You are right and while Obama did win no Liberal in his right mind can deny that the people voted to support Republicans at the house level, the level closest to home who have led the fight to stop Obama Care.

Prohibition was also a health mandate. It lasted 13 years and only came to an end when the economy was collapsing with the depression and organized crime managed to take advantage of prohibition to not only control liqueur but also to control the government. People suffered because of Prohibition and when it was finally over the people who most supported it breathed a sigh of relief. In fact one of the initial motivators behind prohibition became one of its biggest critics. The great deception of the democrats was to prevent the law from coming into effect until after the election. In other words to keep the results from the people until the people had little recourse.

Concerned -

I know that I will be getting what ever plan costs me the most for the least coverage,

you don't understand capitalism.

Remember that little law that cut the union bargining power over benefits?

Instead of laying off teachers which is certain to degrade education, Wisconsin suddenly was able to hire teacher and decrease the classroom size, which is what the Unions were claiming they would be protecting.

If the states set up the exchanges, then the exchanges must follow federal mandates in coverage. For companies to do that they have to make what used to be options all standard features and increases the premiums to cover those additions at the same time.

If the Federal government ran the car industry

Cars used to have standard transmissions. You would get about 2 MPG more and the transmission and that car would cost $500 - $600 less.

Some cars had optional airbags. That cost about $1500 to add and $3000 for the side impact airbags.

Some cars had setbelts as an option. That cost about $300 to add

Some cars had Anti-lock Brakes as an option. that cost about $750 for half and $1500 for the whole system.

You need a car to get to work, but can only afford the car with one option.

The ACA is like taking the basic model and adding all those options including the automatic transmission and making that car the only car you can buy and your only optional choice are 4 seats, 5 seats, 6 seats, or 7 seats. If you have to buy anything over 5 seats then you pay an extra tax.

The only difference is that if you cannot afford the 4 seater, and your income is low enough the ACA will reduce how much you pay and take that money from some mythical rich person.

What the people you defame are trying to do is make it possible for you to still get that basic car with one option.

hate to break it to you candle but the people did not support the gop house at all. they lost 7 seats and would have lost dozens more if not for redistricting. while the american people still don't really understand obamacare as it is implimented i suspect it will be like social security and medicare, people will learn more about it and support it. billions of dollars were spent to create fear about the law. but as mkore and more of it comes to pass people are more and more seeing there are no death panels and it's not going to cause companies to lay off workers.

most americans don't even realize the so called death panels was one of 160 republican amendments to the bill

conner, I am a business owner, have 78 employees. you think this isn't going to cause companies to lay off workers? partially right. The way the law is currently written we are not going to lay anyone off, we are simply telling people that they will not be able to work more than 25 hours per week and we will hire more part timers to fill the gap.

Obamacare says 30 hours a week is full time and I either pay the $2K penalty on 78 employees, $156K annually, or pay for the lowest crappiest "health insurance" out there. Either way, figure out the math, even a little $100 dollar a month policy for every employee means basically a $94K annual cost that I cannot meet.

There will be reprecussions because I know lots of other small business owners who plan on doing the same thing. Too bad for all those full time job holders, they go part time end of story. what a poorly written piece of junk this legislation is.

Prohibition was also a health mandate.

Prohibition was passed as a moral/social "mandate." And we saw just how well that worked out. This election voters chose not to support a moral/social agenda.

@ DK, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but changing everyone to part time will not help you. It doesn't matter if the majority of employees work less than 30 hours. How they calculate it is by taking how many part time employees you have times hours worked per month divided by 120. The 120 comes from working more than 120 days in that year. Example: You have 80 part time workers who worked 80 hours a month. 80* 80 = 6,400. Take 6,400/120 and you get 53.33. Therefore, you as an employer are considered to have 53 full time equivalent employees which would put you above the small business owner maximum of 50 employees. Just went to a seminar on this and having a bunch of part time workers only lowers your full time equivalent workers, it does not get rid of your obligation regarding the ACA. Did you really think the Government did not think of this first? That is why they put in place these calculations.

no Liberal in his right mind can deny that the people voted to support Republicans at the house level, the

Actually, this is not true. More Americans voted for a Democratic representative in the House than a Republican representative. The only reason there is a Republican majority is because of gerrymandered districts that tilt toward the Republicans. The Republicans truly lost at every level on Tuesday and only maintained their majority in the House because of a rigged system.

Republicans were the ones that came up with the mandate and the exchanges. After losing the election, stop pretending you didn't invent this stuff.

The exchanges is the kind of competition that Republicans were talking about.

Get out of the way. Remember the ACA saves 210 billion dollars over 10 years, and will bring down health care costs.

"bring down health care costs."

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DK - Have you actually read the law? Did you provide healthcare for your employees when they were full-time? If you did, how much did you, as the employer, pay for that healthcare as a group policy? Or, are you grousing because now you won't get your policy for free?

There are some people who actually know how group policies work and that those who provide healthcare for their employees, get their policy for a severely reduced fee or free based on how many people are signed up.

If you did not provide healthcare for your full-time employees, well then we know what kind of employer you are.

But we do understand Obamacare which is why millions of us are going to pay the fine/tax rather than purchase a policy.

This is not about ideology anymore.

DB Akron -

These guys are not here form my best interests. Wlaker brags about how he Saved us Tax dollars and did not have to raise taxes. He gave our surplus ($500 million) to the Kock brothers and then took millions from the Education program (besides the teachers). Now, my local school system receives $1 million less in state aid, so we all get to pay for it again - our money we pay to the state did not drop and our local taxes go up.

So for the car example... It is like taking a car you bought new to a dealership for warranty work and they give it back to you all stripped down and still expecting for you to give them money for the extra labor!

Some people who now have employer-covered insurance are doing that anyway. There’s a clear trend for employers to offer less, and to require their employees to pay a bigger share of their health insurance coverage. “It is definitely true that employers are paying for less and less,” Mendelson says.

Small business is definitely offering less, as there is now less available to choose from and the cost has skyrocketed. Can't offer what you can't afford.

The only thing that is truthful about this article is that no one knows what's really going on with the Exchanges. They talk about 18000 of the "magical" 48000 who will be able to purchase on the exchanges, what about the other 30,000? Let alone the estimated 20 million that will lose their employer-sponsored plan? What about those subsidies? Where are the figures for that?

I was talking on another site and a person wanted to read the ACA. I told them not to bother as they are writing thousands of pages to explain the bill. They said, "how can they do that without having the explanations approved?" They have a very good point. We have a horrible bill that is being free-form re-written by the govt. with no oversight. Do you feel very good about that? It is no wonder there is confusion.

The only thing I know for sure is current compliant plans suck, there is no choice and no ability to custom tailor a plan for your employees. It is a take it or leave it prospect. The only choice you get is how big the deductible is going to be, and even that will be limited more come 2014. That is when the real hurt will begin when companies like mine, to keep a plan will have to go back down to a new max deductible of $2500. Couple that with the tax for fully insured plans, (currently estimated at $500 per employee) and the care will not be affordable. Send the employees to the exchanges and now they are paying 100% of their premium with post tax money. Currently for me, that increase is a factor of more than 4 times what I'm currently paying. And no, I can't afford it.

As it stands now, ACA is destined to fail, and has been from the signing. Too much money is being wasted on things other than care.

This will be a huge mess. I suspect that the vast majority of States will opt out and let the federal government take care of it - especially since the feds have not given them enough information to allow the States to estimate the costs.

Obviously, the taxpayers will get stuck with huge additional costs, and I suspect that the vast majority of the uninsured people will merely pay the very small 'penalty' (which the Supreme Court said could not be enforced by the IRS) and then sign up for insurance if they have a catastrophic illness (they can't be denied).

A perfect example of poorly designed legislation that had absolutely no bipartisan support. But this is a relatively small issue when compared with the REAL CRITICAL issue coming up - the 'Debt Bomb'. Consider this;

These figures come from Obama's own White House Budget projections - link below;

National Debt as of the end of fiscal 2008 (Bush's last year) = $9.986 Trillion.

National Debt at the end of fiscal 2016 (Obama's last year) = $20.391 Trillion.

By the way - this includes Obama's 'assumption' that he gets his tax increases on the 'rich' and Interest Rates remain at historic lows. If that doesn't happen, the Debt will be dramatically higher.

I find it ironic that the young people who provided Obama with his margin of victory are the very same ones that will 'inherit' this unsustainable Debt burden, and have to pay for it - with interest.

I guess you might call that 'Retribution'. LOL

Here's the link - See Table 7.1;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

By the way - For those who are unfamiliar with Economics, the amount of interest payments on the Debt will have to be paid with higher taxes on everyone - Under Bush, it averaged slightly under $200 Billion per year, but if the interest rates return to the average under Clinton of 4.7%, the interest payments alone will skyrocket to almost $1 Trillion per year by 2016 (Almost $10 Trillion over 10 years – for interest alone). That money will effective come out of the pockets of American families and go into the pockets of 'Investors' – largely foreigners like the Chinese, thus decreasing economic growth/job creation substantially. We are on the same path as Greece.

Have a hernia, got it when I was still employed, but not job related. Doctors said they needed to do surgery right away to fix it. Got laid off, and suddenly their new tune is, you won't die from it. That's the prime example of OUR broken healthcare system. My very Red State of Tennessee has locked down the state health plan, while they have over 500 Million dollar surplus in the current budget, well probably last years one since I believe it ended on 10/31. Health Insurance companies need to change their motto to match how they represent themselves, "Money talks, Bullsh!t walks".

And for whoever thinks the states will opt out. Not a chance, too much money they can scam from the system. States are probably even more corrupt than the Federal Government.

Bobby and the rest of the big thinkers, you do realize that even paying the fine will not shield you from health care cost. If you need service it will cost you full price, with what ever assets you have being confiscated to pay your bill. Only this time the federal government will take it out of any return from over payment of your taxes. Don't pay taxes, go to jail, and you will still need some money to pay the Doctor. The only difference I see is that now you free riders that used to stick me with the bill because I have insurance will be responsible for your own. Obama care is a good thing and it will lower health care cost.

If the government is going to subsidize the health insurance so people can buy it, isn't that the same as medicaid just renamed? The federal government could not even run a brothel successfully. That is documented.

Paula, I read and quote this to you directly from an article that was in the Washington Times, dated 11/8/2012.

"Under the health care law, if a company has more than 50 "full time equivalent" workers, a combination of full and part-time employees, but doesn't offer "affordable" coverage that meets the governments minimum value standard, the company will have to pay a penalty. This penalty is determined by the number of full-time employees minus 30 full-time employees. So to reiterate a very important point: part-time workers are not part of the penalty formula. The health care law creates a perverse incentive to hire part-time versus full time workers".

The way I view that statement is that if a company has right at 50 full-time employees minus 30 this makes a total of 20 full-time employees for the companies reporting requirement. It doesn't matter if the same company has 100 part-time employees, they do not figure into the penalty formula only the 50 minus 30 count.

I could better understand your formula if I could read it for myself. Could you please post a link, I would really like to read it? Thanks...

John in Battle Creek

You shouldn't be name calling.

Your inability to understand that adding layers of bureaucracy to the heath care system is going to increase costs makes it difficult to take you seriously.

Millions will opt to pay the fine, that's a fact.

And as to the rest... the checks in the mail and... I'm not gonna...

Does anyone else find it uproariously hilarious that one of the states to establish exchanges to date is... drum roll... Utah?! Yeah. That Utah (UT has, however, not yet announced whether it will opt-in or out of the Medicaid expansion).

The following states have implemented exchanges:

UT, WA, OR, CA, NV, CO, NY, VT, MA, RI, CT, MD, WV, and KY. DC has also implemented an exchange. IL and AR likely will.

Separately, the following states have explicitly opted out of the Medicaid expansion or are leaning that way: NV, NE, IA, TX, LA, MI, FL, SC, GA, NJ and ME. As you can see, there's a smattering of blue and red states there.. my guess it has a lot to do with their own pattern of Medicaid spending.

On the other hand,notably, red state KY is leaning toward opting in. Red state AR has already opted in... they couldn't sign up fast enough.

Republican hypocrisy is really something special...

I hope they make sure the exchanges really pair apples with apples and force the insurance companies to come clean on their offerings. It's almost impossible to compare plans right now - like buying cell phone service. They make it so confusing so you just give up and sign up for something you didn't really want or need in the first place.

California, why do you have to turn it into a "red state, blue state" issue? Each state has a responsibility to it's citizens to provide what's financial possible to them. Most, if not all, of the states you mentioned are financial strapped and are trying their best to keep taxes from increasing.. And then you have California who places (temporary ha ha) tax increases on a ballot and lets everyone think that their "rich and famous" are just going to sit back and take one for the team.. So I guess I can see how you would suggest BS like that... Carry on..

trust, I don't understand something. You complain about a doctor telling you that you no longer need surgery because you appear to no longer have insurance coverage, yet you state the insurance companies are the A-holes. Did the insurance you no longer have tell you that you don't need the surgery or the doctor?

The exchanges is the kind of competition that Republicans were talking about.

Get out of the way. Remember the ACA saves 210 billion dollars over 10 years, and will bring down health care costs.

If we would have had competition whereby insurance companies would have been able to offer products competitively from state to state, we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with. Truth is each insurance company would lobby for a state and then lobby to keep competition out of that state.

It may save the government $210 billion over 10 years but that cost will be transferred for the most part to the consumers by way of higher premiums and more out of pocket at the point of service.

Don't be fooled. Your premiums will go up and the services you are accustomed to receiving with your current insurance will decline. I have already seen it this year in my insurance. My children get 1 wellness visit per year now and each receive 4 sick visits per year. After that my out of pocket goes up exponentially. Prior to this year, this was not the case.

Conversations about the ACA always go around in circles. Conservatives bitch about the rules their guys came up with and liberals defend a program they never wanted.

Liberal wanted universal, tax funded, single payer health care not any @!$%#ing mandate to put more hard earned money into the pockets of moneygrubbing insurance companies!

The problem is all the damn hands in the health care cookie jar.

Untill we as Americans can finally grow up enough to realize that not everything should revolve around corporate profit, we will continue to fight amongst ourselves and we will continue to get screwed.

Health care, utilities, food and housing are things that should never have any aspect of it's business publicly traded. Profits should be capped and the only ones making any money should be those actually working in the industries.

Call me socialist and hate me for thinking we should try to make the world as fair as possible, I don't care.

For those of you worried that you won't be able to afford health insurance, or you're already paying thousands of dollars for coverage and can't afford more, the ACA will make it much cheaper for you to have coverage than what is available to you today. (That goes for small businesses, too.)

Here is a good summary sheet of how the new program will work:

http://www.ncsl.org/portals/1/documents/health/hraca.pdf

Lack of information leads to fear of the unknown. But notice that for people with incomes at 133% of the federal poverty level (about $25k for a family of 3), your coverage can't cost more than 2% of your annual income.

That amount rises to 9.5% for those with 400% of federal poverty level, but that's still less than the $7k a year one poster above said he's paying for his family's coverage today.

And those under 133% of the poverty level will get Medicaid.

The GOP has tried every scare tactic in the book for the last couple of years, but the reality is a big improvement over our current system. Read up, or wait and see.

Let me understand this--Republicans don't want you to have the same comparative on-line shopping tools you have for airfares, car insurance and automobile purchases. I don't get it.

Insurance has always been regulated at the state level. That is why the ACA ("Obamacare") incorporated the requirement that states set up their own "website" but what do I care. I'll buy off the federal one!

BTW, John Beohner, the new chief justice of the supreme court and de facto republican president just said that Obamacare is now the law of the land. Good. There is nothing prohibiting him from introducing legislation to add tort reform to Obamacare.....Now, what will you bet that he won't want to piss off the lawyers lobby?

@Rick-3416939, you make no mention of one very important factor in the overall cost of healthcare insurance in this country - participation.

With 20 million+ new participants estimated to now be joining what will be a larger and more cohesive risk pool by virtue of the PPACA, (the largest portion of these new participants being young healthy Americans who tend to have the lowest annual healthcare costs), this will reduce the effect of "adverse selection", which will in turn have a downward influence on costs for everyone.

The net result remains to be seen, but at the end of the day something had to be done, because the status quo was absolutely unsustainable. PPACA may not be the perfect solution, but it IS "the law of the land", so we might as well try towards the best possible outcome as we as a nation implement it. It's no longer a matter of IF, but HOW.

When working poor folks in the states that don't take the Medicaid expansion, see everyone else getting health care but them, then we will see complete democrat control of congress.

Republicans better dump the Tbaggers and neocons quick or they will be an endangered species! HaHaHa!

I just found this link which shows how the employer penalties are calculated:

http://www.shrm.org/hrdisciplines/benefits/Documents/EmployerPenalties.pdf

It's a bit confusing, but part-time employees ARE counted for the purpose of determining whether or not an employer has 50 employees; but part-time employees ARE NOT counted when determining if an employer will be penalized when one of his employees gets insurance through the exchanges.

Bobby Gordon, Name Calling? The facts are there is no bureaucracy, the truth is it will be run by private insurance companies. You must be the ignorant righty that calls this a government take over of our health care system. I truly wish is was, every other country in the world, except one recognizes access to health care is a basic human right. Maybe its because I've got absolutely no use for conservatives as most are not smart enough to tie their own shoes. Simple things like this. If you opt for the penalty and get sick, you are on your own. No insurance, and you will pay for it. If you have assets you won't have so much when the Doctors and hospitals get done with you. Stupid is as stupid was.

@ Real Americans - I read your link. You need to have something more up to date to support your post. The link is from 2011 and parts of it are already inaccurate...(CLASS for one, has been dropped and the cost went up because they said CLASS would generate revenue and that's not going to happen.) No one is going to believe they are going to use the poverty levels from 2010 in 2014 in determining subsidies. Let alone, where do you think the govt. is going to get the money for all these subsidies?.....inquiring minds want to know.

Exchanges = death to the health insurance agent

Manta has 3,351 companiesunder Accident and Health Insurance businesses in United States

That Number should drop to 351 by 2018

1/4 million health agents on food stamps by 2018

thanks Obama

"Let alone, where do you think the govt. is going to get the money for all these subsidies?"

@Willowbrook, do a search how is PPACA funded, or see below.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act:

Summary of funding

PPACA's provisions are intended to be funded by a variety of taxes and offsets. Major sources of new revenue include a much-broadened Medicare tax on incomes over $200,000 and $250,000, for individual and joint filers respectively, an annual fee on insurance providers, and a 40% excise tax on "Cadillac" insurance policies. The income levels are not adjusted for inflation, leaving the possibility of increased taxes on incomes over 250,000 inflation-adjusted dollars after more than two decades without indexing through bracket creep.^[36] There are also taxes on pharmaceuticals, high-cost diagnostic equipment, and a 10% federal sales tax on indoor tanning services. Offsets are from intended cost savings such as changes in the Medicare Advantage program relative to traditional Medicare.^[37]

Summary of tax increases: (ten year projection)

• - Increase Medicare tax rate by .9% and impose added tax of 3.8% on unearned income for high-income taxpayers: $210.2 billion
• - Charge an annual fee on health insurance providers: $60 billion
• - Impose a 40% excise tax on health insurance annual premiums in excess of $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family: $32 billion
• - Impose an annual fee on manufacturers and importers of branded drugs: $27 billion
• - Impose a 2.3% excise tax on manufacturers and importers of certain medical devices:$20 billion
• - Raise the 7.5% Adjusted Gross Income floor on medical expenses deduction to 10%: $15.2 billion
• - Limit annual contributions to flexible spending arrangements in cafeteria plans to $2,500: $13 billion
• - All other revenue sources: $14.9 billion

Summary of spending offsets: (ten year projection)

• - Reduce funding for Medicare Advantage policies: $132 billion
• - Reduce Medicare home health care payments: $40 billion
• - Reduce certain Medicare hospital payments: $22 billion

Original budget estimates included a provision to require information reporting on payments to corporations, which had been projected to raise $17 billion, but the provision was repealed.^[38]



@ DB Akron,

Aren't you glad President Obama was re-elected. If we were dealing with Romney right now the states would not only be scrambling to figure out how to organize this but they would be figuring out how to organize for a lot of things. I can't tell you how many times I heard Romney say we need to give it back to the state.

Times up.....States have negative budgets......implementing X-changes will put States in a default mode.

Aren't we glad that 51% of Americans voted for Mr. Obama AGAIN ?

@ cksks - How many "Cadillac" plans will remain after that part of the bill comes into effect? Answer, pretty much none. (You will be lucky if "most" of the large employers even have plans.) There are many "supposed" ways they are going to pay for this, (like CLASS, that was "supposed" to create 80 billion in revenue, that has magically disappeared when they were called on it) and many like the Cadillac tax will not pay out like they said. Let alone, who do you think is going to pay for the taxes on Pharm companies, and fully insured plans? That's right, the consumer, not the insurance or Pharma company. So in essence, you have a big shell game, and in the end it will not pay out.

Oh and those reductions to Seniors? Let's just make it so they have no care at all. It is pretty short for many now. Gee, is that like a "passive death panel?"

Ellie Mae, that minus 30 employees is only for the penalty. If you have 52 full time employees and opt not to offer health insurance and instead pay the penalty, you get the first 30 free and have to pay the penalty on the other 22. The 30 employee deduction does not count towards your total full time employees. As to a link about the calculations to figure out how many full time employees a company has, I do not have one. I went to a ACA seminar and that is where I learned about it. Will try to see if I can find it on the website of the host of the seminar and post a link. Hope this helped a little bit.

@ cksks - How many "Cadillac" plans will remain after that part of the bill comes into effect? Answer, pretty much none.

They are already phasing out. I discribe above the changes my insurance company made this year.

confussed you are really confussed.

The states would be doing nothing because Romney and a Republican congress were set to repeal it.

3,000,000 Ron Paul branch of the Tea Party didn't get the memo.

There were also 8 or 9 million democrats that didn't show, because they didn't want to vote for Obama and were afraid to vote for an "evil" republican.

You don't get the government you want, you get the one you deserve.

Let me explain to you what The ACA has done for me. Health insurance increases of +20% 2010. +20% 2011 + 30% 2012 and expecting at least another +30%. I NEVER had and increase of 18% (twice) and most other times the increase was 12 - 14%.

BTW, it doesn't matter if a state sets up an exchange or not. The ACA gives the IRS permission to look in your bank accounts to see what insurance you are buying, so they can find out who is insuring you and if they are giving you the coverage the government mandates you have.

The ACA is the most intrusive and evil act in US History.

Oh, yeah for those who think there is no competition for health insurance. Two people Fraudulently used our phone number when appling for health insurance coverage.

Our phone rang, and rang, and rang, and rang, and rang, from insurance companies trying to sell us a policy.

Paula

It doesn't matter what law you write, the Americans will find a way around it. If they don't they will revolt in ways you will not expect and cannot anticipate.

ROY WILSON,

Always with your negative, leading narratives and non-fact-checked hyperboles.

Excerpts from what you posted:

----------------------------------------

These figures come from Obama's own White House Budget projections - link below;

National Debt as of the end of fiscal 2008 (Bush's last year) = $9.986 Trillion.

National Debt at the end of fiscal 2016 (Obama's last year) = $20.391 Trillion.
.
.
.
That money will effective come out of the pockets of American families and go into the pockets of 'Investors' – largely foreigners like the Chinese, thus decreasing economic growth/job creation substantially. We are on the same path as Greece.

---------------------------------

Contrary to your Fox News and their right-wing Echo Chamber's propaganda, it's NOT the national debt, Wilson...that's been around for decades as this nation grew in population and in economic strength since WW2. It's the deficit that matters. The deficit under the Obama Administration has been FALLING in percent of GDP, ever since the beginning of the Great Recession that G.W. Bush started.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_deficit_chart.html

And as far as your fears about China:
To Those Seized by Debt Fear: China Holds Just 10 Percent, Down From 2 Years Ago

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/to-those-seized-by-debt_b_1988855.html

And consider this: What is happening in places like Greece -- the protests, the riots, are a result of corruption, and now, to correct for it, austerity measures similar to what Romney and Ryan and Co. proposed for the U.S. Wilson, is this what you and your right-wing buddies want for the U.S? Implement crippling austerity measures? Sounds like it. Admit it, you want the U.S. to suffer. Why else would you and your right-wing buddies in Congress block every measure to fix the economy and bring back jobs? Oh yes, that's right, because you and your Tea Party buddies believe that a "black Muslim socialist" is in the White House ...so you do everything you can to spread the propaganda of doubt and fear, while trying to stop the economy from getting better just to make President Obama look bad and prevent him from getting re-elected.

Well guess what Wilson,

YOU AND YOUR BUDDIES LOST.

Is Sheldon Adelson upset that he spent millions for nothing?
As one blogger put it:

Sheldon Adelson spent millions on Republican races hoping that a Romney administration could let him off the hook for his four separate cases of violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Now, in spite of throwing millions at political races Adelson will still have to face justice.

How much do you love the idea of corrupt Republicans not being able to way their way out of prison?

-----------------------------------

Eighty percent of super PAC contributions from the investment community have gone to conservative super PACs, according to the Center's analysis.

Excerpts:

Money can't buy happiness, nor can it buy an election, apparently.

The top donors to super PACs in 2012 did not fare well — casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the No. 1 super PAC contributor with more than $53 million in giving, backed eight losers at this writing.

Adelson was top backer of the pro-Mitt Romney Restore Our Future super PAC, with $20 million in donations. Romney lost to President Barack Obama. In addition, Adelson's contributions to super PACs backing U.S. Senate candidates in Florida, Virginia and New Jersey were also for naught.

He was not the only conservative billionaire who had a bad night.

Win-Loss Rundown:

(Giving to candidate-specific super PACs in the federal election)

Sheldon Adelson, Republican, $53.7 million*

• Mitt Romney — loss
• Connie Mack (Florida Senate) — loss
• George Allen (Virginia Senate) — loss
• Allen West (House, Florida’s 18th) — too close to call, but leaning toward loss
• Joe Kyrillos (New Jersey Senate) — loss
• Shmuley Boteach (House, New Jersey’s 9th) — loss
• Newt Gingrich (GOP presidential primary) — loss
• David Dewhurst (GOP primary, Texas Senate) — loss

Harold Simmons, Republican, $26.9 million*

• Mitt Romney — loss
• Connie Mack (Florida Senate) — loss
• Rick Santorum (GOP presidential primary) — loss
• Newt Gingrich (GOP presidential primary) — loss
• Rick Perry (GOP presidential primary) — loss
• David Dewhurst (GOP primary, Texas Senate) — loss
• Orrin Hatch (GOP primary, Utah Senate) — win

Bob Perry, Republican, $21.5 million*

• Mitt Romney — loss
• George Allen (Virginia Senate) — loss
• Connie Mack (Florida Senate) — loss
• Rick Perry (GOP presidential primary) — loss
• David Dewhurst (GOP primary, Texas Senate) — loss

Joe Ricketts, Republican, $12.9 million*

• Mitt Romney — loss

Fred Eychaner, Democrat, $12 million*

• Barack Obama — win

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/08/15001252-money-cant-buy-happiness-or-an-election?lite

3score&4

Am I the only one that sees the oxymoron in blowing $20million on Elections and being called "CONSERVATIVE"?

#1.14 - Thu Nov 8, 2012 5:13 AM PST

Common Sense-2004266

The irony is that the economy is not doing so bad if these people had millions to donate and piss away.

#1.15 - Thu Nov 8, 2012 5:13 AM PST

RI Mom

WHEN

were

these MAJOR POLITICAL FUNDERS

going to realize that

the

MAJORITY

of Americans

were totally

DISGUSTED

with their

Bullying, Buying, & WAVING THEIR 1 % Cash around.

HOW DARE THEY SCREAM that WE THE PEOPLE are a drain on their lifestyle.

.CEO's sitting on mountains of CASH...

and yet they won't hire, invest, innovate, expand....

and we were supposed to believe that a BUSINESS-MAN knew how to create jobs and improve our infrastructure?

#1.24 - Thu Nov 8, 2012 5:36 AM PST

Dick-2100935

The good news is that the moneyed people lost, the bad news is they have so much money it doesn't affect them anyway. They just didn't get a candidate that will allow them to pay less tax. It was an investment for them; if Romney got in they would save the money they spent and much more in his tax breaks for the super rich.

Some information I heard and put together during election night was that ACA will cost around 1 billion dollars over ten years and Presidential candidates spent 1 billion dollars just in one election. Hopefully this will put things in perspective. Who says we can't afford health care?

#1.19 - Thu Nov 8, 2012 5:25 AM PST

I said this before but lay-offs and part-time employment going on doesn't have a thing to do with "Obamacare" like many are saying. Small local businesses owners who are conservative and pissed about the reelection of Obama might take the measures they think appropriate in their individual cases, like some we know.

Multinational corporations are still laying off in the U.S. while they keep making bundles in other countries and they're doing now what they were doing regardless of who took the Presidency. Those type of corporations employing mostly outside of the U.S. will never get the breaks they want from an Obama administration.

You folks who want the Feds to take over... that is make unilateral decisions about what we want and need ... doesn't make sense to me.... sorry.

First... the American states, like us human beings, are composed of dramatically different "kinds" of people in their populations from one another, and are next to what their people need, and what the population wants.

No! This is not insulting. Human beings don't clone... not from the dawn of time, and I thank the Entity which formed us for that. (OK I am not atheist, but I am ecumenical... I respect the different roads people take to the best they can be.)

Second, what I am trying to say is that the states can respond to the Delphic Oracle's substantive lesson, "know Thyself." The state administrations are elected on that basis. I fear such an increase of power to the Federal Government. (In my opinion it's way overboard already) is not what we should put up with.

I'm reading a recent book by Ken Follett about the years in our time from about 1911 through the end of World War I and subsequent years into the early 1920s. Although it might be labeled "historical fiction" it is no way even close to fantasy. It's meticulously researched, but fascinating and swiftly told.

The Points of View are narrated about five people who lived in those times beginning several years before World War I ...

~~~ an American Lawyer who worked in the White House;

~~~ an intelligent young peon, a laborer, who with hard work learns a trade and becomes for a top-level housekeeper in an aristocrat's household;

~~~ a Duke in Britain's House of Lords;

~~~ the Duke's sister, an engaging, witty, and highly educated (for the era)... who chooses a love marriage with ...

~~~ ... a young German in one of the Cardiff Embassies;

~~~ and two orphaned brothers who try to escape Russia ruled under Tzar Nicolas of Russia.

Each of them meet one or more of the others with significant effects on their lives.

What this book seems to be showing me is that the more power the country's head honchos have (in spite of, or perhaps worse than, sociological intentions), the more the power at the top is enhanced.

This is especially noticeable in Germany and Russia in this second decade of the 20th century. And, for me, anyway, what I couldn't help but conclude was what followed in each of those countries:

Hitler in Germany. Stalin in Russia.

What are we inviting here in the United States today, with the Federal Government at the hands of our president whom we have newly voted to continue with all his ideas (for running our lives).

I prefer to make my own decisions about my insurance (and I have a very good supplemental policy to Medicare).

I do not want the Feds to tell me what I HAVE to have... on any level. (lol outside of Constitutional Law as it works now most positively for us)

I give up......I'm gonna become a 47%er

Avenger, at least you will have health care.....

Yikes, almighty - look at all the livid little TeaWhiners! Next time, perhaps find yerselves someone legitimate to nominate and vote for - Willard just wasn't even close to viable. Think Chuck Hagel when seeking out political competence and experience - you won't regret it...

Actually, forcing people to buy health insurance will not only put the bigger companies out of business( costing jobs) but will decrease care for those who are already on the govt. healthcare.

I don't understand how a majority of liberals would agree to this. If you go into any doctor's office, most will not accept medicare because their quotas are full. It's only private insurances they accept.

Afterall, who can afford extra money each month to cover those who can't pay? The President hasn't fullfilled his part of the bargain by improving the economy. Money is tight right now. Those who didn't have health insurance, but were healthy are now forced to buy insurance. For some, that means buying health insurance or buying food. You will see a lot more people on food stamps now because of this.

San Francisco,Ca. has their own health insurance exchange.I looked it up and if you can prove residency,even if you are here on a green card you ca purchase their health insurance.This whole ACA could have been avoided had the Feds allowed insurance companies to sell their products across state line.That is how the free market is supposed to work .ATT raised retirees monthly contribution(even though we were promised future paid for medical upon retirement)the co-pays went up as did every type of service and prescriptions to boot.corporate America will be off the hook to provide medical care for their employees and I bet ATT drops all of us once this takes affect.I can't hardly wait for Medicare to kick in as seniors will probably die waiting for health care.The U.S. should have set this up like France but the way this ACA works it is one big disaster if you ask me.

Romney claimed the more things the States can do the better for the Federal Government. I find it funny that it's the Republican Governors that want the Federal Government to set up the exchanges. The Governor of Kansas says "could cost Kansas taxpayers millions of dollars" could is the magical word here, he doesn't know if it will or not. But then again he might be using the word "could" to cover his ass or just scare the hell out of you. I'll be glad when it goes into effect just to see if it does as planned, lower rates. How many of you think Anthem is talking to United Health Care about how much they will be able to make? They could care less how much it cost you, the bottom line is how much can they make. They know no matter how much it cost us the government will pay what we can't. It's a win win for them. I think we need to turn the game around. We all need to tell them to take their high priced insurance and stick it where the sun doesn't shine. What we need is a new company we can all afford.

Ellie Mae Clampett... I found this :

The PPACA uses several calculations to determine who must comply with new coverage mandates. It requires “large employers,” those who employed 50 or more full-time or full-time equivalent employees during the preceding calendar year, to offer all full-time employees and their dependents affordable and comprehensive health insurance, as defined by the Act. For purposes of the Act, “full-time employees” are those who work an average of 30 or more of hours per week in any month. In making the “large employer” determination, an employer must include in its calculation seasonal employees who work 120 days or more per year, and must use a specified formula to calculate the number of “full-time equivalent” employees based on the number of hours worked by all part-time employees.

Beginning in 2014, if a large employer fails to offer or provide affordable and comprehensive health insurance to all full-time employees and their dependents, it will incur a penalty if one or more full-time employees receive a “premium tax credit” to assist the employee with paying for health insurance. Note that PPACA stipulates that employers need to offer and provide insurance only to full-time employees. Therefore, employers are not required to offer or provide health insurance to part-time employees and are not at risk for being assessed a penalty if a part-time employee receives a “premium tax credit.”

http://www.parksandrecreation.org/2012/October/Clarity-and-the-Affordable-Healthcare-Act/

Those participating in exchanges (and otherwise) now have a federal mandate on loss ratio, which already existed in state legislation. There will have to be claim costs paid.

Those who use the exchanges, for the most part, will be the ones who are not well to begin with. The cost to the federal and state governments will be enormous. Healthy people may select to just pay the penalty and not get insurance.

PPACA was a typical one-size-fits-all government program that does not consider unintended consequences and therefore, like most all government programs, will be an utter failure.

Anyone that would do "recreational surgery" has psychiatric issues that need to be addressed. You are aware that money is not the only painful thing about surgery, right?

Rev is absolutely correct, like RomneyCare here in MA, ObamaCare is not going to accomplish much. It still leaves Americans at the mercy of commercial insurers and does more to discourage accessing medical services than anything else. In short, it is insurance you must buy but can't use!

Rev is absolutely correct, like RomneyCare here in MA, ObamaCare is not going to accomplish much.

I disagree. I too live in Massachusetts, and find that in the six years since RomneyCare became law, 1) virtually everyone has coverage (98%), 2) the rate of increase in healthcare costs is slowing measurably, and 3) 90% of doctors in Massachusetts say that the quality of care is improving.

I've always had insurance anyway, as everyone should. Not to carry health insurance is simply irresponsible - equivalent to being a deadbeat. I just had an annual physical, as did my wife. Both were free. No co-pay, no nothing. That does not discourage accessing medical services - to the contrary.

Well, here in Oklahoma, the reddest and most backward (politically) state in the nation, opted not to create any healthcare exchanges. NAAAAAH, we're not gonna need'em 'cause Mitt will win and immediately, day one, do away with Obamacare. No problem.

What?.........Mitt didn't win?.........Boehner says Obamacare is the law of the land?......uh oh.

What a bunch of maroons. (To quote Bugs Bunny)

But the idiotic philosophy underlying ObamaCare & RomneyCare is that unless people suffer financially to obtain healthcare they will have recreational surgery and chemotherapy.

Recreational surgery? You've got to be joking! And you're saying that chemotherapy shouldn't be covered?

For all those complainers, we could switch to single payer.......it would be more efficient.

We already pay for all the health care costs in the whole of this country. We do not have injured people lying around in the streets. Are we poorer than most of the industrial nations? This A.C.A. is weak because it was the only way that our P.O.T.U.S. could get it passed. There will be many amendments in the years to come but I am sure that we will finally have a Health Care Act that is as good as the best instead of the most expensive yet nowhere as good or as cheap as other countries.

@ tim - but MA also has the highest cost for insurance in the United States. Now we are going to do this to the entire country.

I'll be waiting for the "Single Payer" option, sort of a Medicare for all - NOT free - but allowing me to flush the money-grubbing HMO we have now.

but MA also has the highest cost for insurance in the United States. Now we are going to do this to the entire country.

From what I've seen (i.e. a Boston Globe article), this was the case about three years ago (2009) but not anymore. According to the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Alaska, D.C., Delaware and New Hampshire were all higher as of last year. Depending on how you choose to look at the numbers (single vs. family, coverage types, etc), several other states would also be considered higher.

Now that the election is over and our family knows what we are facing, here is our likely scenario:

My spouse is a small business owner and 3 time cancer survivor who will not take on any more business or expand and hire any help.

I work in healthcare, and I will either work part time or quit. Frankly, I don't want to deal with even more of the garbage this will bring about that already comes with Medicare.

We fought hard against this law for these and many other reasons, but since there is no going back now, we (mid 30's early 40's) will basically retire early. We worked our hind ends off to get to a comfortable position, and although we wanted to do more, here we will stay.

So Obamacare can chalk up at least one less healthcare worker and one small business that won't be hiring! We will most likely get a cheaper plan for me and the kids and pay the penalty on my spouse. We can just enroll when the next tumor shows up, saving us a boatload in premiums! Except for a small amount left on our mortgage and some school loans, we are debt free and simply have to keep our income below about, what, $90,000/year if we want premium assistance if/when another tumor appears?

Thank you President Obama and the taxpayers who voted for this nonsense! Now we can relax and spend more time with our kids! All we have to do is cover our monthly expenses and sock money away month after month in case we need to pay cash to see someone quickly when all the other doctors are backlogged with this mess. We will simply seek one out who refuses to accept the low reimbursement rates that are sure to come, pay them to get us set up for tests and treatments, then enroll to have those costs covered. Yay for us! :)

Sorry to those who, like us, were against ACA because you will be paying for expensive future tests and treatments, but I tried to warn people and they didn't listen! Now we are simply doing what makes good financial sense for us...

Toughcrowd - That may be one of the dumbest posts I have ever had the misfortune of reading. First off, what does your wife having cancer 3 times have to do with her business decisions? You know, she can actually get insurance now that pre-existing conditions discrimination is no longer legal. Additionally, how stupid can one be to stop working and stop a business because of a health care reform? Nobody believes your lunatic rantings so stop with this silly ruse.

toughcrowd.

OMG, are you seriously that clueless, you are whining about the hardships of retiring before 40 with kids ?

Your post is exactly the problem, well off idiots whining about how they are getting shafted, when in fact, you woes could be so easily cured, you know, by getting one of those things most adults have, a J.O.B. Does it matter to you, in the least, that maybe that 45 year old woman with a teenager who works two jobs so her family can eat might actually reap some benefits, or is everything about you and the struggles you and your wife are having with pre-40's retirement. I fear at the though of what happened to you to make you that oblivious to the flight of your fellow countrymen/women.

And for everyone else, remember this mess, was entirely because republicans would not hear of extending Medicare to everyone. It was simple, cost effective, and would have covered every single soul in the country. They fought everything tooth and nail, and now we have this grand compromise. The worse part of all of it, the republicans ensured it was a mess by slicing and dicing it every way humanly possible, and now they have the gull to whine about how screwed up it is.

Trust me, this is not what any democrat wanted, but we took what we could. Not the best, but it's a start, and it's going to morph and evolve until it serves the ultimate purpose, to ensure all Americans. Everyone keeps acting like a snap of the fingers is all it will take. Like our government, they started out with what they had, not perfect, but they worked on it, and as much as R's whine about the government, we all now it doesn't get any better then the good ole USA.

Same for me. Will not be hiring anymore staff. Satisfied at the current level (3 people) and will raise prices when workload increases, to make same money and reduce workload at same time. There simply is no incentive to grow a business anymore but many disincentives.

My wife, a two time cancer survivor, took a 60% pay cut when her old employer moved to another state (trolling after Govt incentives) and I have a cronic disease, so the group plan at her new work is the only way we could afford coverage as we're too 'rich' for Obama to care about us even though I spend over $8K a year just for one medicine after that insurance.

Wonder how the average worker will react when they see how much their employers pay for their insurance (mandated by Obamacare by 2014). When that number shows on the W2's everyone knows what will be next..... it will become the next target to be taxed.

What a disaster this "I want a freebee" society has become.

1) virtually everyone has coverage (98%), 2) the rate of increase in healthcare costs is slowing measurably, and 3) 90% of doctors in Massachusetts say that the quality of care is improving.

Tim, healthcare and health insurance are completely different things. The connector has been approving very high deductible & copay plans designed for the low wage retail sector. The deductibles and co-pays are so that people in this group will suffer severe financial hardship accessing healthcare. Essentially they are insured in the eyes of the state but still cant afford healthcare. The difference between health insurance is reason why medical bankruptcy is still a problem: http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2012/09/09/medical-debt-massachusetts-persists-despite-health-law/mAIqhFsnbAtdtojrRsdqjI/story.html

The slowing of healthcare cost increases has many causes including the current depression.

I don't know how many doctors you know. I do know MANY. I doubt any of them would say quality has improved. To be honest the "quality" indicators are pretty much garbage. They are extremely limited, easy to game with information systems and they may actually have the opposite effect.

Sorry Tim but I have spent most of the last 30 years working in MA hospitals and see RomneyCare from the inside. The truth of the matter is that you cant provide universal healthcare through the commercial insurance market. Single payer is the only way to do it.

Goodtimesbadtimes & ScottW714,

Why is that stupid and clueless?

What does having cancer 3 times have to do with business decisions?!? How about why work ourselves to death (maybe literally) when we have given it our all for at least the last decade PLUS years upon years of schooling and loans only to be slapped in the face for our sacrifices and hard work?

All we plan on doing is using ACA to our benefit as so many others will, so why not? We didn't write that law! Instead, we have worked hard, made WISE decisions, and because of that, we are in a place to do what we wish, so what's it to you?!? By the way...we are not "well off" for any other reason than we put off instant gratification for a VERY long time as we looked ahead to the future for the bigger long term payoff. Now there is no payoff/incentive for us, so why keep torturing ourselves?

I think you both are just angry because we figured out how to turn this mess around to work to our advantage! Again, wise decisions, hard work, determination, grit, and using our brains to problem solve...it's exactly how we got to where we are now in the first place!

Don't hate the players, hate the game! LOL!!!

Typical teabagger sh!t. The constitution is the absolute rule, unless they disagree. People with peanut butter where their brains ought to be.

Then defend the borders, remove the illegal immigrants and ask Obama to stop circumventing the Constitution.

Typical liberal only certain laws need to be followed right?

Here is a thought genius. Every citizen in America will have to prove they have health insurance, but not every person in America has to prove they are a citizen.

So those taxpaying citizens and business's will be paying for people who get to prove their citizenship with a electric bill, or library card. Stupid is as stupid does. What was the no.1 thing facing the nation at the time? It was not healthcare I can tell you that.

As for healthcare it would be great if everyone had it, utopia. But just how does placing 20 - 30 million more people on insurance lower the cost of healthcare? It doesn't, no where in the ACA does it control the cost of healthcare it just provides insurance and you honestly believe that you will not have to pay anything or next to nothing? Naive... if they cannot afford insurance and get it free how are they going to afford the co-pays?

As for toughcrowd, I agree with that decision and yes it is all about them and their families. Having compassion is one thing and every deserves a little compassion and everyone deserves a little help. But I decide who and what I agree with helping not anyone else.

Example the lost state of California is voting on whether they are going to pay for transsexual operations for those people confused as to why they were born a boy when they feel like a girl, something I would never support and would not want my tax dollars going for under a variety of reasons let alone religion. That being stated I would never visit nor plan to go to California as it is a complete failure in my opinion. The amusing part of that statement is that some clown will chastise me for it, thinking that I really care what they think. Amusing to say the least.

Happy times

You seem to want a Bloomingdales product at a walmart price. Your parents should have taught you that you get what you pay for.

I'll agree that an HMO is unlikely to be that great, they is why my wife and I always paid a little extra to be on the PPO.

I'll agree that an HMO is unlikely to be that great, they is why my wife and I always paid a little extra to be on the PPO.

I would have to agree to that too. It was also the reason I enrolled in a health savings account.

HMO has gate keepers to keep costs down.

Restrictions play a part in your costs.

Sage, there is more to chemotherapy than cancer. The dominant use today is for cancer. I was thinking he may be talking about experimental chemotherapy drugs.

Under PPACA, clinical trials now must be paid by health plans. You will see an increase in the amount of experimental treatments.

Sorry I was being sarcastic. Built into both RomneyCare is the idea that unless you suffer financially you will overuse health care services.I have seen few patients who overuse services because they don't cost enough money. The opposite is much more common. Patients avoid accessing healthcare because of the cost. In reality it is the healthcare provider that orders the care not the patient. Though the ACA does cover some preventive care the list is by no means exhaustive. Currently there is a big push against the use of diagnostic imaging and making people pay very high co-pays for it. This means people will still avoid seeking care when necessary because of the cost which will lead to a later diagnosis.

Most Republicans governors in the US are angling for ways to take that federal handout and use it for everything but healthcare if they can just figure a way to do that without making it obvious.

No matter what any naysayers whines about...Figure it out for yourselves...if these poor people can't pay for their own healthcare and their states refuse to raise taxes on their wealthiest instead of handing the 1% landfills of tax cuts and subsidies for their corporations, the rest of us end up paying for our healthcare insurance and theirs. Sorry, that game no longer flies and this is what really has Republicans in an uproar...since Reagan...they've been dumping their red states healthcare costs on the federal government all while they illogical bitch about a deficit while they help themselves to federal revenues.

This is what has been wrong in these backward states for too many decades. They use their state taxes for everything but their taxpayers needs and then beg, borrow and go on the dole for federal tax funding. Don't believe it? Go to the government website and see which states have the highest numbers on welfare and collecting SSDI. Then take a good, hard look at the ROI they get for the federal taxes they pay...it's nearly double the $1 they are paying.

What's not to understand. Obamacare isn't a national health care plan, it's health insurance reform that has given the "for profit" health insurance companies the power to levy a tax on you.

The White House has already stated that over 33 million American will be excluded from getting any health benefits and its expecting to raise over $7 billion in penalties from people who don't buy the insurance.

Health care, your kidding right?

Maybe, but this is just talking about a website, nothing more as far as I can see. Why don't they just put the state name at the top of the einsurance site. I'm sure einsurance would be more than happy to do it!

what happened...Not true...The federal government passed healthcare reform that has been on the table for nearly 3 decades. The only reason it didn't pass before was because the Republicans in red states knew for certain it would mean no more federal handouts to their states for healthcare.

If your state can't provide adequate healthcare for the poor, there's a serious reason and why should I or anyone else who already pays huge costs for our healthcare insurance pay for those in your state who use emergency rooms like they are a doctor's office?

That's really what all the BS from states likes yours is about. People who have gotten off scott free for years from paying for their own healthcare and then have the gall to tell the rest of us "you're on your own?" When more than 35% of our incomes pay for healthcare that includes yours?

Ewent

What is health care reform? Its people receiving health care services based on their ability to pay. What is Obamacare? Its a mandates that you buy an insurance policy from a "for profit" health insurance company regardless of your ability to pay?

The next time you need the services of a health care provider drive to your health Insurance office for the services you need and tell me they will provide them for you at that office. How frigging stupid are you people? All health insurance companies do is make a profit from processing paper work about how much your health care needs cost. That's all they do.

So Obama claims that if you can't pay, the government will buy or supplement the cost of the insurance policy for you.

Well, our national debt is almost $17 trillion and growing. You people are so gullible its pathetic.

I think this is a good thing. Obama was not given a mandate he was given a second chance and you only get second chances if people believe that your first chance failed. There is a huge difference. If Obama succeeds then great. I admit I am wrong and we all move along. If I am right then American suffers for 4 years and Liberals lose big in 2016 because their faith will be shown to have been misplaced and abused.

How can this be a good thing? The Obama administration is projectig that when Obama leaves office, our national debt will be over $24 trillion.

Candlewycke.

Mandate or not, the previous passed legislation is still being implimented. The only way it was going to stop for certain was for at least weak republican majorities and a republican on libertarian president.

Here's what my family faces. I start paying this month 30% more for my health insurance. Last month my wife's increased 9% only because the employer changed the prescription drug section so they now have less coverage and pay double the Co-pay.

Because I became unemployed 3 years ago, I had to change my health insurance to an HSA and take the $10,000 deductible. Currently I work underemployed and with my wifes wages we appear to be making about $50,000 - $55,000 combined. I expect this to be too high for a family of 4 to qualify for any help on health insurance, and is already too high for almost all government programs including foodstamps, energy programs. When 2014 comes in, the highest deductible will be $5,000. That will be a minimum of another 30% increase in my health insurance before considering the addition of mandated mental health and a couple other of coverages.

Which states will get on the exchange bandwagon in wake of
the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on PPACA? http://www.healthcaretownhall.com/?p=5658

DB

50-55k falls below 4 times the federal poverty level . You can get a sbsidy of up to 6000.00

People earning up to four times the federal poverty level can get a subsidy: that’s an income of $92,000 a year for a family of four.

Rick

You and others don't get it. I don't want government help, I don't want other people to pay for me and my family. That is MY responsibilty, Not yours, not the Government.

IF the GOVERNMENT WASNT MEDDLING IN EVERYTHING AND FOULING IT ALL UP, I and my family would be making more that twice what I listed and I wouldn't be on here talking about it!

I think I'd better get a blood pressure pill before I have a stroke!

DBAkron...Your opinion is that of most Americans until you look at how HMOs have been plundering our healthcare system to fatten their wealth. HMOs are not "driving down the cost of healthcare by increasing competition" as they claimed from the start. That competition is double talk for HMOs competing with each other to see which HMOs CEO can earn the highest salaries. All while they jack the cost of healthcare we pay for that is now so unaffordable, it's the world's most costly.

Was it really necessary for 7 TX HMOs to bilk Medicare out of $350 million since 2006 right under the nose of a former TX governor in the White House? Was it really necessary for Prudential's HMOs to play high risk investment games and then when their real estate investments went sour, jack their premium rates and copay and deny claims and drop policies?

Sorry but the Plundering of the Too Prosperous is over. When you've got HMO mentalities who think 80% of premium payments are "profits" and then spend that and demand taxpayer help to keep them afloat...that little charade is over.

DB Akron...Why are you complaining about a $5,000 deductible in 2014? My Aetna hospital deductible alone is $5,000 and has been since 2005. My copays for the PCP is $30 and for any specialists $50. I don't use Aetna's prescription drug plan because the copay is $40 for generic drugs, all since the employer changed to Aetna is 2005 to keep his bottom line and reduce my salary.

So you can't blame the ACA for the increases in your healthcare costs...You can lay the blame squarely on the plunderers of HMOs none of whom pay their CEOs less than tens of millions a year. And, that doesn't count bonuses and perks.

Here's proof that Obama is not the cause of Big Insurance extortion...I'll give you all 1 week to come back and post how many times you heard in pitches from insurance of any kind in the media...how many insurance leaflets, brochures and inserts you see in your daily newspapers and your junk mail.

By the end of one week, I was able to put the number of times at more than 30. This was for health insurance, Medicare insurance (since I'm working and Medicare eligible and choose not to lose my employer healthcare benefits, I'm inundated with Medicare insurance mail, emails etc.) dental insurance, pet insurance, radon and carbon monoxide insurance, auto insurance (at least 10 of these every other day)...and what precisely do we deduce from this glut of Big Insurance advertising?

How about Big Insurance in the US is willing to sell policies they never expect to make payment on claims and change terms of the policies to suit their ability to avoid paying claims...Wouldn't it just be easier to have a single Big Insurance and hand them our paychecks? That IS what they are really all after. Pay as few claims as they can, hope that people die before they ever file a claim and then take all those premiums they receive every month and use it for high risk investment and to jack HMO CEO paychecks.

Have you frigging people lost your minds. The government was going to shut down twice in fourteen months August 2, 2011, October 1, 2012 and is facing a possible shut down on March 1, 2013 because of Obama's debt crisis that has our national debt at over $16 trillion.

Where in the hell is the government going to get the money to pay for all these health insurance you claim the government is going to be paying for or supplementing?

Its been reported that over 50% of all tax payers pay no income taxes so does that mean that Obama is going to just print more money or borrow money from China to pay for all those Obamacare benefit?

Our government can't support itself now without borrowing money from foreign nations and you people really believe that Obamacare is going work. Oh my, have you educated yourselves into stupid.

Ewent

How many Federal, State, Country health care programs are you paying taxes for? Medcare, welfare, dependents of active and retired military, Federal employees, Congress, verterns. That's only a few of the many. There all kinds of health care programs at the State and Country levels.

Come 2014 you'll be adding both the Obamacare taxes on top of all the others. We only need one national health care program in this country. One that is based on a persons ability to pay. One tax for one program. That's what a real national health care program is!

How stupid are you people?

Ewent

How many Federal, State, Country health care programs are you paying taxes for? Medcare, Medicad, dependents of active and retired military, Federal employees, Congress, veterans. That's only a few of the many. There all kinds of health care programs at the State and Country levels.

Come 2014 you'll be adding both the Obamacare taxes on top of all the others. We only need one national health care program in this country. One that is based on a persons ability to pay. One tax for one program. That's what a real national health care program is!

How stupid are you people?

Pretty good idea huh? Divide the country up amongst the Blue and the Red leaning states. You get socialism and the debt and the higher taxes at some point to pay for it all. We get relieved from the insanity of the Democrats and their free spedning socialist ways. I guess you haven't paid much attention to how well all the borrowing has affected Greece, Italy, and quite a few other countries. The piper will come to collect at some point. Guess who has the oil reserves and refineries. Yeah YOUR cost of living just want WAY up. Enjoy going bankrupt like the cities in California who gave away more than they took in. The fiscal cliff looms large. OH, and hope you don't live in a state where they have taken your gun rights away. If you want your military bases back come take them. The land still belongs to US!!! HaHaHa...

Brenda if all the Red States left the Union, who would pay for your Free ****???

Answer: NO ONE.

That is the great thing about STATES RIGHTS, they can opt-out of the shell-game healthcare game.

By looking at the election maps by county, the majority of the country would be red and the libs could all move to California since it is already run like the libs want the country to be.

Well leather since it's the red states that suck the government teat I suspect if the all the red state moochers left the union the rest of us would be much better off. Thanks for pointing that out.

shellie you are truely stupid, you might want to see how many blue states are freakin broke!

The southern red states are all "poor" - and they are the stupid ones. SC, MS, AL, WVA, LA - crap states that get big Fed subsidies - and I'd love for them to break off on their own - we shoulda let them the first time. Of course, they'd have begged to come back.

Those red states that get big fed subsidies (no such thing, by the way), where is the money spent? Is it in the "red" counties or the "blue" cities?

Why are blue states broke? It's the blue states supporting red states...I'll prove it. My state NJ gets 61 cents for every dollar it pays to the Fed. NY gets 67, CT get 64 ...Alaska gets $1.72, Texas $1.47 and that doesn't count the $12 billion in tax subsidies the House voted to give to Big Oil this year alone. MS, TN, AL, KY, GA, NC, SC...all get more than the $1 they pay in federal tax return to their states.

So...don't ask why blue states are broke. We are fed up supporting red states and we plan to do all we can to insure that federal funds are doled out equitably to all states...not just those who fly the Stars and Bars and whistle Dixie.

Candlewycke: I don't know where the **** you got the 40 dollars per check to get insurance or not from.

Try around $150.00 to $300.00 Per check to get the mandatory insurance and that is going to be the cheap plan that does not cover **** and has a highest deductable.

Leatherneck, the $40 is based on being subsidized by government (tax payers)...not what you would pay through your employer.

yep leatherneck BOOKEM is right. A lot of people will get that 6000.00 a year subsidy for being under 4 times the federal poverty limit. Not sure where the money will come from, oh yeah from me,lol

Rick, it will be graduated 0 - 6000 as determined by a board. Once you lose a dependent like I will in the next couple of years is 92,000 dropps to 69,000. If you job situation changes, then you will have to Re-apply for adjustment.

My income is going to vary greatly given the current market. At times I will be eligible, and at times I will not eligible. It's a whole lot easier to say I have x bills and budget to that amount than it is to chase government help.

The whole system is the symbol of liberalism. We are so smart we are stupid.

You paid $30 million in tax dollars? Seriously, it was not just tax dollars from Kansas, but every other state too.

Can you explain how money not taken from the federal government by a state is used for to pay for a lobbyist?

Taco, how much do you think it would cost to set the exchange up and then maintain it? Let the Feds administer there own crap.

Book'em: the feds gave each state $30M to build their own Exchange. When our Governor sent it back they then gave it to a lobby group to setup the exchange for Kansas. The lobby group actually created a new department betting that some of the dumber Governors would do what Brownback did. They have, and and this lobby group is all over this money. The sad thing is that our Insurance Commissioner did a lot of pre-work on this Kansas exchange and we had a beautiful system setup until Brownback did his Republican thing. Whatever, its just that I like it when my tax dollars come back to the state of Kansas. I love Kansas.

ozzie not much actually... it can be digitally run for extremely cheap.. Thats how you do it with federal employees. Its actually amazingly cheap. And the insurance company choices and all the plans within those companies are available to you. You know those awesome plans everyone complains about federal employees having and not them? Well guess what, now you get them too. And you get the buying power of your entire state or even nation depending on the particular plan you get. Not just the buying power of your company. Youll save a buttload, plus have amazing healthcare for once. For a single individual, its about 30 bucks every 2 weeks to 60 bucks every 2 weeks depending on what plan you want. Family youll pay about 300 a month for the top, or for the savings account types, 100-200 depending, and its deducted from your taxed part of your income, so youll barely see any of that come from the actual take home pay part of your paycheck. Its actually really fancy, and really cheap, and on top of that even tax deductable from there.

Eddie...thanks for your post...Yeesh...For more than 15 years, I've paid far more than $30 a week on a single income for my healthcare insurance costs through an employer. So the ACA is going to be a nice tidy savings over the past costs of my healthcare insurance.

ewent

You are so uninformed, you are going to be in for the surprise of a life time. Don't forget that your death councling is free.

Brenda-1255880

Is that like when John Kerry voted for it before he voted against it?

Your post makes absolutely NO sense at all. Do you work for MSN or NBC? Did you READ your post before you hit the post comment icon?

She works in a law office, of only four (small business, doesn't have to participate) and the lawyers can't cough up enough to pay 50% of their employee's insurance?!?! Shame on those bogarts!

Not ALL lawers are successful Jan....

We don't do high dollar criminal law or personal injury law. Just a small town attorney who does estate and disability planning and probate estates, working mostly with the elder population. :) I can understand why they don't provide insurance, they do provide a fully paid retirement plan, which is much more than most small businesses do. However, with my pre-existing conditions, I just want to be able to purchase a plan myself when my husband retires for the 11 or so years until I am old enough for Medicare.

Brenda ...that's been the problem for years with small business owners...NJ hands them $5,000 tax cuts for every employee they hire and retain for more than 24 months...this doesn't count the multitude of state tax cuts and other breaks they get that reduce their corporate taxes to less than the average income tax their employees are paying.

Then, you get doctors, dentists, lawyers, accountants who pay crap salaries, offer no benefits for healthcare or retirement and then run to the state and federal government for all of the possible tax breaks they can get. They lie when they say they can't afford healthcare. They can't afford it because they are following the examples of the Enron bois...plunder their businesses to fatten their bank accounts and then cry poor mouth for handouts from taxpayers they are already stiffing as employees and consumers.

Obviously, states with strict voter ID laws are going to vote Republican, because they're red states, and this is how Republicans sought (unsuccessfully) to prevent dark-skinned people from voting. You're confusing cause and effect.

Dave Harris, do you have a instance which a PHOTO ID was shown by a "dark-skinned" person that MATCHED the photo ID and then DENIED the vote? I was denied as a mixed race person. Rather, Dems do NOT want FULL PHOTO ID Laws, then makes it too difficult to vote mulitple times, under pet names or other names, vote under dead people names. The FULL PHOTO ID Law to board an airplane does not deny "dark-skinned" people from boarding, saw plenty darker than me. The FULL PHOTO ID LAW to attend the DNC Convention or an Indoor Obama Campaign did NOT deny "dark-skinned" people from attenting. Nor will a FULL Photo ID Law prevent Legal "Dark-Skinned" people from voting. Those against the full Photo ID Law to vote just dont want One vote per One Voter.

Note:

In Virginia, a representative's son was videoed teaching how to alter a utility bill to pass as a voter identification.

Yep, DB, another example of a state (VA) that does NOT have a full Photo ID Law to Vote and how much easier fraud can be committed. Obama won this state but not a single state with FULL Photo ID Law in place on Election Day.

I also noticed that the Republicans won the entire Confederacy.

Dave Harris, typical "liberal" left wingnut response to EVERYONE that disagrees with Obama, or "minorities" in general. Just cry racism. Ho-hum. Boring.

"I also noticed that the Republicans won the entire Confederacy."

And black people only vote when there's a black candidate. What's your point?

Wayne-721139

Check your history. Richmond VA was the Capitol of the Confederacy and Virginia voted for Obama.

Just sayin.

And your point is??

Wayne is still fighting the Civil War on the VERY week when thousands from those "Condederate" states are helping out for relief in Hurricane Sandy Clean up and restoring power in NY, NJ and many other "northern" states. Wayne hatred of those who just happen to be south of the Mason Dixon Line shows he is in the wrong century. Wayne has a lot to learn of the great southern hospitality rather than him being stuck in his mentality to "vote for revenge". It is people like Wayne that does NOT want a full Photo ID Law to vote, or else how can he vote mulitple times under several names?

Kurt, from "real america" showing everyone how hes not a fake american like him. No one is right but "real americans" just ask "real americans"

The Reality is that there are now 30 Republican Govenors or Governors elect, the most ever of EITHER Party to have so many Governors of one Party.

Because democrat governors have to tow the line, and I would guess are not too bright. Anyone who works and has a brain knows there is no benefit to "working with the feds". The only thing the feds offer to anyone actually working for a living and paying taxes is a bigger ream job. More taxes, less take home pay, fewer freedoms. I could go on forever, but you should get the point.

The Republicans are already backpedaling on the health care law and immigration law. They saw that 10% of the vote for Obama was Hispanic and said damn we need that vote next time. They are doing they same on health care because they want to win the next election. Anyone that really believes that either party has the best interest of the American people at heart is an idiot. All they care about is their own pockets and their own agenda.

Rick,

If the Republicans kick out all the illegals, Obama would not have got that 10 percent...

Brain,

Not every "brown" person you meet is "illegal" most are american citizens.

Lisa,

Brian said nothing off color, just stated that defending the constitutional law of the land might have had a different outcome in the US elections. I tend to agree with Brain.

By the way my wife is a immigrant going through the legal process of becoming a citizen.

I think you should whine more and learn less Pearl. It suits you.

Sooner or later they will get rid of the middle class. That is the goal. Then we have the elite and the poor. Then they will take the free things from the poor also.

She has a valid opinion, Shellie. This is how things appear to thousands, or MILLIONS, of American citizens. If she's wrong why don't you explain how? Or can you?

Some people are covered by more than one type of insurance.

Medicare & a supplemental policy as an example.

Sounds like typical Joe Biden math to me...

No new taxes on those making less than $250,000. 1767 Townsend act is the blueprint for this kind of taxing. Back door taxing.

What an idiot.

Randy, I only wish the "electorate" would have used half the brain they were born with to actually READ and UNDERSTAND what they were supporting. Instead due to another record breaking turnout of the "young" vote who thought it was more important to be able to stay on their parent's health-care policy and push for our tax dollars to subsidize their party days in college by helping with their student loans, we ADULTS have to be subjected to this embarrassment of legislation which will ultimately spiral this Great Nation into bankruptcy.

I am all for everyone having some type of health-care, and even go so far as to support a clause that stated that a child could stay on parent's policy until out of college. But, 26yrs old?????

BEWARE!! This goes far beyond simple Parisian politics and the buying of votes.

REMEMBER who suggested and instrumental in our current President becoming involved in the political arena. Mr Bill Ayers, you know, one of the founders of the Weather Underground.

For any of you who did not grow up in the days of the Weather Underground (60's & 70's), a quick look up in Wikipedia will show Bill and the group's ideology.

"The thesis of Weatherman theory, as expounded in its founding document, You Don't Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows, was that "the main struggle going on in the world today is between U.S. imperialism and the national liberation struggles against it", based on Lenin's theory of imperialism, first expounded in 1916 in Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. In Weatherman theory "oppressed peoples" are the creators of the wealth of empire, "and it is to them that it belongs." "The goal of revolutionary struggle must be the control and use of this wealth in the interest of the oppressed peoples of the world." "The goal is the destruction of US imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism"

Sound familiar?

By the way, in case anyone is keeping track of campaign promises. Only 2 days in, and the Administration lowered the ceiling for the tax increase to a combined income of $200k from $250

Good luck everyone and God Bless Our Great Nation.

Doctors in Cuba usually have 2nd jobs such as being a Taxi driver, waitstaff, street food vendor ect due to the Gov control of healthcare dictating pay on Doctors. If you see YOUR Doctor as your taxi driver also in about 4 years, do not be surprised.

"Just wait until the government starts dictating how much money a person working in the health care field can make."

I have never, ever heard anyone suggest anything of the sort.

Straw man.

The government will start to dictate what they will pay once they are in charge of paying the bills. They already do this with Medicare.

It's always "just wait". Just wait until Obama takes all our guns. Still waiting. Just wait until this country is Greece. Still waiting. Just wait until we are all in a soup line. Yep, still waiting for that too. Just wait until Obama declares marshall law and calls off the election. Uh....still waiting. Just wait, all the doctors will leave the US if the ACA is passed. Nope, they are still here. Just wait, business will fire all their employees and leave. Nope, that didn't happen either. It's all you teapublicans have. Just wait.

I guess it's like intelligence for the teapublicans, they keep waiting, but it never comes. Oh and hey, how about all those "Romney wins in a landslide" super secret republican polls. LOL yep, still waiting.

Shellie-657180

The signs at my doctors office(s) read:

Surgeon: We regret to inform you that we will no longer be accepting Medicare patients. Current patients with medicare will be referred to other practioners that do accept Medicare. We are sorry for this inconvenience.

General family: We regret to inform you that we will no longer be accepting Medicare patients. Current patients with medicare will be referred to other practioners that do accept Medicare. We are sorry for this inconvenience.

The verbiage is admittedly not exact, but they are posted with generally similar notices. The reasons for this according to the office personnel is that Medicare reimburesments do not even cover the coasts associated with the service any longer. Obamacare will only exacerbate this issue.

I would make coments about your other theories, but you're obviously not just drinking the kool-aide, you're swimming in it.

There is socialized healthcare in the UK. Doctors are still rich. Believe me, it's where I'm from. The Dr I went to had a frickin' Porsche. Hardly something you'd buy if you weren't paid enough and had to work a 2nd job.

Idiots.

Wayne,

Tracy is correct. With Medicare and Medicaid which are both government health care providers, the Government has a maximum they will pay for "covered" medical services, effectively "dictating how much money a person working in the health care field can make." Ask anyone on Medicare how hard it is to find a doctor willing to accept new patients. This is due to the Government limiting what they will pay, coupled with the fact that they inherently take their time in paying doctors for their services.

Rob80 : "The Dr I went to had a frickin' Porsche. Hardly something you'd buy if you weren't paid enough and had to work a 2nd job" "Idiots"

Before you start the name calling, please go to eBay and you will find a red Posche 928S for a buy it now price of $4500.

If a Porche makes you rich............you have no conception of wealth.

BTW who looks like the "idiot" now???

Viet Vet - you do, because it was brand new! Ask anyone from the UK whether doctors are paid well. They are. They work damned hard and they deserve it, but they ARE paid well.

My wife used to work at a doctors office. he loved medicare patients because he got more from them.

"...all the excemptions [sic] for the DEMOCRATIC supporters"

Huh? What exemptions. Please list them.

He is referring to the waivers the unions got.

1.Done behind closed doors . Translation, I was too stupid to turn on C-Span and watch them there as they were happening for OVER A YEAR or, I'm too stupid to know C-Span exists for all to watch. Instead I listened to Hannity.

2. Republicans were shut out. Again, I'm too stupid to know the whole thing was a REPUBLICAN idea that came directly from the Heritage foundation and implemented in MA by Gov. Mitt Romney. I'm also too stupid to know about all the amendments republicans added to it.

3. Trust me attitude of Nancy Polosie. I'm apparently too stupid to spell as well.

4. Didn't get to see the bill until just before it was voted on. Again, too stupid to know it was online for the world to see the ENTIRE time it was being worked on. Can't spell, probably can't read either.

5. Wasn't bi-partisan at all. Again, republican idea. Still stupid.

6. Exemptions for democratic supporters. Back to being too stupid to read.

7. Good for everyone. Yes, on this you are correct.

8. Hidden cost of the plan. Well again, it all boils down to being too stupid to follow the OPEN C-Span discussions, too stupid to find the bill and too stupid to actually read the bill and too stupid to read the CBO report. And last but not least, years after the fact, apparently still too stupid and know NOTHING about what you are babbling about.

There is no exemptions for Unions. They were granted waivers along with many other companies. The waivers do not exempt these groups from the health care law. They only allow them to continue offering their current health plans with annual limits until 2014.

Where do you get your information from? Also, Congress has to obey the same rules as everyone else.

@uconjak

The republicans had many, many chances to submit amendments, and they did. The problem was that 90% of the amendments were the exact same abortion de-funding amendment....over, and over, and over.

I was unemployed at the time and watched on c-span as republicans spun their wheels doing the same thing over and over.

If they really had been interested they could have offered many different amendments rather than the same one over and over.

Uhmm Shellie...When God asked you if you wanted brains, and you thought God said trains before you were born...Just wondering.. cause I think you did get the trains, since your critical thinking is clouded by the water you drank from the other side...it was rammed down our throats.

20% of all waivers in the USA went to Pelosi's district not state district.

2. Very few if any Republicans got to put in any ideas on the subject. they were basically shut out of the issue.

If they were "shut out", it was because they refused to participate. Their "reform" plan was basically a one page document with vague ideas.

Yep these people who voted for Obama are going to be crying when they get the pink slip, cant find work and still need to get medical coverage.

Just waiting for the majority of Employers to drop there coverages do to it will be cheaper for them and still all there employees will need to get insurance.

Why not just shut it down completely? Oh that's right, you don't really own anything, you're just here spewing BS as usual thinking somehow you will scare someone. Didn't work on election day eg, still not working. Anyone find it curious that those such as eg who got their panties all in a twist with the BS 'you built it" crap are the first one to start the sniveling whining and threaten to "lay off 50%" when they don't get their way. Suddenly all that supposed "risk" and "hard work" means nothing. Just going to shut it all down because you are a sniveling whining ass about to pee your pants because you just can't believe you didn't get your way. LOL Is there anyone who actually believes eg is anything other than another run of the mill sniveling whining teabagger.

And one of us socially moderate Yankee Republicans in the NE will pick up the slack and take away your customers. The Rust Belt is now The Gold Belt with thousands od great paying and solid middle class jobs awaiting those who are productive, not whiners, and can pass a drug test.

You are absolutely right, your reduction is the wave of the future. Apparently, the masses have to live the Unemployment Rate at 40-50% before they will believe. They are going to have that opportunity. There won't be any employees who work more than 29.5 hrs/wk. That is a 25% reduction in pay, not even considering insurance.

Fortunately for you, Egram, there are enough unemployed that you can half the hours and double the work force to accomplish your business plan. I'd do exactly as you.

Large corporations will send more manufacturing overseas.

shellie--My sister and husband have a business and yes it will be done. Full time help to part time, and cancel healthcare and pay the penalty. Good luck dumb ass, put your head back in the sand!

Apparently egram is a poor excuse for a small businessman.

How so Dave? Small business are not started to make jobs they are started to make profit. Sometimes that includes downsizing/restructering.

egram: I think you are just trying to make a point. I own a business and employ 75 people. Does and will obamacare affect me, yes; but not to the point of laying people off. If you already have a health care plan in effect, Obamacare only outlines rules that you must abide by IF you change anything in your plan. Here's the problem, Obama care is going to adversely affect most insurance companies to the point they will have no choice but to force you to make a change in your plan, then you lose the "grandfather" status. That's when it will become miserable. Way too much regulation, red tape, etc...Obama should have initiated tort reform, health care cost and prescription cost before implementing this not very well thought out plan.

Brew,

I agree. Will it be cheaper for you to pay the penalty?...Not that you want to.

Our decision was made on election day - We have already started a plan to downsize our small business by 50%.

Translation: My wife is going to stay home and have babies, now that we can afford the maternity coverage.

I work for a company of over 60 employees (we were less than 1/2 that size three years ago), and we've always provided health insurance for our employees. Why? Because it was the right thing to do. They shouldn't have to worry that illnesses are going to bankrupt them, and we're better off because they don't come into work sick. It is also an important form of compensation that is more cost-effective than a pay raise because a) we don't have pay payroll taxes on the premiums and 2) employees don't have to pay taxes on the value of insurance. If you're a money-grubbing business owner who can't stand the thought of missing out on a single penny of profit and to hell with your employees, I suppose healthcare reform looks like a bad idea to you. But, I think that the rest of the business community will find that it isn't so unbearable after all.

I'm pretty sure they meant: out of those who ARE covered.

Some people have more than one type of coverage.

Example: Medicare and a purchased supplemental plan.