That is how the GOP is portraying the penalty in "Obamacare" (examples HERE, HERE and HERE). How hyperbolic is this?
Via the CBPP
Showing posts with label obamacare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label obamacare. Show all posts
Monday, July 23, 2012
The Biggest Tax In History?
July 23rd, 2012
That is how the GOP is portraying the penalty in "Obamacare" (examples HERE, HERE and HERE). How hyperbolic is this?
Via the CBPP
That is how the GOP is portraying the penalty in "Obamacare" (examples HERE, HERE and HERE). How hyperbolic is this?
Via the CBPP
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Things You Can't Make Up - Romney & The Obamacare Mandate
Mar 3rd, 2012
Who Mitt Romney really is or what he really believes is anyone's guess at this point. He has been for so many things before opposing them, and vice versa, that there is no longer any way of knowing.
Sahil Kapur makes this entertaining catch today:
"In July 2009, Mitt Romney called on President Obama to require Americans to buy insurance as part of his health care plan, using “tax penalties” as a backstop — in other words, the individual mandate that Republicans virulently oppose.
In a USA Today op-ed titled “Mr. President, What’s the Rush?,” which has since been removed but remains available on MittRomneyCentral.com, Romney urged Obama to look to his Massachusetts health care plan that contained the same policy, and touted it as effective.
“First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance,” Romney wrote. “Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages ‘free riders’ to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others.”
Obama opposed that approach in his 2008 campaign, and was not on board with it at the time of Romney’s op-ed, but eventually adopted it in the sweeping bill that became law March 2010. Republican voters strongly decry the mandate as egregious federal overreach, and Romney has vowed to repeal the entire law if elected President." EMPHASIS MINE
This is more than a flip flop. This is Mitt Romney recommending a policy to the President the adoption of which he now singles out as a reason not to re-elect him.
Good times.
Who Mitt Romney really is or what he really believes is anyone's guess at this point. He has been for so many things before opposing them, and vice versa, that there is no longer any way of knowing.
Sahil Kapur makes this entertaining catch today:
"In July 2009, Mitt Romney called on President Obama to require Americans to buy insurance as part of his health care plan, using “tax penalties” as a backstop — in other words, the individual mandate that Republicans virulently oppose.
In a USA Today op-ed titled “Mr. President, What’s the Rush?,” which has since been removed but remains available on MittRomneyCentral.com, Romney urged Obama to look to his Massachusetts health care plan that contained the same policy, and touted it as effective.
“First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance,” Romney wrote. “Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages ‘free riders’ to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others.”
Obama opposed that approach in his 2008 campaign, and was not on board with it at the time of Romney’s op-ed, but eventually adopted it in the sweeping bill that became law March 2010. Republican voters strongly decry the mandate as egregious federal overreach, and Romney has vowed to repeal the entire law if elected President." EMPHASIS MINE
This is more than a flip flop. This is Mitt Romney recommending a policy to the President the adoption of which he now singles out as a reason not to re-elect him.
Good times.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
The GOP War On The Separation Clause
Feb 8th, 2012
by F. Grey Parker
I regard myself as a Christian. I believe in the Gospels. I generally keep it to myself and out of my writing because I have the right to do so. In America, no one may tell me what, how, when or where to worship.
I am protected from litmus tests or societal demands to prove my faith by the Constitution. That's what the separation clause provides for.
What I am not guaranteed is special status to impose my religion when I participate in public markets. I am also (supposed to be) Constitutionally disallowed access to taxpayer monies while simultaneously demanding the right to implement policies driven by a theological agenda in those markets.
Period.
Contrary to popular GOP propaganda, there is no war on religion in the United States. That is absurd. What we do have currently is a coordinated effort to attack the bedrock principle of separation. Nothing illustrates this more than the current brouhaha over the Obama Administration's new birth control guidelines.
by F. Grey Parker
I am protected from litmus tests or societal demands to prove my faith by the Constitution. That's what the separation clause provides for.
What I am not guaranteed is special status to impose my religion when I participate in public markets. I am also (supposed to be) Constitutionally disallowed access to taxpayer monies while simultaneously demanding the right to implement policies driven by a theological agenda in those markets.
Period.
Contrary to popular GOP propaganda, there is no war on religion in the United States. That is absurd. What we do have currently is a coordinated effort to attack the bedrock principle of separation. Nothing illustrates this more than the current brouhaha over the Obama Administration's new birth control guidelines.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Obamacare's Early Results
Sept 14th, 2011
No wonder the Republicans are so desperate to get rid of Obamacare. Just think how terrible it would be if 2014 rolls around and, gasp, all demographics might be benefitting the way 18 to 24 year olds are. The horror. The chart below is from Jonathan Cohn's piece today in The New Republic. He writes:
"Need a reason to believe the Affordable Care Act is starting to work? The Census Bureau just gave you a half million of them.
That’s how many young adults had health insurance in 2010, as compared to 2009, according to the official estimates. Or, to put it another way, the proportion of 18- to 24-year olds without health insurance fell, by roughly two percentage points, last year.
That’s pretty remarkable, given what was happening in the rest of the population. For every other group of non-elderly adults, from 35 through 64 years of age, the proportion without health insurance increased."
No wonder the Republicans are so desperate to get rid of Obamacare. Just think how terrible it would be if 2014 rolls around and, gasp, all demographics might be benefitting the way 18 to 24 year olds are. The horror. The chart below is from Jonathan Cohn's piece today in The New Republic. He writes:
"Need a reason to believe the Affordable Care Act is starting to work? The Census Bureau just gave you a half million of them.
That’s how many young adults had health insurance in 2010, as compared to 2009, according to the official estimates. Or, to put it another way, the proportion of 18- to 24-year olds without health insurance fell, by roughly two percentage points, last year.
That’s pretty remarkable, given what was happening in the rest of the population. For every other group of non-elderly adults, from 35 through 64 years of age, the proportion without health insurance increased."
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Friday, March 26, 2010
I Read the Bill... And The Bill... And The Fix
March 26, 2010
by F. Grey Parker
Several weeks ago, I began my own personal endgame with Health Care Reform. For months it seemed, the growing mantra of the opposition had become the argument that nobody understood the legislation, just as it had been with 2009's stimulus package against which Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) had so famously boomed. We just didn't get it. It didn't matter whether we were discussing the House Bill, the Senate Bill or the Fix. The leadership of the opposition kept telling us that we were against it and if we weren't, well, then we just didn't understand it. These arguments didn't sit right with me from the beginning. There was something about that declaration, so insistently parochial, that was patently offensive to me.
by F. Grey Parker
Several weeks ago, I began my own personal endgame with Health Care Reform. For months it seemed, the growing mantra of the opposition had become the argument that nobody understood the legislation, just as it had been with 2009's stimulus package against which Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) had so famously boomed. We just didn't get it. It didn't matter whether we were discussing the House Bill, the Senate Bill or the Fix. The leadership of the opposition kept telling us that we were against it and if we weren't, well, then we just didn't understand it. These arguments didn't sit right with me from the beginning. There was something about that declaration, so insistently parochial, that was patently offensive to me.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Someone On The Front Lines Of Healthcare
March 1st, 2010
This is the blog of someone very smart who is in the healthcare industry. I have known this individual for a quarter of a century and can attest to their wit, humanity and condor. As this person works so hard to help people in a crumbling system, their posts are not as frequent as an avid reader such as myself might desire. But, you would do yourself a disservice to dismiss the observations.
Anonymity is essential for this writer, so don't ask. The truth is the trade off, so to speak.
Do yourselves a favor... read it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
