Nancy Pelosi famously said that we have to pass Obamacare, to find out what's in it. Well, they did pass it, and we're still not done finding out what's in this law. The latest "glitch" is a provision that expands Medicaid coverage to retired people who are considered "middle class." From AP:
"Up to 3 million more people could qualify for Medicaid in 2014 as a result of the anomaly. That's because, in a major change from today, most of their Social Security benefits would no longer be counted as income for determining eligibility. It might be compared to allowing middle-class people to qualify for food stamps."
I found the food stamp comparison interesting, because many middle class people already qualify for food stamps, in this economy. They used to have ads touting "you may not know you qualify for food stamps." I can imagine an ad, after Obama's re-election, saying the same thing to people who didn't know they qualified for Medicaid under Obamacare. By then, it would be too late to oppose, because they kept it "under the radar" long enough...
AP's story explains that this was a "anomaly" that really bothered the administration, but it seems more like a "hand in the cookie jar" moment. Someone wrote this legislation, and that person(s?) is acting out the liberal agenda of expanding dependency on government assistance. Since it became public knowledge, this "glitch" in Obamacare's effect on Medicaid will get "fixed." Color me skeptical: I think the Obamacare will be overturned entirely before this "glitch" is acted on.
Obama had 2 years of complete Dem control of all three branches of government. He came into office after a financial crisis that rivaled the crash that preceded the Great Depression. He spent a few months dealing with it, pasing two liberal "stimulus" laws that helped few that weren't employed by, or dependent on the government. He abruptly moved on to expanding government dependence by "mandating" individuals to buy health insurance. Obamacare was a costly political move, that only a progressive liberal would make. It was the straw that broke the camel's back, in the independent voter's mind. If the economy was in a crisis when Obama took office, why did he spend all that political capital passing Obamacare, but settle for less than liberal economists wanted from his economic "stimulus" packages?
American liberals are trying to expand what the government "gives out," but they are hitting the wall of what taxpayers can provide. It seems that at the same time several government entitlement programs are projected to bankrupt the economy, Obama has thrust a new bureaucratic monstrosity on us. I don't think Obamacare will stand, but as long as it does, it will be hanging around the Dems' necks, and twisting the liberal media into knots, as we keep finding out "what's in it."
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 27
Once here.
And here.
And I'll bet there will be a lot more "glitches" revealed before this monstrosity is fully understood by even those who most support it (becauusse they all agreed, as you noted, that in order to find out what's in it, they had to pass it --- reading it until they understood it was just too hard ... or too much risk to the passage of the thing).
... If the insurance companies wrote the thing it's still on Dem's backs that they passed it without reading it and without fine tuning it (even though they knew it was written by insurance companies - and I laugh about this because all the while they complain and demonize insurance companies but pass a bill written by them ... it's just too delicious).
Blame the Repubs? They supported the criminal action all the way? Got proof for that? I'd be interested in having more names for my 'to go' list.
I know since it passed they've had some weak slips and many of those will be gone next time around ... but the vote on the actual bill is all on Dems because the thing passed without a single Repub vote.
Guess they could have been suporting it silently; still and all though, even in that case, it's still only partly on their shoulders even IF that is true. Dems had the majority even then, it's on them totally, whatever comes of it.
Blame the repubs? While their non action was a little too little a little too late, I applaud them if their finally-united Johnny come lately nonactions had anything to do with keeping single payer out of it (if it is out...).
But, that has to be on Dem shoulders too because they had the majority even then ... and even without an obviously single payer spin to it ... the thing passed in hasted without one Repub vote.
The GOP fought it all the way? Except for a few weak sister slip ups they sure did and God bless all those who truly opposed it then and who truly oppose it now.
Harry M. Jun 30, 2011, 2:41pm EDT
The health care bill is no good but mainly because the grand old party fought it all the way and would not allow single payer health care to pass, the only proven health care service that works.
The present health care bill was written by insurance companies and the republicans supported the criminal action all the way so blame the republican party of big government.
That's what I'm saying. On the final physical vote that is.
Of course there was Cao's one little vote that allowed it to come up for a vote in the first place (can't remember the exact reasons or circumstances at the moment) ... And I think there were a few other nasty little weak sister votes that allowed it to procede in the months previous. But the final vote did not include any yes votes from Repubs. Too late for yes or no by then but it's a fact none voted for it.
Wikipedeia says this: The PPACA passed the Senate on December 24, 2009, by a filibuster-proof vote of 60–39 with all Democrats and Independents voting for, and all Republicans voting against. It passed the House of Representatives on March 21, 2010, by a vote of 219–212, with 178 Republicans and 34 Democrats voting against the bill.
The New York Times said this: The final House vote was 220 to 207, and the Senate vote was 56 to 43, with the Republicans unanimously opposed in both chambers.
I don't think so either ...
That's what I thought too ...
J (DANGED CAP LOCK!) Mickey Jul 2, 2011, 2:41pm EDT
WHOA !!!!!!!!!!!
Harry - the Health Care bill was NOT written by insurance companies!
Where do you get this tripe - HuffinToot?
It was written MONTHS before it was presented by one of Soro's groups - Apollo Alliance I believe ...... and the "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" (referred to by the more cynical as death panels) was in the Atimulus Bill - its defined purpose is "to empower an unelected bureaucracy to make the hard decisions about health care rationing that elected politicians are politically unable to make".
The blueprint it was based on was written in a book ( Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win) by Robert Creamer, while in prison, for Bank Fraud.
He is the Husband of Jan Schakowsky, A Dem Congresswoamn.
And since economically, financially, and mathmatically, there is no possible outcome for Insurance Companies except to be driven to Bankruptcy - how on EARTH could you think 'they' wrote it.
So true, I wonder why she said that.