« Collecting and Connecting the Dots (Addended)(updated 3jul13) | Main | Common Core is Coming (updated 22jun13) »

20 June 2013

Comments

Bill Tozer

Da exchanges, da exchanges! Look Boss, da exchanges! The CBO announced that only 17 states will make the Oct deadline to have the exchanges set up. New Hampshire hasn't had any willing participants, so their exchange to drive down the cost of health care insurance is limited to zero companies to choose from, lol. Washington State has one one carrier willing to be the exchange and that only covers part of Washington State. Talk about creating a monopoly. Me smells the can getting kicked down the road. October, socktober, it does not really matter. Jan 2014...nay, they did not really mean Jan 2014...it was just a figure of speech.

Ben Emery

Bill,
Basically the insurance companies are controlling the game at the state level and we have some insane republican controlled states who are playing chicken but in the end will dive right into the exchanges.

fish

Basically the insurance companies are controlling the game at the state level and we have some insane republican controlled states who are playing chicken but in the end will dive right into the exchanges.

So single payer then?

Russ Steele

Obamacare in California means more Dem voters, not better health care. This should work out well. /sarc

Katy Grimes at Cal WatchDog:

Obamacare is carefully institutionalizing a perverted style of corrupt politics throughout the U.S., but particularly in California where Democratic politicians are taking the law, and adding that special, corrupt California uniqueness to it.

How? Community organizers and unions will be recruiting people to enroll in Obamacare and sign up to be part of the permanent, beholden Democratic voting majority, according to Investor’s Business Daily.

The California Legislature set this up through SB 35, passed and signed into law in September 2012, requiring that voter registration part of the health insurance exchange.

“Last month, Covered California announced $37 million in grants to 48 organizations to build public awareness about the opening of the health exchange on Oct. 1,” IBD said.

“The California legislature and the new Covered California health insurance exchange are conspiring to keep secret how they will dole out more than half a billion dollars in taxpayer dollars to contractors,” IBD said. “The lion’s share of the money is going for what the exchange budget terms ‘outreach.’”

“The Obama administration granted a whopping $910 million to California to set up its insurance exchange,” IBD said. “That money is not for bandages, surgery, nurses and doctors to care for the sick. Nor is it for insurance plans, though $910 million could buy generous coverage for at least 113,000 people!”

The money will be used to register Democratic voters in California — new Democratic voters.

“The $910 million is slated for bureaucracy, including rich compensation packages for exchange employees ($360,000 a year for the executive director) and contracts for computer equipment, public relations and ‘outreach.’”
“Outreach is the largest expenditure and where the real monkey business occurs.”

Unfortunately, this is standard operating procedure in California politics.

- See more at: http://www.calwatchdog.com/2013/06/20/obamacare-california-means-new-dem-voters/#sthash.zUjyfo4O.dpuf

Ben Emery

The best thing they could have done for all Americans is to open up Medicare for anyone who wanted to buy into it. It could have been done with reconciliation due to it being an existing program.

http://blogs.jamaicans.com/gwgraeme/2010/03/10/denis-kucinich-has-a-point-and-democrats-should-listen/

Gregory

"we have some insane republican controlled states who are playing chicken but in the end will dive right into the exchanges." -Ben

No, they won't, and it's telling that you couldn't resist declaring Republican states resisting being assimilated into the collective as being"insane".

Time will tell which of us is correct on this one.

Bill Tozer

Dr. Rebane: If you thought Asylum for climate change refugees was out in left field, read this. Suppose a convicted embezzler was applying for the new purchasing department manager in your business. Or bookkeeper. Suppose a person convicted of three separate incidents of assault with a deadly weapon upon co-workers and unarmed little old ladies from Pasadena applied for the HR position or other openings. Would he make a good salesman or security guard wearing the company logo? Fact is stranger than fiction;

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/22/obama-administration-files-suits-against-businesses-using-criminal-background/?test=latestnews

George Rebane

BillT 1155pm - thank you for that Mr Tozer. We are indeed going deeper into Obamastan. Our legal system is so broken that now businesses will find themselves in "the dilemma in which a company does not run a criminal check and risks having a new hire with a violent criminal history assault a co-worker, or run a check and face a federal lawsuit." If that employee with criminal record causes ANY problems in the workplace or with its work product, the company immediately becomes a target of a rapacious civil suit for not acting prudently.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad