Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fester Chugabrew
But they have by no means exempted themselves from partaking of the Federal exchanges...

Except for the "paying for it" part.

37 posted on 10/05/2013 6:17:25 AM PDT by Aevery_Freeman (Tried to tell 'em Affirmative Action was a bad idea...Now look what happened!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Aevery_Freeman

“Except for the “paying for it” part”

Yep, and they get the Gold plan, Taxpayers are probably picking up 25k or more per year for each Congresscritter and their Staff


39 posted on 10/05/2013 6:21:18 AM PDT by DAC21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Aevery_Freeman

Right. This is less nefarious than refusing to participate altogether. I am not all that averse to their receiving some assistance - especially lower paid staff - if warranted. But with their insider trading perks and such, it is not sound, ethically or economically, to let Congress members feel no pinch from the legislation they would like to heap on the rest of us “peons.”

To suggest this legislation has to do with reducing health care costs, when in effect it is merely meddling in health insurance costs: this is the most egregious affront of all, if not the unlawful transfer of power to the Executive Branch.

My point, anyway, is that when arguing against this we should take care not to use the word “exemption” or “exempt” as if any member of Congress has asked to be wholly excluded from the exchanges. Like same-sex marriages, however, I hate to speak of exchanges as if they lawfully exist.


49 posted on 10/05/2013 6:34:20 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson