The Obama administration has delayed the employer mandate contained the Affordable Care Act for one year in order for smaller businesses to have more time to prepare for the changeover. Even though the adolescents on the Right are calling this a "victory" and are vowing to now repeal the law (the 38th time is the charm:)), I think it's a good move.
It demonstrates that the president is sympathetic to the concerns of small business in a time of economic recovery. This was a legitimate beef with the law. How does an employer of 51 people end up covering everyone without causing problems on his or her margin? Now, they have some more time to sort it out. We are also going to be able to see just how many small businesses that are around this size do not offer health care to their employees. That is also a good thing.
Republicans are vowing to use the ACA as a major talking point in 2014. I hope they do. If I were a voter, I'd wonder what else they were doing aside from voting to repeal Obamacare.
8 comments:
Never mind that the law as passed says 12/31/13. No, you love you the rule by decree of your mighty, mighty Obamessiah. If he wants it changed - his word is a command that all must obey!
How does an employer of 51 people end up covering everyone without causing problems on his or her margin? Now, they have some more time to sort it out.
Ahh, yes - more time. That will do what? Delay shuttering the doors or reducing the staff to part time?
Because not being able to afford it today will just 'sort itself out' if given an extension.
And businesses have only had how many years to prepare for this? And this just can't possibly have anything to do with delaying some of the worst immediate effects until after the 2014 elections.
I would like to know under what authority Obama thinks he can unilaterally suspend part of a law that has no provision for him to do so. And if he can do this, then what prevents him from doing this for whatever other law he feels like disregarding? What other laws is the Administration disregarding now, but not announcing that they're doing so? Or lying about it? And what would prevent his replacement from doing the same thing?
"You know things are bad when you can’t even successfully implement your own bad ideas."
— Gov. Bobby Jindal
So you place yourself in the democrats heads and you see compassion and all kinds of other good things. If it was such a good idea there would be no need to delay it. They know what kind of pain this will cause. I remember when Markadelphia used to claim that paying into the program was for the betterment of society. Guess all those folks who probably paid for waivers feel pretty suckered now. HAHA
Those are great questions Larry. Good luck getting an answer - they only talk about The Right.
I don't get it. Why M post this when you must realize it is bad news for your most high hero? Why open yourself up?
Okay, maybe I do get it - you actually like the abuse.
I take comfort in the fact that you guys will focus on all of the bad things that happen with the implementation of this law and none of the good things. How do you think that will look with the voters?
I'm not worried nor am I fazed at all by this latest development. Any sort of implementation of a major law is going to have setbacks.
Of course you don't care that Obama is not conducting his Administration within the confines of the law. You don't care about the law, you love the rule by cult of personality.
Too bad you weren't around to follow Jim Jones.
So Social Security and Medicare had big problems when they were being put into effect, big enough that even with years of preparation, parts had to be delayed by more years? Do tell...
Or perhaps those laws were better thought out and for the most part passed by politicians who had actually read the bills and understood what the fuck it was they were passing, however misguided some parts were? Could that be it?
Post a Comment