Monthly Archives: December 2013

  • HHS wants insurers to cover people who have a plan in their basket-no payment required

    There is no doubt they’re doing this so they can release supercalifragilisticexpialidocious numbers on enrollment in ObamaCare before the end of the year. Otherwise, the enrollment numbers are abysmal.

    More specifically, the Department of Health and Human Services will now pressure health insurers to retroactively accept payment for coverage that was supposed to begin on January 1, even if no payments have been made and no coverage has been formally granted. Furthermore, HHS wants insurers to pay out-of-network providers as though they were in-network “to ensure continuity of care for acute episodes,” and to pay for refill prescriptions under previous plans.”
    In other words, if you applied for Obamacare, have not been enrolled, have not paid a dime, and get sick on January 1, the Obama administration now wants insurance companies to pay for your care before you ever pay a dime. Furthermore, they want you to get care for which you will not be approved under your insurance plan.

     After I read through the document, it’s clear what they are trying to do. With the extended coverage they are encouraging insurers to provide (i.e: out-of-network benefits, extended drug coverage) they don’t want consumers to realize the full amount of coverage they are actually going to lose in this process. By hiding exactly what doctors or medications are out of reach in these new plans for the first 30 days, and having insurers in the Exchanges can wait to get the money, HHS is buying time. Insurers can wait to inform (by covering them for the first 30-days) consumers that their preferred doctors or life saving drugs are not covered-and consumers will have plans that don’t meet their needs. It delays, until 30-days after the first of the year, the outrage that people will have when the full impact of this legislation begins to hit the masses. I’m sure it is the hope of the Administration that this will spread out the pain out enough that media coverage will not make it look so bad. And, it puts insurers in the position of waiting to receive payment on insurance plans that are most likely covering only the sickest and most needy patients.

    Exit question-Since when is it ok for the government to tell companies you must provide service to consumers even though they’ve made no effort to pay? How about if I start ordering from Amazon with a promise to pay within the next 30-days….how about the government orders that mandate.

  • Ryan-Murray deal will "Social Security" the TSA

    Well if this isn’t a laugh-riot to finish the day. And by “laugh-riot” of course mean, “more stupid shit that just won’t stop.” The Ryan-Murray budget calls for more jingle to be added to the cost of every plane ticket purchased in America so travelers can pay for this stupid travesty of a budget bill:

    Murray and Ryan settled on an agreement that would hit air travelers with a fee of $5.60 per one-way flight — or $11.20 for a round-trip excursion. That’s 60 cents higher than the $5.00 fee the Department of Homeland Security requested, and represents a huge jump up from the current $2.50 minimum security fee.

    To make this super awesome, conservative, small government math work, even though the TSA is massively un-funded-to the tune of some $5 billion-they felt it would be super awesome to pull a “Social Security” on them and put those additional funds in the general fund, rather than actually pay for the already underwater program.

    But the Ryan-Murray deal doesn’t earmark the new revenue for TSA. Instead, the funds will be deposited into the “general fund of the Treasury,” where they are supposed to help partially rollback the sequester and offset the automatic spending cuts set to begin in January.

    I mean TRULY, what screams budget-conscience, smart, fiscal conservative, more than tacking fees on to a behemoth program that isn’t paid for in order to fund other behemoth government programs that aren’t paid for? So if this passes, I’m curious who WILL pay and how exactly will the TSA receive enough funding to continue to operate?

    I guess they could pass a special sock fee to offset costs.

  • A review of why Boehner and Ryan can both suck it.

    From National Review:

    Number ONE on my list: Under the Ryan/Murray package, claimed savings during the BCA period come predominately from fee/revenue increases rather than lower spending.  So, it doesn’t reduce government, but rather enables a larger government. (Otherwise known as “I am SICK. TO.DEATH. of the lies”)
    Here it is all broken down:

    Analysis of the Ryan/Murray Spending Package–It boosts spending right now, a total of $71 billion over the next two years—$63 billion in new discretionary spending, and $8 billion for a 3-month extension of the doc fix.
    –The deficit increases under the Ryan/Murray plan for at least the next 3 years.  Net deficit reduction would not begin until FY2017, after President Obama leaves office.
    –It is not “paid for” over the Budget Control Act (BCA) window of 2014-2021, eroding the $2.1 trillion in spending cuts that were achieved in the BCA in exchange for the $2.1 trillion debt ceiling increase in 2011.
    –Under the Ryan/Murray package, claimed savings during the BCA period come predominately from fee/revenue increases rather than lower spending.  So, it doesn’t reduce government, but rather enables a larger government.
    –About half of the $85 billion in “savings” in Ryan/Murray are achieved in 2022-2023, after the BCA period ends.  Most of those savings are from the continuation of policies not included in the baseline, so are the result of baseline games rather than genuine reforms of bankrupt entitlements.
    –Accounting for interest costs, which are higher near-term because of the new spending endorsed in the Ryan/Murray package, net reduction in the debt is no more than $15 billion in 10 years.  The $23 billion in deficit reduction claimed by Ryan/Murray does not include interest costs.
    –The Ryan/Murray package raids certain Federal trust funds, employing policies that should be used for fixing programs and possible deficit reduction instead for higher spending, like federal retirement contributions changes.
    –This bill reduces retirement benefits for current military members and retirees—who gave 20 or more years of service—but spares current federal civilian employees from any changes to their retirement benefits.
    –It wipes out the need for a budget resolution in 2015, allowing Senate Democrats to again avoid taking hard votes on budget issues on the Senate floor.  And, with all the reserve funds included in the Ryan/Murray package, it allows Harry Reid and Senate Democrats the chance to duck votes on Budget Act points of order against specific bills. 

  • Ryan-Murray deal will "Social Security" the TSA

    Well if this isn’t a laugh-riot to finish the day. And by “laugh-riot” of course mean, “more stupid shit that just won’t stop.” The Ryan-Murray budget calls for more jingle to be added to the cost of every plane ticket purchased in America so travelers can pay for this stupid travesty of a budget bill:

    Murray and Ryan settled on an agreement that would hit air travelers with a fee of $5.60 per one-way flight — or $11.20 for a round-trip excursion. That’s 60 cents higher than the $5.00 fee the Department of Homeland Security requested, and represents a huge jump up from the current $2.50 minimum security fee.

    To make this super awesome, conservative, small government math work, even though the TSA is massively un-funded-to the tune of some $5 billion-they felt it would be super awesome to pull a “Social Security” on them and put those additional funds in the general fund, rather than actually pay for the already underwater program.

    But the Ryan-Murray deal doesn’t earmark the new revenue for TSA. Instead, the funds will be deposited into the “general fund of the Treasury,” where they are supposed to help partially rollback the sequester and offset the automatic spending cuts set to begin in January.

    I mean TRULY, what screams budget-conscience, smart, fiscal conservative, more than tacking fees on to a behemoth program that isn’t paid for in order to fund other behemoth government programs that aren’t paid for? So if this passes, I’m curious who WILL pay and how exactly will the TSA receive enough funding to continue to operate?

    I guess they could pass a special sock fee to offset costs.

  • Rand Paul has it right…

    It is shameful:

    Sen. Rand Paul added his name to the list of lawmakers opposing the bipartisan budget deal carved out between House and Senate negotiators, saying it is “shameful” to restore previously agreed to spending cuts in exchange for promises of future deficit reduction.
    Mr. Paul, Kentucky Republican and likely 2016 presidential contender, said that the two-year spending proposal is like many that have come before it.


    “There is a recurring theme in Washington budget negotiations. It’s ‘I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today,’” Mr. Paul said in a statement. “I think it’s a huge mistake to trade sequester cuts now for the promise of cuts later.” (Emphasized because that is EXACTLY right)

    Read more here.

  • A review of why Boehner and Ryan can both suck it.

    From National Review:

    Number ONE on my list: Under the Ryan/Murray package, claimed savings during the BCA period come predominately from fee/revenue increases rather than lower spending.  So, it doesn’t reduce government, but rather enables a larger government. (Otherwise known as “I am SICK. TO.DEATH. of the lies”)
    Here it is all broken down:

    Analysis of the Ryan/Murray Spending Package–It boosts spending right now, a total of $71 billion over the next two years—$63 billion in new discretionary spending, and $8 billion for a 3-month extension of the doc fix.
    –The deficit increases under the Ryan/Murray plan for at least the next 3 years.  Net deficit reduction would not begin until FY2017, after President Obama leaves office.
    –It is not “paid for” over the Budget Control Act (BCA) window of 2014-2021, eroding the $2.1 trillion in spending cuts that were achieved in the BCA in exchange for the $2.1 trillion debt ceiling increase in 2011.
    –Under the Ryan/Murray package, claimed savings during the BCA period come predominately from fee/revenue increases rather than lower spending.  So, it doesn’t reduce government, but rather enables a larger government.
    –About half of the $85 billion in “savings” in Ryan/Murray are achieved in 2022-2023, after the BCA period ends.  Most of those savings are from the continuation of policies not included in the baseline, so are the result of baseline games rather than genuine reforms of bankrupt entitlements.
    –Accounting for interest costs, which are higher near-term because of the new spending endorsed in the Ryan/Murray package, net reduction in the debt is no more than $15 billion in 10 years.  The $23 billion in deficit reduction claimed by Ryan/Murray does not include interest costs.
    –The Ryan/Murray package raids certain Federal trust funds, employing policies that should be used for fixing programs and possible deficit reduction instead for higher spending, like federal retirement contributions changes.
    –This bill reduces retirement benefits for current military members and retirees—who gave 20 or more years of service—but spares current federal civilian employees from any changes to their retirement benefits.
    –It wipes out the need for a budget resolution in 2015, allowing Senate Democrats to again avoid taking hard votes on budget issues on the Senate floor.  And, with all the reserve funds included in the Ryan/Murray package, it allows Harry Reid and Senate Democrats the chance to duck votes on Budget Act points of order against specific bills. 

  • Rand Paul has it right…

    It is shameful:

    Sen. Rand Paul added his name to the list of lawmakers opposing the bipartisan budget deal carved out between House and Senate negotiators, saying it is “shameful” to restore previously agreed to spending cuts in exchange for promises of future deficit reduction.
    Mr. Paul, Kentucky Republican and likely 2016 presidential contender, said that the two-year spending proposal is like many that have come before it.


    “There is a recurring theme in Washington budget negotiations. It’s ‘I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today,’” Mr. Paul said in a statement. “I think it’s a huge mistake to trade sequester cuts now for the promise of cuts later.” (Emphasized because that is EXACTLY right)

    Read more here.

  • Boehner gets pissy with conservatives….

    John Boehner held a press conference today extolling the virtues of his new budget deal. He’s super proud of the $20 billion saved…..so proud in fact he thinks conservatives should just shut it about how much they don’t like the deal. House Speaker J…

  • Boehner gets pissy with conservatives….

    John Boehner held a press conference today extolling the virtues of his new budget deal. He’s super proud of the $20 billion saved…..so proud in fact he thinks conservatives should just shut it about how much they don’t like the deal. House Speaker J…

Posts navigation