Posted on 12/07/2010 12:46:21 PM PST by SeekAndFind
If the US passes a law that then requires the government to issue over two hundred waivers in the first few months to avoid disastrous consequences for enforcement, doesn’t that indicate a problem in the law itself? That question should be foremost on voters’ minds as the number of waivers to ObamaCare issued by the Obama administration soars to 222:
The Obama Administration has quietly granted even more waivers to the new federal health reform law, doubling the number in just the last three weeks to a new total of 222.
One of the more recognizable business names included on the newly-expanded list of waivers issued by the feds is that of Waffle House, which received a waiver on November 23 for health coverage that covers 3,947 enrollees.
Another familiar name was that of Universal Orlando, which runs a variety of very popular resorts in the Orlando, Florida area. Universal was given a waiver for plans that cover 668 workers.
These waivers deal with limited health benefit plans, sometimes referred to as “mini-med” policies, which companies as large as McDonald’s use for some its employees.
Waffle House. How appropriate! The Obama White House demanded a series of federal mandates that it claimed would protect Americans without damaging business, and now the administration is waffling on its own mandates.
The Boss Emeritus has been on the case of the waivers for weeks, and now calls this Waiver-Mania. Why has this fever struck the administration? Its own mandates would force these companies to drop coverage entirely for part-time and low-wage workers under full enforcement — hurting the very people Obama claimed to be helping with his takeover of the health-care industry. The use of “mini-med” coverage allowed employers to offer limited benefits to low-wage employees that they couldn’t afford on their own, and for which taxpayers didn’t provide subsidies. ObamaCare and its coverage mandates would eliminate that coverage by design and force those employees onto Medicaid, greatly increasing the cost of ObamaCare and reducing their ability to get private coverage instead.
This is basically a finger-in-the-dyke approach to oncoming disaster. Any such waivers means that the government is no longer enforcing the rule of law but the rule of whim, choosing winners and losers in a totally inappropriate manner. Issuing 222 waivers (for now!) demonstrates that the law is unworkable and needs to be repealed.
I heard that one of these health-related organizations that helped to craft the healthcare bill for the Administration then asked for [and got] one of these waivers for their people ...
If the US passes a law that then requires the government to issue over two hundred waivers in the first few months to avoid disastrous consequences for enforcement, doesn’t that indicate a problem in the law itself?
http://www.johnspeedie.com/healy/Uh_Yeah.mp3
This problem is not isolated to just the Health Care fiasco!
On another post of mine I ask .. Why is it that some folks will get extended welfare checks (UI) while others .. get nothing!?
No way, it indicates how thoughtfully the Demorats crafted this lawsuit so they could give out favors to the big guys as BF the little guys.
Some are more equal than others.
Nowhere in the article does it mention how much these companies had to contribute to Ubama 2012 in order to get these waivers.
Some are more stupid than others.
Yeah, but it’s not corruption if demonrats do it.
How many of those getting waivers contributed to the Obama campaign or to one of those ObamaCare fronts?
The world is full of hypocracy and mendacity.
The GOP needs to publish the list of all those entities that were granted exemptions. This should be attached to the bill repealing this mess. Let Hussein and the progressive/marxists defend the indefensible.
I don't know. How large of a contribution to the DNC do you have to make in order to get a waiver?
It’s how Chicago politics works. There may have been no money changing hands, yet. In the short term the administration doles out waivers. When they need favors, then the waivers become “due”.
Alternatively, when the heat is off, waivers must be “renewed”. In other words outstanding waivers are like money in the bank.
I’m hoping some FBI task force has the foresight to keep certain phone lines under constant surveillance. Sure would be sweet to have a tape of a dunning call.
SCOTUS had better hear this. If refused, Hussein’s dictatorship is a fait accompli.
What ever happened to the XIV Amendment, equal protection clause ?
It’s the redistribution thing.
Never ends
There is no such thing as a waiver from a law. If a law is valid, no one has a right to grant a waiver, not the congress, not the president.
What he is doing is telling his “justice” department not to prosecute certain specific companies. That is selective enforcement, which invalidates the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.