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

Skip to comments.

Mandate waiver for some low-income people
Associated Press ^ | July 10, 2012

Posted on 07/10/2012 5:30:38 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration says low-income residents in states that decide to opt out of a big Medicaid expansion in the new health care law will not risk federal penalties as an unintended consequence.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: lowincome; mandate; obamacare; waivers

1 posted on 07/10/2012 5:30:41 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
The Obama administration says low-income residents in states that decide to opt out of a big Medicaid expansion in the new health care law will not risk federal penalties as an unintended consequence.

What an idiot!

2 posted on 07/10/2012 5:38:30 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (Obamaid has to go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

The clown has no plan. Everything he does is made up on the fly.


3 posted on 07/10/2012 5:44:54 PM PDT by Psycho_Bunny (Future generations will curse what we've done to them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
In a letter to governors Tuesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said low-income residents in those states who would have been eligible for the coverage will not face the individual insurance mandate.

how can she just decide who will and will not be subject to a law? Seriously.

4 posted on 07/10/2012 5:45:18 PM PDT by Principled (It's not enthusiasm for Romney, it's grim determination to remove Hussein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
Me thinks we are walking in a direction dictated by a lost soul with no sense of direction.

0bama the narcissist who can't handle the idea that he is a buffoon without ANY leadership skills.

Life must really suck for him about now.

At least he has a supportive babe to relax him and get him through these troubling times....

5 posted on 07/10/2012 5:45:38 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

It is falling apart.

Also, if you make too little income you are not eligible to buy a policy on the so-called “exchanges”. But if your State doesn’t expand Medicaid, then many will make too much income to qualify for standard Medicaid. These people caught in the middle will create a new DONUT HOLE in ‘coverage’

What a mess.

In any case it looks like the creaters of this monstrosity will not meet their projected 30 million newly “covered” people.


6 posted on 07/10/2012 5:48:28 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

They passed it to see what was in it. Apparently what was in it is a screwed up mess.


7 posted on 07/10/2012 6:08:13 PM PDT by Terry Mross ( To all my kin: Do not attempt to contact me as long as you love obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Hi,

My name is John Galt... I have no income.

LLS


8 posted on 07/10/2012 6:11:41 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Don't Tread On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
What will zero do, issue an Executive Order, like he's a king?

)I know, he thinks he is....)

9 posted on 07/10/2012 6:12:04 PM PDT by jeffc (Welcome to the United Socialist States of America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

One thing is for sure.

This whole mess is a guaranteed employment bill for high priced attorneys.


10 posted on 07/10/2012 6:19:33 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Principled

“.........how can she just decide who will and will not be subject to a law? Seriously.”
*********************************************************************
How DARE you to question the decisions and prerogatives of our czars and overlords! They are our sovereign rulers.

Just wait until Obama’s second term—we haven’t seen anything yet.


11 posted on 07/10/2012 6:20:01 PM PDT by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: House Atreides

nobama is such a quick thinker. Wow. He must be so smart. Why...he can just work his way out of anything. m I must be so beneath him...and stupid. I am so lucky to have nobama taking care of me.


12 posted on 07/10/2012 6:49:33 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: House Atreides

nobama is such a quick thinker. Wow. He must be so smart. Why...he can just work his way out of anything. m I must be so beneath him...and stupid. I am so lucky to have nobama taking care of me.


13 posted on 07/10/2012 6:49:43 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: House Atreides

nobama is such a quick thinker. Wow. He must be so smart. Why...he can just work his way out of anything. m I must be so beneath him...and stupid. I am so lucky to have nobama taking care of me.

Wait a minute... I accidentally posted “quick thinker” for horse’s ass”.

Sorry.


14 posted on 07/10/2012 6:51:31 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: House Atreides

nobama is such a quick thinker. Wow. He must be so smart. Why...he can just work his way out of anything. m I must be so beneath him...and stupid. I am so lucky to have nobama taking care of me.

Wait a minute... I accidentally posted “quick thinker” for “horse’s ass”.

Sorry.


15 posted on 07/10/2012 6:52:37 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Principled

how can she just decide who will and will not be subject to a law? Seriously.

Good question. I’m not sure but I think there are hundreds of clauses in the ACA saying something to the effect “the secretary of HHS shall determine” or “as determined by the secretary of HHS” or some sort of similar lanquage. It looks like the democrats gave the secretary to do whatever she wants with no restrictions. This whole bill is one outrage on top of another and never ending. We’ve got to win in November or this country is finished.


16 posted on 07/10/2012 7:47:14 PM PDT by Joan Kerrey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Principled

Let me try to parse this report. If the reporter accurately conveyed what Kathleen Sebilius said, then one of several things is true:

(1) The term “low-income residents” refers to those with income of less than $10,000/year for those filing as single, $12,850/year for those filing as head of household, and $17,950/year for those married couples filing jointly, including united homosexuals. The statute specifically exempts these individuals from the tax. The tax also exempts illegal aliens, members of Indian tribes, and those incarcerated without pending charges regardless of income.

(2) Although Sebilius will exempt the “low-income residents” from the mandate, they still must pay the tax on their low incomes unless they fulfill the mandate. Although she failed to articulate so, this situation does not differ materially from the situation of “high-income residents” except that their tax will be more affordable, and they could afford health insurance if it did not conflict with their moral systems.

(3) The statute (26 USC § 5000A) actually allows the Secretary of Health and Human Services to grant exemptions from the tax in cases of “hardship with respect to the capability to obtain coverage under a qualified health plan.” However, she must act through functioning Exchanges so to do: if no exchange exists, then no hardship exemptions can exist.

(4) Quite possibly, some low-income persons with may fall under the situation wherein the monthly premium for one individual exceeds 8% of the annual household income for the most recent year for which the Secretary of the Treasury gives her information (probably your household income one or two years before the coverage year). For a household with a constant income, this effectively means that the household would have to spend more than 96 percent of gross income (before taxes) on each individual’s health policy to get the exclusion. A household experiencing a collapse in income may have to continue to pay for health insurance for years based on previous years’ income before qualifying for the exclusion. Worse yet, the 8% monthly rate gets indexed, not to anything particularly helpful, but to “the excess of the rate of premium growth between the preceding calendar year and 2013 over the rate of income growth for such period.” In other words, if health coverage costs continue to soar, the threshold for the exclusion would rise concomitantly.

(5) Some other section of law may empower her to do as she proposes, or, alternatively, she plans to induce Congress to pass such a law (if Democrats win victories in November).

The more I read this statute, the lees sensible it seems. I guess that’s why the Congress had to pass the law so that we could find out what is in it. We who hold the Congress in utmost contempt wouldn’t have believed that the Congress could do something so awful otherwise.


17 posted on 07/10/2012 7:47:45 PM PDT by dufekin (Obama and Pelosi: at war against the Church--and innocent American babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Even it it does create 30 million “newly covered” people, they won’t have any significant access to healthcare, only possibly to death, because they won’t have the money to pay both the premiums, the food bill, the taxes (yes, premiums get taxed, just to make them more “affordable” for Congress), and the required copayments to get actual healthcare. Life-ending and death-inducing procedures of course are provided for free.

More likely, the working poor (as opposed to the welfare classes)—those lucky enough to get something close to a year-round full-time minimum-wage job will pay an additional tax of $695/person (indexed for inflation). For a single mother of 4 with an income of just $12,850.01/year, this new tax takes away a whopping 16.2% of total income. That doesn’t include a $2,000/employee tax on her employer, which money otherwise might go to providing wage raises. But Congress doesn’t think such families are suffering enough already.

So Democrats use tax policy to oppress the poor...the widow and the orphan! That’s who they mean when they say “tax the rich.” That’s what they did.


18 posted on 07/10/2012 8:01:30 PM PDT by dufekin (Obama and Pelosi: at war against the Church--and innocent American babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
"The Obama administration says low-income residents in states that decide to opt out of a big Medicaid expansion in the new health care law will not risk federal penalties as an unintended consequence."

Welcome to another episode of Governing by issue polling...

You can tell they polled the issue of States opting out and this was the key concern. Know plan just a "Oh were gonna do this" How? These people won't have Health Insurance so Dumbasses big plan is NOT TO PUNISH THEM FOR IT> But hey we will punish anyone who has a few dollars BECAUSE THEY ARE RICHER THAN YOU AND THEY SHOULD BE PUNISHED!!!!

Like I told a friend of mine who doesn't have water to his house now for 14 straight days (After not having electric for 5) He should get a D9 and get on the North Side of the City building and then head South then head to Washington DC and do the same on the Capital Building and 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

19 posted on 07/10/2012 8:09:28 PM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dufekin

I don’t think your single mother of four making $12,805 per year would have to pay the penalty. However, depending on the State she may not be eligible to buy a health insurance policy on the “exchange” and she would be making too much to be eligible for non-expanded Medicaid.

There will be people a lot of people in this gap ... and the media is ready to pounce on it. They will blame the States that these people are not “covered”, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that States do not have to expand Medicaid and PPACA did not prepare for that.

Obama admin, Pelosi et al were completely blindsided by the SC ruling on Medicaid expansion. They don’t know what to do except to use the media to shame States into complying.


20 posted on 07/10/2012 9:06:35 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

The clearest low-income exemption from the tax under 26 USC § 5000A comes in 26 USC § 5000A(e)(2):

“Any applicable individual for any month during a calendar year if the individual’s household income for the taxable year described in section 1412(b)(1)(B) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is less than the amount of gross income specified in section 6012 (a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.”

The “taxable year described in section 1412(b)(1)(B) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” is “the most recent taxable year for which the Secretary [of Health and Human Services], after consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, determines information is available.” I conjecture that it likely refers to a year before the year for which the taxpayer might pay insurance premiums or taxes for lacking health insurance.

“The amount of gross income specified in section 6012 (a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer” is quite complex but generally refers to the sum of your personal exemption (if allowed, 2 if married filing jointly) and standard deduction (if allowed). This does not include personal exemptions for any dependents.

For a head of household, that amount will be approximately $12,850 in 2013, and the tax under 26 USC 5000A, unlike regular income tax, includes the income of any dependents.

By the way, it now seems that a dependent who earns just $950 will have to pay the $695 tax ($348.50 if under age 18)—even if parents who can claim such dependent (even if they do not claim such) also must pay the $695 tax ($348.50 if under age 18) on the same dependent. Such a small income, however, may make health insurance not “affordable” as annual premiums exceed 96 per cent of the annual (gross) income of the individual for such prior year as Health and Human Services has information. But the indexing of the 8 percent per month (96 percent per year) threshold for affordable coverage to the increase in health insurance rates may render this tiny exemption effectively meaningless.

I didn’t make up these laws. Congress did; blame its distinguished members. They wrote this sordid law and sold it through deceit. The more I read it, the more abhorrent it gets.


21 posted on 07/10/2012 10:12:23 PM PDT by dufekin (Obama and Pelosi: at war against the Church--and innocent American babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
Writing the law on the fly? Why for only low income people? How is that "equal protection under the law"?
22 posted on 07/11/2012 3:49:07 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

REPARATIONS


23 posted on 07/11/2012 4:07:50 AM PDT by Windcatcher (Obama is a COMMUNIST and the MSM is his armband-wearing propaganda machine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

R E P A R A T I O N S ! ! ! ! !

Wealth transfer from whitey to Holder’s people, unmarried women with rug rats, Hispanics and poor immigrants both legal and illegal. Those who are married and work are suckers!!! And pay the fright.

Speaking in generalities here


24 posted on 07/11/2012 4:14:19 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

pay the freight


25 posted on 07/11/2012 4:15:05 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Windcatcher

Another
REPO-RAY-SHUNS
BO-NAN-ZA
for the people who already get affirmative action, that isn’t enough.


26 posted on 07/11/2012 4:17:35 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
There will be people a lot of people in this gap ... and the media is ready to pounce on it. They will blame the States that these people are not “covered”, even though the Supreme Court has ruled that States do not have to expand Medicaid and PPACA did not prepare for that.

They can move to the states where they can get a better deal. The states that stand their ground will benefit from the outflow

27 posted on 07/11/2012 4:20:27 AM PDT by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
While waiting for a stop light, a thought occurred to me as I watched a panhandler "work" the cars.

I wondered what would happen if I made a sign that read: Need money to pay for my FREE healthcare.

28 posted on 07/11/2012 4:21:51 AM PDT by N. Theknow (Kennedys=Can't drive, can't ski, can't fly, can't skipper a boat, but they know what's best for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

That’s what I suspect will happen.


29 posted on 07/11/2012 8:03:15 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Principled

How is it a mandate if it’s not uniformly applied?


30 posted on 07/11/2012 5:07:30 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

And this is what happens when we elect a guy who never had a real job, and he makes decisions about a law he never read.


31 posted on 07/11/2012 5:12:15 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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