Ed Rogers writes: It’s been a bad week for Obamacare. Incredibly, the
White House has had to grant yet another delay in the employer mandate. This time,
employers with between 50 to 99 employees who don’t already offer health
insurance to their employees have until 2016 to comply with the shifting
Obamacare requirements. This latest delay represents another political
calculation by the White House. They are counting on the fact that the
criticism they will face now for bungling incompetence and disregarding their
own law is less than the criticism they would receive for damaging American
business closer to the elections.
And the fine print of the latest announcement from the
Administration is worse than the terrible headlines. This rule includes a
provision that says you have to have the right motives for having a certain
number of employees to be in compliance with Obamacare. Bear with me, that’s
right:
You must certify to the IRS – under the threat of perjury – that the
reasons for your employee head count have nothing to do with your opposition to
or avoidance of Obamacare. This president doesn’t just selectively enforce the
law as he sees fit; now he is actually inventing new crimes . . . . . . . I can’t wait to see the video of the first
Democrat who tries to defend this new threat of prosecution within
Obamacare. . . . . . . It’s
completely indefensible.
This comes immediately on the heels of another body blow to
Obamacare; specifically,the CBO announced that under Obamacare, the projection of
hours worked will represent “a decline in the number of full-time-equivalent
workers of about 2.0 million in 2017, rising to about 2.5 million in
2024.”
While this statement got all the attention from the press, another stunning revelation in the CBO report is that in the decade after implementation, there will be still be roughly 31 million uninsured Americans under Obamacare. . . . . . . the president can amend the law, ignore the law and now even create new ways to prosecute you if you try to avoid its burdens, and the Democrats all fall in line. . . . . . . If it were nine days instead of nine months before the next election, maybe they could pull it off. But Obamacare is failing in its original purpose of providing insurance for the uninsured, it unnecessarily burdens American families and businesses, and now the White House has opened the door to prosecuting those they deem to be insufficiently committed to Obamacare. When will the nightmare end? . . . . . . . . . . . . Read the full article in the Washington Post, here.
Editor's notes: Understand that Rogers is a Republican writer who has written op-eds for the Post for years. His article would not be allowed onto the pages of the Post, if the editor's of that news source, felt his opinions were both inaccurate and harmful. Indeed, this article appears in the Post, precisely because of its content.
Here is a typical Democrat response, addressed by readers of the Post:
While this statement got all the attention from the press, another stunning revelation in the CBO report is that in the decade after implementation, there will be still be roughly 31 million uninsured Americans under Obamacare. . . . . . . the president can amend the law, ignore the law and now even create new ways to prosecute you if you try to avoid its burdens, and the Democrats all fall in line. . . . . . . If it were nine days instead of nine months before the next election, maybe they could pull it off. But Obamacare is failing in its original purpose of providing insurance for the uninsured, it unnecessarily burdens American families and businesses, and now the White House has opened the door to prosecuting those they deem to be insufficiently committed to Obamacare. When will the nightmare end? . . . . . . . . . . . . Read the full article in the Washington Post, here.
Editor's notes: Understand that Rogers is a Republican writer who has written op-eds for the Post for years. His article would not be allowed onto the pages of the Post, if the editor's of that news source, felt his opinions were both inaccurate and harmful. Indeed, this article appears in the Post, precisely because of its content.
Here is a typical Democrat response, addressed by readers of the Post:
No comments:
Post a Comment