because they don’t work but consider welfare to be incidental income.
It’s a good start. Next, abolish the penalty. Here we have the Party of the People punishing working people who can’t/won’t subsidise the Democrats’ non-working voting base.
“Why isn’t the first point of business to Repeal this Un-Constitutional act?”
My thoughts exactly. Are they playing with this like a cat playing with a mouse?
This isn’t playtime, nor is this a toy.
Dumb to make changes that make it less damaging. Let the full impact be realized and repeal all of it when possible.
I agree. The uninformed need to suffer. Congress should vote to repeal. Obama will veto. As ObamaCare starts to affect more people, more will scream. Congress will vote to repeal the law, and Obama will veto.
The Republicans will then proclaim that if America wants to stop the suffering, they need to elect a Republican president in 2016 - one who vows to repeal Onamacare.
Another “get on board stunt” and cover, for the
Exempt Ones and their quasi Insurance-Banking lobby, as April approaches.
This is all Kabuki Theater. What they didn’t plan on was that the vast majority of Americans were going to take this betrayal personally. It is rapidly becoming the Gov against the People. In a fight like that, which will turn guerrilla rapidly, the Gov is pretty well outnumbered and outgunned. Tar, feathers, pitchforks, torches and rails will become hot commodities.
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.