<i>&quot;If a senator voted ... against my amendment,... his or her decision was based on personal interests, and not the public interest.&quot;</i>
Vitter&#039;s more interested in the <i>pubic</i> interest rather than the <i>public</i> interest.
During the incessant debate, Obama made the unfortunate statement that if you liked your current insurance, you could keep it. This was, unfortunately, obviously not true -- if you have employer-subsidized insurance, you <i>can</i> keep it, but only if your employer continues to offer it. This is no different under ACA than it was before -- I had employers who changed carriers, and coverage, every couple of years, in search of savings.
Many employers have been reducing coverage, and in some cases discontinuing it, somewhat aggressively during the Great Recession. Benefits such as subsidized health insurance are an employment inducement. When the unemployment rate is 7 or 8 or 16 or 23 percent (pick your favorite metric), there is less need to offer such inducement.
What&#039;s happening right now is that some employers are using the ACA as an excuse for doing what they were going to do (or were already doing) anyway. The unions&#039; problem is that when employment is so low, they lose leverage in negotiations. That&#039;s not a problem with the ACA, it&#039;s a problem with the country. BTW, they cannot be &quot;put into Obamacare&quot; unless they agree to it in a contract.
There actually is a website. With other videos.
<i>&quot;If a senator voted ... against my amendment,... his or her decision was based on personal interests, and not the public interest.&quot;</i>
Vitter&#039;s more interested in the <i>pubic</i> interest rather than the <i>public</i> interest.
During the incessant debate, Obama made the unfortunate statement that if you liked your current insurance, you could keep it. This was, unfortunately, obviously not true -- if you have employer-subsidized insurance, you <i>can</i> keep it, but only if your employer continues to offer it. This is no different under ACA than it was before -- I had employers who changed carriers, and coverage, every couple of years, in search of savings.
Many employers have been reducing coverage, and in some cases discontinuing it, somewhat aggressively during the Great Recession. Benefits such as subsidized health insurance are an employment inducement. When the unemployment rate is 7 or 8 or 16 or 23 percent (pick your favorite metric), there is less need to offer such inducement.
What&#039;s happening right now is that some employers are using the ACA as an excuse for doing what they were going to do (or were already doing) anyway. The unions&#039; problem is that when employment is so low, they lose leverage in negotiations. That&#039;s not a problem with the ACA, it&#039;s a problem with the country. BTW, they cannot be &quot;put into Obamacare&quot; unless they agree to it in a contract.
don&#039;t forget Ensign, who didn&#039;t quit until charges were about to be brought
oil money and stupid wingnut constituents
now i have to go watch those damned &#039;american horror story&#039; teaser trailers again.
At least we know he could never be elected NYC Comptroller.
Oy, Vitter, blackmail is not bribery you dolt.
He seems to assume that a sex scandal gives him more gravitas then he had before.
I can&#039;t imagine that some prostitutes are paid nearly enough.