Skip to content

Obamacare: The Obama regime hands out another 200 healthcare waivers

May 14, 2011

  I haven’t written about the multi-million dollar companies and unions which have received healthcare reform waivers since March and since that time the Obama regime has handed out an additional 204 healthcare waivers. This brings the number of healthcare waivers granted by the Obama regime up to 1,372.

  If you are a multi-million dollar company or a union and have high profile lawyers and have applied for a healthcare waiver the chances are that you have been or will be approved for a temporary reprieve from the healthcare reform law. However if you are like me and are nothing more than an average American and cannot afford a high profile lawyer to argue on your behalf you will be beholden to this law and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it. And this double standard is coming from the man and the party who claims to care about the little people. So much for equal protection under the law.

11 Comments leave one →
  1. The Georgia Yankee permalink
    May 14, 2011 8:33 pm

    From the linked article:

    “The waivers are temporary and only apply to one provision of the law, which requires health plans to offer at least $750,000 worth of annual medical benefits before leaving patients to fend for themselves.”

    The way the term “waivers” is bandied about, it implies that these corporate- and union-sponsored healthcare plans are getting a pass from having to comply with any of the new law.

    In fact, it’s a single naqrrow requirement they’re getting a pass on, and that pass is temporary.

    Many of us have worked with benefit plans, and are well aware that some plans have smaller annual spending caps, or lifetime caps of from $1 to $5 million.

    More from the linked article:

    “Administration officials say the law allows the Health and Human Services Department to grant the waivers to avoid disrupting the insurance market before the law overhauls the insurance system in 2014.”

    I’m sure that if even one of these waivers had actually harmed even one average American, it’d be all over the news. I guess that means that in the time since these waivers started, nobody’s been harmed by their insurance plan not carrying the minimum $750k annual cap.

    And if that’s the case, then perhaps all the hollering and ranting about the waivers is just the right wing trying to keep the pot stirred. After all, complacent GOPers and T-Partyers don’t write checks and might not go out to vote . . .

    Take good care and may God bless us all!



    • May 15, 2011 1:37 pm

      My view is slightly different from the “it’s not fair they get waivers” thing. Here’s the obvious problem: if businesses need to get waivers from any aspect of the law, how in the world can anyone argue that the law is a good one?

      How does one need parts of a good law waived?

      And don’t give me that “to smooth the transition” line. Either a law helps, or it doesn’t. The only transition being smoothed is the squeezing out of private health insurance and private healthcare, making room for the future single payer system of care, which will be rationed by the IPAB from the top down.



      • The Georgia Yankee permalink
        May 15, 2011 2:06 pm

        You may not want to hear “smooth the transition,” but the fact that all these waivers are temporary emphasizes just that point.


      • May 16, 2011 1:39 pm

        Dear Mr. Yankee-

        The waivers are temporary in order to “smooth the transition.” M’Kay, that begs the question:

        Smooth the transition to what? Can you tell me what our healthcare system is going to look like under this reform law, at least in basic broad strokes?

        I’ve told you what I think it’ll look like. It may take several years to finish draining many of the insurance companies dry, but it’ll look like a single payer system to everyone but those who can afford the few remaining expensive private packages. It will ration healthcare from the top down, using IPAB.



      • May 16, 2011 6:31 pm

        I agree with Linda on this one; if the law was so good why is there the need for waivers in the first place? The part of the law in question here does not go into effect until 2014 and yet companies need waivers to comply with the law. And are we to assume that when the waivers expire that they can’t be reapplied for and granted in perpetuity?


  2. Gregory Peter DuPont permalink
    May 15, 2011 6:21 am

    Typical for Obama and the rest of the Leviathan Statistics
    “Free for me,but not for thee” seems to be their MONTH…look at all the rabid Anti2A activists and pols who also have CC licensing and /or armed bodyguards(also tax funded)…its the same mindset of all aspiring totalaritarians


    • The Georgia Yankee permalink
      May 15, 2011 11:06 am

      “Free for me but not for thee?” Someone’s getting a free ride on Obamacare? I’m surprised we haven’t gotten an earful from the vigilant. Perhaps you’d care to fill us in?

      I’m sure your comments on the Second Amendment are equally as enlightening, but that’s not the topic here.

      Take good care and may God bless us all!



  3. May 15, 2011 9:42 am

    He does care about the little people, or about their money anyway 😀 The multi million dollar companies already donate plenty of money to Obama and the democrats.

    But I agree, it is frustrating that as individuals we don’t have the power to escape the mandate. Hopefully your state, and my state can be like Maine and apply for health care waivers. But knowing Oregon politicians I kind of doubt it.


    • The Georgia Yankee permalink
      May 15, 2011 11:03 am

      Big companies do contribute money to the Dems, but overall, the corporations and their minions contribute far more to the GOP and its fellow travelers. Remember Citizens United? That was a ruling cheered far more by the right than the left. Of course, in this case, it’s useful to rant against the multi-million dollar companies because it’s useful to the argument.

      The State of Maine is not exempt from Obamacare, nor has it received a waiver from the mandate. It applied for, and received, a temporary waiver, on behalf of the insurance carriers doing business in its state, of the requirement that at least 80% of premium revenues be spent on medical expenses, instead of the current 65%. Maine’s justification was that meeting this requirement would be disruptive of the insurance market in that state. As already stated, this waiver, like every other waiver granted by the Dept. of Health and Human Services, is temporary.

      Apparently some folks just can’t see past the word “waiver” and certainly can’t be bothered to do any research on a topic – that’s what makes them such useful “allies” in this or any other controversy – just holler out a buzzword and watch them line up, regardless of whatever the actuall facts might be.

      It’s also probable that if Maine had applied for the waiver to protect its insurance market and been turned down, the fringe groups would be screaming bloody murder about that. Thus, the administration is, in the eyes of the rightwing, damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t – but isn’t that really the name of the game anyway?

      Take good care and may God bless us all!



  4. Old Marine permalink
    May 16, 2011 7:27 am

    Just one more step in the evolution to single payer healthcare. Make no mistake. The objective is to put the insurance companies out of business and leave everyone to the mercy of the government.
    No doubt some aspects of our health care system need to be addressed but to let the government run it will be disastrous.


  5. May 17, 2011 9:04 am

    And check this out:

    Apparently, being connected or wealthy does indeed help you to acquire a waiver. Hmm.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: