Obamacare repeal means waivers for everybody

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Can't we all just get a waiver from Obamacare? Unfortunately not, but the list of people applying is getting longer by the day.
There are now 1,372 companies, labor unions and states that have applied for and been granted waivers from an early provision of the law that says health policies must provide at least $750,000 a year in insurance protection.

In the latest batch of waivers, one in five went to expensive restaurants, spas and other businesses in former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's district in San Francisco. What a coincidence!

Nearly two dozen states have either applied for or have been granted waivers from an Obamacare provision that forces health insurers operating in their states to comply with strict federal limits governing how much they can spend on administrative costs versus reimbursements for medical bills.

And now we learn that the Department of Health and Human Services on Thursday issued regulations explaining that health insurers will have to justify to the federal government health insurance premium increases above 10 percent.

But the rules include an interesting exemption for Medicare supplemental insurance policies. Surprise, surprise! The top marketer of these so-called Medigap policies is AARP, which spent millions of dollars helping to get Obamacare passed.

This is the same AARP that makes upwards of $1 billion in profits from marketing Medigap policies. Clearly, if you have friends at the White House and pay your dues, you, too, can be exempt from Obamacare's rules.

This is crony capitalism at its worst as people and companies seek special favors to escape the destructive 2,800-page law.

In a bizarre near-admission that the so called "Affordable Care Act" is anything but, the White House issued a blog post defending itself. It is issuing waivers that exempt employers "from the annual limit provision of the law if it would disrupt access to existing insurance arrangements or adversely affect premiums, causing people to lose coverage."

In other words, Obamacare would cause people to lose their insurance coverage or cause costs to go up if they don't grant these waivers. Wasn't Obamacare supposed to do just the opposite?

Read more at the Washington Examiner: washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2011/05/obamacare-repeal-means-waivers-everybody#ixzz1NBQJRGz5

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I joined AARP back in 2005, when I had turned 50. I was a member for several years, and grew tired of their monthly magazine which contained numerous stories month after month, of whining, pusillanimous and pathetic, entitlement mindset retirees.
I refused to renew. AARP is a front for an insurance company.

[Deleted]

Like a lot of things I'm sure that AARP started out as something good & with high ideas & purposes. Then like most things they drifted into the money making aspect of business (as in making money is their primary goal). I'm a member & the biggest benefit that I see is I get to fill my garbage can faster with offers for car insurance & life insurance.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

the biggest benefit that I see is I get to fill my garbage can faster with offers for car insurance & life insurance.

So we can safely say that AARP is destroying the earth? Nice angle.

[Deleted]

Obamacare repeal means waivers for everybody

Once again a well meaning liberal (President Obama) come up with something "good for us" that doesn't work as intended, wasn't wanted (by about half the country) & is going to backfire.
A program like Obamacare is not sustainable (or compatible) with the other socialist type programs we have & our present form of government. The reason that it was designed for "everyone" in the first place is that it was really a wealth distribution plan where the people with money pay for those making less than what liberals consider a "living wage". Big shock that not everyone wants it.

Why a "living wage" is a falsehood. Sorry but that term has been used over & over & there mostly isn't such a thing. That's because the cost of living varies so much across the country. Poor would be considered by most liberals (I assume) to be an income of $15,000 per year (around that anyway) for a family of 3. Well where I'm located at an income of $15,000 could allow you to buy a house. Does it have 4bd rms & a large plot of land...no. But if someone makes that much & has good credit they could sure buy a starter house. On the other hand making $60,000 & living in NYC & you would be poor IF you could get by on that amount. Case in point is that we make less than most of you & have a larger house (almost paid off) & more disposable money than a lot of you (ex: a $300,000 crystal collection). That's because we choose to live in a LCOL area. If you choose to live in a HCOL area then it's your responsibility to make sure that your doing a job that pays enough to live there. Not some arbitrary rule from the government.

[marshabar1]

Obamacare repeal means waivers for everybody

Instead of just for the godlet's supporters?

Anathema!!!!!!!!!

[marshabar1]

AARP still keeps you on their records as an inactive member, SF.

I inadvertently filled out the wrong insurance application a few years ago, doing the one for an AARP affiliated plan. I got a phone call telling me I'd have to activate my membership. When I said I had CANCELED my membership the woman told me the canceled memberships just go into an inactive mode. That means in terms of their statistics and lobbying power they LIE.