[identity profile] farmerz-agent.livejournal.com posting in [community profile] talkpolitics
I am not a big fan of The Obama Administration not solely because of ideological issues but more so because I feel like there's a lack of positive leadership coming from the top down. Last night as I was trolling Zite I had to tip my hat to This Administration!
The controversial provision that requires companies with more than 50 employees to provide coverage or face fines is being delayed by a year. The rule is now on hold until 2015 - after the 2014 midterm elections.
I feel that this shows leadership more than political posturing. I think The Obama Administration made the right call here. Now employers should give back the hours they've taken from employees!
While the employer mandate was delayed with Tuesday’s announcement, the individual mandate — which requires individuals to obtain health insurance — presumably remains on schedule for 2014.
The individual mandate was challenged — and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that the healthcare law was constitutional since the penalty would be collected by the IRS and amounted to a tax.
Meanwhile, the Obama administration also still plans to open up a new marketplace for government-regulated insurance plans on Oct. 1, to take effect on Jan. 1. And a sprawling set of subsidies would also remain in place.
With more and more people having to get insurance on their own, this will be a great opportunity for insurance companies to earn their business. It will also mean that people will be more involved in their health care instead of allowing a big business to make their decisions for them.
Its good to see an administration that is listening to businesses and their needs. Obama once said " I will not rest until anybody who's looking for a job can find one ". I think this decision shows him more as a man of his word than I gave him credit for originally.

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 15:31 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] enders-shadow.livejournal.com
wondered how long after seeing that headline somebody would post on this.
answer: not long.

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 15:34 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ddstory.livejournal.com
It's not like those super-secret FBI/CIA programs to kill people with sniper fire. Now that is what I call a deeply buried story!

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 16:29 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com
I am not familiar with that particular story. Does it constitute a replacement for extraordinary rendition? The FBI does not need to resort to sniper fire. They can just question someone at home and shoot them under the pretense that the person being questioned attacked them. Sniper fire for the CIA represents a step up from exploding cigars.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] ddstory.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 16:37 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 16:47 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] ddstory.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 20:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com - Date: 8/7/13 15:29 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 15:31 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] luzribeiro.livejournal.com
And I've been waiting to see what those infamous death panels are all about, but they still ain't coming... *sniff*sob*

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 15:46 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] luzribeiro.livejournal.com
Ms Sebelius should rename herself to Captain Obvious.

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 17:46 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com
"death panels" are a fact of life, whether your insurance comes privately or not. You think there aren't faceless bureaucrats at Blue Cross and Blue Shield doing cost benefit analysis on every single transplant before approving or denying it?

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 19:14 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 19:44 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 20:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] gunslnger.livejournal.com - Date: 5/7/13 21:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com - Date: 5/7/13 21:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] gunslnger.livejournal.com - Date: 11/7/13 07:52 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com - Date: 14/7/13 20:24 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 20:02 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] luzribeiro.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 20:08 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

Date: 4/7/13 02:34 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yelena-r0ssini.livejournal.com
And she rejected the first set of lungs and her diaphragm got injured in the operation to put in a second set and chances are we've essentially thrown two perfectly good sets of adult lungs in the trash.

This case is where I'm a giant asshole. And honestly, it's not that I want a kid to die. Especially not from CF. But this whole thing has been bullshit from the get-go. Transplant guidelines are what they are for a reason, and while I'm open to the possibility that maybe this revision may be ultimately beneficial - if the survival rates for under-12 recipients of adult lungs have really improved that much since the guidelines were originally written - it still sickens me the way this case has been framed in the media. There are not enough organs to go around, ever. So transplant guidelines are SUPPOSED to be based on who has the best chance of the most extended lifespan from the transplant. They are not supposed to be based on who's the cutest and most pathetic-looking and has the most media-savvy parents.

Sorry, this rant is tangential to your main post. But it's a thing that grinds my gears.

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 15:40 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mahnmut.livejournal.com
He's totally going to get re-elected for the third term.

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 15:49 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] htpcl.livejournal.com
HA! I saw wat U did dere.

> "obama's uphill battle"

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 18:27 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com
In all seriousness, though, this is more a ploy to try and delay inevitable layoffs and significant benefit changes to try and save the Democrats from losing the Senate.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 20:31 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 16:19 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com
I am not a big fan of The Obama Administration not solely because of ideological issues but more so because I feel like there's a lack of positive leadership

Given that, what administration were you a big fan of?

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 16:38 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] luvdovz.livejournal.com
Does one have to be a "fan" of some administration? Pick a team and root for it no matter what, sort of?

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 19:26 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] fizzyland.livejournal.com
It's more a game of 'Who would do it better?'

This applies to burger joints and politicians. I don't want to discuss cheeseburgers with someone who hates all cheeseburgers but imagines a hypothetical burger they would like.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] yes-justice.livejournal.com - Date: 4/7/13 02:46 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] comeonyouspurs.livejournal.com - Date: 4/7/13 10:20 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

Date: 4/7/13 01:51 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] comeonyouspurs.livejournal.com
I prefer the Morales (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/jul/03/bolivia-president-evo-morales-plane-video) administration. ;)

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 16:30 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com
Anything that helps big business and hurts the little guy must be good.

(no subject)

Date: 3/7/13 16:46 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] sophia-sadek.livejournal.com
When sweatshops close down due to upgrades in work safety regulations, it is not as bad for the employees as one might think.

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 17:01 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 17:48 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 18:00 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 19:12 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] dwer.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 20:06 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] mindstalk.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 18:01 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 18:17 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] mindstalk.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 18:55 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

From: [identity profile] fizzyland.livejournal.com - Date: 3/7/13 19:27 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

Date: 4/7/13 15:08 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] policraticus.livejournal.com
If it can't be implemented in time, if it is going to hurt the economy when it is implemented, then... why not just scrap it?

That would be leadership. This? This is just kicking the can down the road a bit.

(no subject)

Date: 4/7/13 19:53 (UTC)
From: [identity profile] brother-dour.livejournal.com
Never trust anyone who makes more than 5 figures a year

Credits & Style Info

Talk Politics.

A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods

DAILY QUOTE:
"The NATO charter clearly says that any attack on a NATO member shall be treated, by all members, as an attack against all. So that means that, if we attack Greenland, we'll be obligated to go to war against ... ourselves! Gee, that's scary. You really don't want to go to war with the United States. They're insane!"

March 2026

M T W T F S S
       1
2345 678
910 1112 1314 15
1617 1819 202122
2324 2526 272829
3031