Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (766613)	1/29/2014 12:05:32 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574720

Outreach Posted on January 28, 2014 at 5:00 pm by JM Ashby Congressional Republicans have finally unveiled their alternative to Obamacare and guess what; they want to bring back pre-existing conditions including the pre-existing condition of being a woman. This protection, instituted under Obamacare, would vanish under the new Senate GOP plan. “It would be back to, being a woman is a preexisting condition because the ACA prohibits pricing based on gender,” said NWLC Vice President of Health and Reproductive Rights Judy Waxman. “And this plan repeals that and lets insurance companies do it again. … We would be right back to women getting charged more because they’re women, even though there won’t be maternity coverage. Right back to that.” More on pre-existing conditions. The GOP plan would extend that requirement only to people who have had continuous coverage. So, if you lost your job and immediately bought insurance on your own, you’d be protected. If you let your coverage lapse, you’d have to pay more because of your preexisting condition. Among other things, the GOP alternative would tighten Medicaid eligibility, repeal the individual mandate, reduce subsidies, and eliminate free preventive care. The GOP alternative is for everyone to pay higher premiums and higher out-of-pocket costs. Virtually any aspect of Obamacare they have complained about would become worse under their plan. It’s a cruel joke.

To: i-node who wrote (766613)	1/29/2014 12:07:48 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574720

The Next Witch Hunt Posted on January 28, 2014 at 3:30 pm by JM Ashby While the Department of Justice seeks to crack down on financial predators and fraudsters, House Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) seeks to crack down on the Department of Justice. House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Job Creation and Regulatory Affairs Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder on January 8, accusing the Justice Department of “using its civil investigative power” to “inappropriately target two lawful financial services: third-party payment processing and online lending.” The Department of Justice is trying to determine if big banks helped payday loan sharks extract billions of dollars from their customers’ checking accounts. Fortunately for America the Department of Justice doesn’t need Inquisitor Issa’s permission to perform its job. Darrell Issa has come up empty on every investigative witch hunt he has conducted during his time as chairman. This time will be no different because on top of his utter incompetence, the Obama administration is also genuinely clean. It has to be. The president and Attorney General Eric Holder know just as well as you that standards are higher for his administration than previous administrations for unfortunate reasons.

To: i-node who wrote (766613)	1/29/2014 1:27:14 PM
From: bentway	Respond to of 1574720

GOP Response To State Of The Union Missing Key Words: Repeal Obamacare Posted: 01/29/2014 12:12 am EST \| Updated: 01/29/2014 12:59 am EST huffingtonpost.com WASHINGTON -- Rep. Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-Wash.) delivered harsh criticisms of President Barack Obama's health care reform law during the official GOP response to his State of the Union address Tuesday, but stopped short of explicitly demanding its repeal. McMorris-Rodgers highlighted the negative effects of the Affordable Care Act on consumers whose premiums rose, whose previous health insurance policies were canceled because they didn't meet the law's benefit standards and whose physicians aren't covered by the new plans available on Obamacare's health insurance exchanges. But while McMorris-Rodgers declared Obama's reforms a failure, she didn't vow that congressional Republicans would continue their push to repeal the law, for which the GOP-led House has vote dozens of times. "No, we shouldn't go back to the way things were, but this law is not working. Republicans believe health care choices should be yours, not the government's," McMorris-Rodgers said. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) made no mention of Obamacare in the written statement he issued following the speaches by Obama and McMorris-Rodgers. Despite her criticisms, McMorris-Rodgers' remarks reflected the post-Obamacare reality that took root on Jan. 1, when the first wave of Americans gained new benefits and protections from the Affordable Care Act, and many received financial assistance for the first time to help pay for health insurance. Any Republican proposal to repeal the law, or even replace it, would have to account for those consumers or risk a backlash that would rival the ire provoked by the health insurance policy cancelationsthat landed in the mailboxes of millions of Americans last year. In contrast to McMorris-Rodgers, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) made a clear call for undoing the Affordable Care Act in the tea party response to the State of the Union. "When it comes to health care, we know the best way to repeal Obamacare is to deliver better solutions," Lee said. Like McMorris-Rodgers', however, Lee's comments acknowledged that going backward isn't an option. "We can't just return to the old system. Health care policy used to give too much power to insurance companies. Obamacare now gives too much power to the government," Lee said. Republican voters overwhelmingly oppose the Affordable Care Act, polls consistently have shown, and GOP lawmakers remain politically united against the law. But differences persist over how much emphasis to place on health care reform and how hard to fight its implementation. Efforts by tea party-affiliated lawmakers like Lee and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to defund Obamacare led to a government shutdown and pushed the nation to the brink of default last year against the stated wishes of GOP congressional leaders. Republicans have yet to come to consensus on another critical aspect of their anti-Obamacare agenda: Whether to propose a comprehensive health care overhaul of their own. Although individual GOP lawmakers have introduced numerous health care bills over the past five years -- including Sens. Orrin Hatch (Utah), Richard Burr (N.C.) and Tom Coburn (Okla.) this week -- the party hasn't coalesced around an alternative. Obama mocked Republicans in Congress for their relentless attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and challenged them to propose ways to achieve the goals of his law through different means. "I do not expect to convince my Republican friends on the merits of this law, but I know that the American people are not interested in refighting old battles," Obama said. "So again, if you have specific plans to cut costs, cover more people, increase choice -- tell America what you’d do differently. Let’s see if the numbers add up. But let’s not have another 40-something votes to repeal a law that’s already helping millions of Americans." Neither Republican lawmaker who spoke Tuesday offered anything like that, and the plethora of legislative vehicles introduced by GOP lawmakers in recent years would fail that standard. Republicans don't share Obama's aims, and generally oppose spending additional federal dollars to provide health coverage to low-income uninsured people or imposing stringent regulations on health insurance companies that would ban them from rejecting individuals with pre-existing conditions, charging women higher rates than men or covering a proscribed set of benefits, all of which the Affordable Care Act does. The gulf between what the Affordable Care Act seeks to accomplish and what Republicans can support, evidenced by the Hatch-Burr-Coburn proposal, as is a recognition that the status quo has changed and some of Obamacare's reforms can't fully be dialed back. The Senate Republicans' plan would offer some protection for people with pre-existing conditions, but only if they remain continuously insured, so any gap in coverage would subject those individuals to higher rates or outright rejection by health insurance companies. The proposal would provide tax credits to cut the cost of health insurance, but they would be less generous and be available to fewer people than those offered by Obamacare. The Hatch-Burr-Coburn plan also would scale back the full tax deduction for job-based health insurance, which has been in place since World War II, further than Obamacare does, and would reduce funding for Medicaid, the federal-state health program for low-income people, which Obamacare expands.