Rand Paul to introduce amendment to Obamacare, removing exemption for government employees.

page: 3
50
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Many government agencies and approved contractors (government or private) see private medical data today.

The ACA isn't changing that one single bit.

You have yet to show me within the ACA law where it says that EMR records will be handed over to the government and what mechanism they are going to use to do this.




posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Sorry for the confusion... I had meant to put in this video, but instead got one I had linked to for a different thread:



Do you really trust Obama or our government running 1/6th of our economy?

edit on 25-9-2013 by UnifiedSerenity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Yeah Rand Paul and Cruz are some of the only handful of decent folks in the government.
Obummer care is so blatantly anti-constitutional it's not even funny, as is are the gun laws, and who knows how many other things in acted by the Marxist Obummer and his evil minions.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Uh, GS employees are NOT exempt from the Affordable Healthcare Act (aka OBAMACARE). In fact, Supervisors must have their GS employees read a memo concerning it and then sign an endorsement stating they have read and understand the rules and regulations. I'll try to scan the document and upload it here tomorrow.

Currently, Federal Employees are covered by FEHB www.opm.gov...

The endorsement must be signed by all civilian employees by 30SEP13 and kept on file for one year. More info to follow...my apologies for not being prepared.

On a side note, not sure why everyone's getting upset about this for, I've heard from many different sources that the world is ending in October AND ISON is actually a spaceship filled with Marvelous Beings. Again, I'll try to upload that memo tomorrow before heading out to the Ozarks.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
LOL oh god.
This again.
The only reason why Congress and the rest of the Federal Government is "exempt" is because THEY ALREADY HAVE COVERAGE THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT"

They are "exempt" the same way a person with health coverage already is "exempt"

These people are truly evil in how they try to spin this crap.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Would you post the link? the video did not embed.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


I don't know where you are getting your information but there is no exemption for Congress, nor the President, or for that matter any other government employee. You can look it up. Everyone in the country is covered under the ACA, except for some Old Order Amish sects which neither use insurance nor pay into or use Social Security.

The ACA is not insurance nor a government takeover of health care. What it is is a law that says insurance companies can no longer screw over their customers, deny care, deny the ability to purchase insurance, or discriminate against those with pre-existing conditions. They are also directed to spend at least 80% of their income for actual health care, instead of lining their pockets. The law also mandates that all of us have coverage. For a lot of us, those who already have insurance, it changes nothing, except for the good. "Oh, but my costs will go up!" I hear many say. Well, that may be true for some, but if the price does go up, then you will have the option of purchasing another, better, less expensive policy through the insurance exchange and depending on your income you may get subsidies or tax rebates to offset the cost.

Please stop spreading disinformation and trying to scare people.

Oh, BTW, the basis of the ACA was a Republican plan. You can look it up.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AlienScience
 


This document refers to things like "individually identifiable health information" etc etc

It is heavy on hipaa references in PPACA etc etc

many references to PPACA and individual information



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Public servant's the kind that are in Government should not have more money than the Citizens

This is the largest error in the American System.


Why not put some homeless people in the White house give them a home and let them make decisions I am sure they would be more sound of mind than the Psychopathic Criminals running the government at the moment.

Not to mention the Homeless folks have endured the worst of society so I am sure they know what actual problems pervade said society.. They are after all on the Streets every day.

Kind of like how politicians go on the street every 4 years.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   
I am all for this. I'm in favor of Obamacare (which I realize is an unpopular opinion around here) and think it should go through. One of the big reasons I feel this way however is because of the political games that went into getting the thing written in the first place. It's intentionally a dysfunctional piece of legislation (which is still somehow oddly better than the current system). The fair thing to do is to place everyone in the country under it including those in congress. They wrote bad legislation to try and score political points, they should be punished like everyone else.


Oh, BTW, the basis of the ACA was a Republican plan. You can look it up.


It's more than that. Obama made a huge mistake early in his first term when pushing health care. In order to try and create bipartisan support he let the Republicans write a large portion of the legislation in exchange for their votes. What ended up happening is they wrote the worst possible legislation they could that still sounded beneficial. This gave them an opportunity to try and attack it and gain votes. The entire thing has been a political game, and intentionally written for the benefit of political f***ery between parties rather than for the benefit of the people. I'm impressed you knew the history of the ACA though, it's not something well publicized and never talked about.
edit on 25-9-2013 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   

AlienScience

WaterBottle
Obamacare isn't a healthcare nor insurance plan..........


What is sad is that Rand Paul knows this...but he has to talk to this because his audience consists of a bunch of idiots.

The statement "they should get Obamacare" has no meaning. All "Obamacare" does is say "you need health insurance or pay a fine". I'm sure the SCOTUS judges already have health insurance...so they are already compliant with "Obamacare".


How do people not understand this simple fact?

I am truly lost by this line of thinking............
In your honest opinion they passed a 2000+ page bill that only says "if you don't have insurance, you will have to buy it or be fined"
Really?
I have read parts of it (probably more than anyone in congress).
If you want to know what's in it, don't listen to Nancy, actually read it. You may be in for a "surprise" though.
Quad



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 09:38 PM
link   

AlienScience
Please explain how you will have zero privacy???


This video by Ben Swann might help explain the Federal Data Hub under Obamacare




posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


Lets have EVERYONE take a bite of that sh@t sandwidge.... Good or bad I want it to affect EVERYONE, how else can we truly rate it?



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by MrPlow
 

Since they are not in a warzone I don't see why they can't pay for their own health care.
Let them feel what they are subjecting the rest of us to.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Aazadan
I am all for this. I'm in favor of Obamacare (which I realize is an unpopular opinion around here) and think it should go through. One of the big reasons I feel this way however is because of the political games that went into getting the thing written in the first place. It's intentionally a dysfunctional piece of legislation (which is still somehow oddly better than the current system). The fair thing to do is to place everyone in the country under it including those in congress. They wrote bad legislation to try and score political points, they should be punished like everyone else.


Oh, BTW, the basis of the ACA was a Republican plan. You can look it up.


It's more than that. Obama made a huge mistake early in his first term when pushing health care. In order to try and create bipartisan support he let the Republicans write a large portion of the legislation in exchange for their votes. What ended up happening is they wrote the worst possible legislation they could that still sounded beneficial. This gave them an opportunity to try and attack it and gain votes. The entire thing has been a political game, and intentionally written for the benefit of political f***ery between parties rather than for the benefit of the people. I'm impressed you knew the history of the ACA though, it's not something well publicized and never talked about.
edit on 25-9-2013 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)


Yes totally bi-partisan.

All Republicans in the Senate and House voted against the PPACA.

Look up the vote counts.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   

xuenchen
Yes totally bi-partisan.

All Republicans in the Senate and House voted against the PPACA.

Look up the vote counts.



That's because after they wrote it, they voted against it. They just wanted to say the Democrats put forth some bad legislation and that the Republicans could do better in order to win votes. They never expected the thing to actually pass... it was written to be just about as bad as humanely possible (and despite that it's STILL better than the previous system).

They wrote it, it passed. They should be subject to it. They should in no way be rewarded with votes for fighting against it at this point or even given any credit for being opposed to it.
edit on 25-9-2013 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Aazadan

xuenchen
Yes totally bi-partisan.

All Republicans in the Senate and House voted against the PPACA.

Look up the vote counts.



That's because after they wrote it, they voted against it. They just wanted to say the Democrats put forth some bad legislation and that the Republicans could do better in order to win votes. They never expected the thing to actually pass... it was written to be just about as bad as humanely possible (and despite that it's STILL better than the previous system).

They wrote it, it passed. They should be subject to it. They should in no way be rewarded with votes for fighting against it at this point or even given any credit for being opposed to it.
edit on 25-9-2013 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)



You make a good point about it being some kind of set-up.

But can you show us ?

You realize both Chambers of Congress were dominated by 100% Democrat committees in 2009 ?

This must have been the biggest con game the Democrats ever fell for.

I don't doubt it, but....

You must also know that every Left Wing Liberal organization also supported the PPACA.

And please, how is PPACA better than the 'old' system ?

Details are the better part of valor.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 


That would be great but employers have pooled employees together for years under HMO's and it worked fine but now even Forbes magazine says since the insurance companies know they will get you the plans cost will go up on average of 99 percent for men and 62 percent for women. Obamacare is a government mandated cluster and a Tax. Americans should march on D.C. to stop this crime. Only the ignorant do not see what it is. The same people who voted for Obama just because he gave them a phone lol. The thing Rand Paul does not talk about is how Obama is pleasing big businesses to keep it in play by giving them exemptions. If he did not it would never stay in play. I can only hope the states will force the Senate to throw it out.



posted on Sep, 25 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Kaboose
 


They only try to look good but then take bribes for smaller deals that never do any good anyway and they know it. Don't buy their BS! Just look at what Ron Paul did to back out of his campaign, what did he get? Nothing that mattered in the long run. All these crooks need to be removed one way or the other.



posted on Sep, 26 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   

xuenchen
You make a good point about it being some kind of set-up.

But can you show us ?

You realize both Chambers of Congress were dominated by 100% Democrat committees in 2009 ?


Majority control isn't the be all end all of congress. Minorities have power, and it was intentionally designed so that they have power. In this case that power comes from the label of bipartisan. Obama was shooting for a bipartisan label on the bill, because the guise of bipartisanship is the a very common political defense. Basically, if you can claim the other party supported it too, then if anything bad happens you can deflect it onto them. A lot of political pressure is exerted to get 1 or 2 members of the opposing party on otherwise single party bills in order to get that bipartisan label.

At the time the Democrats were more or less enthralled with Obama, whatever he said they would vote for regardless of the contents of the bill (as we've seen with Obamacare passing). The Republicans were staunchly opposed however. In order to try and get those votes members of the Republican party essentially got to write the bill in exchange for their support. If you need details I'll look up the names, I can probably find them though it's been awhile since I've actually looked into it with much detail. What those Republicans did however was write some very poor legislation, and then their party came out against the bill. In the end it passed due to Democrat majorities, but it did so without that bipartisan label that was sought.


This must have been the biggest con game the Democrats ever fell for.


Really, it shows that Obama and his advisers were terrible at playing party politics. They've since gotten better but I wouldn't call that a good thing.


You must also know that every Left Wing Liberal organization also supported the PPACA.

And please, how is PPACA better than the 'old' system ?

Details are the better part of valor.


At the time I believe it was "support Obama or you're a racist". It's not hard to get support under that system.

As for how it's better, people that previously couldn't see doctors now can. Don't get me wrong, there's A LOT of bad stuff in the bill, and it's less efficient than the old bill but now people that didn't have access to doctors do which raises the minimum standard of care everyone in the nation gets, although it probably lowers the average. To me that's a net improvement, despite the corporate giveaways and massive bureaucracy.





top topics
 
50
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join