Posted on 10/17/2013 7:00:24 AM PDT by Olog-hai
The bipartisan deal to reopen the government and temporarily lift the debt ceiling includes one small Obamacare element—a provision that says people’s incomes must be verified before they can get Obamacare subsidies to help pay their insurance premiums.
But this was not a concession to Republicans, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Wednesday.
“It’s, you know, it is, frankly, a bit of a fig leaf, which we were happy to give, but that was not a negotiation. That was not what Ted Cruz and the others started to demand that we give them.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
You are right about that. Mitch McConnell’s Blue Grass Kickback was the fig leaf. Conservatives got nothing and American citizens will have to pay.
First, I think Boehner did a good job for a while. My main criticism is what/why/how he suddenly caved...which was the result of an absurd poll from NBC. He bought it hook line and sinker, and totally did a 180. So I guess my main criticism would be that he, and you, are totally mistaken about just how weak our hand was.
This isolation from reality outside the beltway has always been my main criticism of him, along with his pathetic communication skills, which are embarrassing and totally non-effective.....so he actually contributes to the weak hand he complains about being dealt.
In your bullet list, you missed one of the big ones: The Dems shut down the government rather than have to be under Obamacare themselves.
We are going to have to change that aren’t we?
Don’t forget the Obama scare-mongering: Social Security and food stamps ending. There was probably a lot of pressure on Congress not to let those two things happen. For the better-informed folks, there was the threat of global financial collapse touted by the media.
I’m not making excuses, just saying the bully pulpit and scare tactics are very effective.
What exactly is your criticism of Boehner on the shutdown, debt fight? I don’t like the outcome any more then you do, but I thought Boehner did his best with a weak hand to play.
The Dems laid this trap over many months and Boehner did basically nothing except pass some bills that he knew Reid was going to table. Boehner has always been content to let McConnell do the dirty work sticking conservatives.
When Boehner finally came over to the conservative position he did the absolute minimum required. That’s not how you win. He has no interest in an engaged battle with the Dems. Too much work I guess. He just wants a deal and debate on the issues to end.
By your logic, we’re done, because we will be held hostage to whatever card “the rats play” in your words. We’re going to have to stare them down at some point. We;ve done it in the past....and won. We just rarely do it.
And the GOP had a good strategy for a while....kick the debt limit while holding onto the Obama Care /CR shutdown.
There are very few “Republicans” who embody a true conservative lean in their personal or political lives. It was easier for us to allow the “Old Guard” to continue to lie and claim the difference while they moved the country forward toward a progressive globalist agenda and met their personal desires in the process.
Going forward we have to protect those who embody true conservatism as well as bring to the table new conservatives, eager for the fight ahead.
I’m not saying we’re done. I’m just pointing out that threats and bribes were used, just as they were to pass this monster in the first place.
In another reply, I said we have to move onward to repeal the entire monster in the future.
Because while that is a great political theater, it is a largely false one, and as much as I like winning, I also don’t like misleading.
First, they are all under “Obamacare”. Nobody is exempted. Obamacare says you have to have insurance, and it has to meet minimum standards — both of which were true for the representatives and staff.
Second, the law specifically forces them OUT of the government worker health care plan, and requires them to purchase plans on the exchange. This is actually a “special exemption” in a way; a big employer is supposed to provide insurance. On the other hand, a big employer CAN shut down their own insurance, and instead pay a portion of the premium for their workers to join a health care exchange (this allows the big employer to avoid the fines).
BTW, for some people, once their employer modifies their health plans to meet Obamacare guidelines, the employees might actually prefer to have the choice of an exchange, rather than the one offering their employer might have. SO simply being put in an exchange is hardly much of a punishment, although the law requires them to sign up for the DC exchange, rather than allowing them to choose their own state exchanges.
Anyway, the actual VITTER amendment doesn’t change the fact that they have to buy insurance from the exchanges. It was simply to cut off government support for the premiums. Which in fact is a special exemption from Obamacare, but not for the workers, but for the GOVERNMENT itself.
Under the Vitter amendment, the federal government would be the one big employer who was “allowed” to kick some workers (congressional staff and congress) into the exchange WITHOUT having to pay a fine, or to pay a percentage of the premiums.
So it has nothing to do with them being “opted out” of Obamacare. It was really just a pay cut; under current law they, like all government employees and most private employees, had their employer covering some large percentage of their health costs, but with the Vitter amendment they would lose that employer match, and it would cost them thousands of dollars more.
IN only one sense was this special — it is true that, because Obama waived punishment for business, that some large companies can actually cut their workers without subsidizing them in the exchanges AND without paying a huge fine, for the next year.
Anyway, like I said, I do understand that this vote was a good one politically, because while it really didn’t make sense from a policy position, and was mostly just a nasty spiteful thing to do, it had “bad optics” all over it.
Yup, sorry to said that but with half the GOP Senate siding with the Rats then yes we are done. Next up amnesty and then we are really done.
That’s out of context, and actually makes my case.
Good technical detail report, but the fact remains that they had a chance to stop the shutdown and rejected it so they and their staffs could get the subsidy.
So you could say they caused the shutdown when Congress offered to back down if they would forfeit the bribe.
More should be made of this, since the blame is falling on Republicans as if we invented Obamacare, a failed, unpopular, disastrous plan, in the first place.
We offered to suffer with a plan that would ruin our economy and the nation, while all they had to do was fork over a few bucks. But they wouldn’t do it. They wanted the shutdown so that Obama could scare everyone and shift the blame.
???????? I quote a few words out of courtesy so you will know what I am responding to and for no other reason.
...but by pulling just a few words out, you missed my context and thus responded to a faulty premise.
Chuckie just told everyone what “Bipartisanship” really is.
Is anyone here surprised by this?
He let the Rat out of the bag.
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.