- Affordable Health Insurance In 20146 FirstQuoteHealth.com/Virginia
- Instant Health Insurance Plans 2015! healthcare.com
- Qualify for New Health Insurance? Online-Health-Insurance.com
If ObamaCare is such a good idea, then why are there 111 companies on the waiver list?
That’s the question in this Fox News segment:
GatewayPundit highights the segment’s central charge:
“The bottom line here is that they gave out waivers is an admission of guilt. Basically they’re saying, “You’re right. We screwed up.” That’s the bottom line here. They did not create a law that benefits all of us.”
Further, GatewayPundit’s analysis of the 111 names (full list here) turns up some familiar names — like SEIU and other unions:
#12– UFCW Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust
#14– IBEW No.915
#19– Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
#33– Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
#35– UFCW Local 227
#52– UFCW Maximus Local 455
#55– Local 25 SEIU
#60– UFCW Local 1262
#78– Local 802 Musicians Health Fund
#83– Local 17 Hospitality Benefit Fund
#89– International Union of Painters and Allied Trades (IUPAT)
#91– Transport Workers
#92– UFT Welfare Fund (United Federation of Teachers)
The New York Times:
As Obama administration officials put into place some of the new rules that go into effect under the federal health care law, they are issuing more waivers to try to prevent some insurers and employers from dropping coverage and also promising to modify other rules because many of the existing policies would not meet new standards.
Last month, federal officials granted dozens of one-year waivers that were aimed at sparing certain employers, including McDonald’s, insurers and unions who offer plans that sharply limit the coverage they provide. These limited-benefit plans, also known as “minimeds,” fail to comply with new rules phasing out limits on how much policies will provide in medical care each year.
Concerned about the potential disruption that would be created by enforcing the new rules, the administration has granted dozens of additional waivers and also made clear that it would modify other rules affecting these policies. Last week, the Department of Health and Human Services issued more guidance, saying it would use a different method of calculating spending for these plans so they would be able to meet new regulations dictating how insurers should use the premium dollars they collect.
Meantime, Michelle Malkin notes that “Soros monkeys” are attacking “Republican repeal mongers” like crazy:
Even as the Obama administration concedes failure and continues to approve temporary repeals of the federal mandates to company after company after union after union.
Here’s the “repeal monger” attack:
Health Care for America Now executive director Ethan Rome says advocates must make it clear what repealing the law or its major provisions would really mean. “The law gets the insurance companies off the backs of the consumers,” he says. “The Republican repeal mongers want to give health care back to the insurance industry. That is what it boils down to.”
Malkins conclusion: Guess we are all “repeal mongers” now, eh?