Last week I participated in a conference call with United States Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming.
With the one year anniversary of the dreadful Obamacare healthcare law now upon us, Senator Barrasso focused his remarks on that law.
“2 1/2 million Americans were granted waivers so they don’t have to live under Obamacare. A lot of these waivers have gone to union members who lobbied for the health care law.”
“This health care law is going to break the backs of the American economy. They played all of these games and gimmicks and accounting tricks. Anybody looking at it knew they were not telling the truth.”
“The SEIU now admits that meeting the targets of Obamacare are financially impossible.”
“There are now over 1000 waivers to 2.6 million Americans. 46% of these people receiving waivers are union workers.”
“You can’t put 16 million more Americans on Medicaid, a program that is already broken.”
“When Jerry Brown and Andrew Cuomo are speaking out against Medicaid…states ought to be able to opt out. Lindsey Graham and I offered a bill for opt outs.”
What many people do not know and Senator Barrasso astutely pointed it out as that all waivers had to be reviewed on an annual basis and resubmitted. The reason for this is simple.
“These are one year waivers but the law doesn’t fully take effect until 2014. Groups are being told that if they complain, they will not get the waiver next year when they reapply. This is hardball.”
It does not take millions of words to get to the heart of the deep problems with Obamacare.
Some very fair questions need to be asked and answered.
If Obamacare is such a great law, why are so many groups who supported the law requesting waivers?
What legitimate reason exists for any group at all to be given a waiver?
If only certain groups are given waivers, doesn’t this possibly violate the fifth and fourteenth amendments about equal protection under the laws?
Given that almost half of the waivers granted are given to ideological soulmates of President Obama, couldn’t this be seen as an abuse of power? Isn’t this rewarding friends and punishing enemies?
Isn’t it reasonable to ask for a public explanation from Attorney General Eric Holder or Health and Human Services Czar Kathleen Sebelius what the criteria is for granting waivers?
Why is Congress exempt from the law? Shouldn’t Congress be subjected to all laws that it passes?
Many critics of Obamacare claimed that the law does not do what Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi promised when they rammed it through. Yet once the law was passed, it was supporters that asked for and were granted a plurality of the waivers.
Either the law should be repealed or zero waivers should be granted.
The law either applies to everybody or nobody.
With tough questioning from Senator Barrasso and his house Republican colleagues, there is a chance the American people may finally get the truth.
I thank Senator Barrasso for helping to get through the fog clouds and getting below the surface of the healthcare law that seems so bad that even supporters are fleeing from it.
eric
These questions have mostly already been answered. Republicans just have a bad habit of not listening.
“If Obamacare is such a great law, why are so many groups who supported the law requesting waivers?”
Most of the waivers are for large employers (McDonalds, for example), large insurers (Aetna, fo example), and unions. That’s because these already provide limited benefit plans and many of those qualified also qualify for other forms of asistance.
“What legitimate reason exists for any group at all to be given a waiver?”
Because it is not necessary for them to be further covered.
“If only certain groups are given waivers, doesn’t this possibly violate the fifth and fourteenth amendments about equal protection under the laws?”
No, because they are already covered.
“Given that almost half of the waivers granted are given to ideological soulmates of President Obama, couldn’t this be seen as an abuse of power? Isn’t this rewarding friends and punishing enemies?”
It’s not “punishing” anyone.
“Isn’t it reasonable to ask for a public explanation from Attorney General Eric Holder or Health and Human Services Czar Kathleen Sebelius what the criteria is for granting waivers?”
The criteria is a certain level of benefits.
“Why is Congress exempt from the law? Shouldn’t Congress be subjected to all laws that it passes?”
It doesn’t matter if congress is “exempt” or not. None of them would be affected.
I think if you paid attention to the law you’re railing against, you’d have more pointed questions.
JMJ