Healthcare bill offically creates its first job.

[Skaw]

Just calling it as I see it.

 

[alanon]

Can someone explain what is good about this bill? I'm not really trying to be a contrarian ass, I really want to know. The only decent thing I see is about pre-existing conditions. Even that though (I know this sounds cold), is kinda of like turning down the extended warranty on a car, having the car break and then trying to buy the warranty.....

 

[Thelona]

Can someone explain what is good about this bill? I'm not really trying to be a contrarian ass, I really want to know. The only decent thing I see is about pre-existing conditions. Even that though (I know this sounds cold), is kinda of like turning down the extended warranty on a car, having the car break and then trying to buy the warranty.....

hmm turns out the pre-existing conditions part was a lie as well, that or they just didnt read the bill.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/29/health/policy/29health.html

tho there is ONE good thing in the bill.

found this bit of Comedy Gold

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/13/us/politics/13health.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

It is often said that the new health care law will affect almost every American in some way. And, perhaps fittingly if unintentionally, no one may be more affected than members of Congress themselves.

In a new report, the Congressional Research Service says the law may have significant unintended consequences for the “personal health insurance coverage” of senators, representatives and their staff members.

For example, it says, the law may “remove members of Congress and Congressional staff” from their current coverage, in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, before any alternatives are available.

The confusion raises the inevitable question: If they did not know exactly what they were doing to themselves, did lawmakers who wrote and passed the bill fully grasp the details of how it would influence the lives of other Americans?

The new exchanges do not have to be in operation until 2014. But because of a possible “drafting error,” the report says, Congress did not specify an effective date for the section excluding lawmakers from the existing program.

Under well-established canons of statutory interpretation, the report said, “a law takes effect on the date of its enactment” unless Congress clearly specifies otherwise. And Congress did not specify any other effective date for this part of the health care law. The law was enacted when President Obama signed it three weeks ago.

The provision governing members of Congress can be traced to the Senate Finance Committee. When the panel was working on the legislation last September, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, proposed an amendment to require that elected federal officials and all federal employees buy coverage through an exchange, “rather than using the traditional Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.”

A scaled-back version of the amendment, applying to members of Congress and their aides, was accepted in the committee without objection.

“The whole point is to make sure political leaders live under the laws they pass for everyone else,” Mr. Grassley said Tuesday. “In this case, after the committee completed its work, the coverage provision was redrafted by others, and that’s where mistakes were made.

maybe it IS that they just didn't read it.

Like to give a high five to Sen Grassley for slipping that one threw!