Author Topic: Congressional Staffers Complain About Double Standard in Health Care Law  (Read 2311 times)

TechMan

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,562
  • Yes, your moderation has been outsourced.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/25/congressional-staffers-complain-double-standard-health-care-law/

Updated March 25, 2010
Congressional Staffers Complain About Double Standard in Health Care Law

By Jana Winter

 - FOXNews.com

Select congressional leadership staffers -- some of whom wrote the health insurance act -- are not governed by new rules governing millions of Americans and the rest of their colleagues on how they buy insurance -- and the special exemption has the Hill hopping mad.

Come 2014, all 100 U.S. senators, all 435 representatives in the House and every one of their personal aides will have to go to the newly formed state exchanges for health insurance -- just like everyone else in the country who isn't covered by their employer.

But select congressional leadership staffers -- some of whom wrote the health insurance act -- won't. And neither will White House staffers and Cabinet members -- nor the president himself. They will be allowed to keep their current plans, which are offered to all other federal employees.

And now many congressional aides who like their current health insurance policies and will be forced to switch are asking: Why?

They want to know: If an exchange is good enough for them, why isn't it good enough for the people who wrote the plan? Why isn't it good enough for the president and his Cabinet?

Mass e-mails have been circulating among congressional aides on both sides of the aisle as they voice their objections to what they are calling a double standard in the health care law President Obama signed on Tuesday.

"If it's such a good bill, why did the people who wrote the bill exempt themselves from it?" asked a Republican aide who requested anonymity. "With this administration it's always, 'Do as I say, not as I do,' just like paying your taxes!"

"If we're forced on the exchange, then everyone should be," a Democratic staffer said.

"If this health care bill is so great, then why are Obama's staff exempt?" a GOP aide scoffed. "If we have to give up our health care, then so should every federal employee."

Members of Congress and their staffers currently select their health insurance plan from the pool of health care policy options that are available to all federal employees. But under the new law, unlike other federal employees, they will be required to purchase their insurance from the state-run exchanges when that part of the law goes into effect in 2014.

But the provision appears to exclude leadership and committee staff, giving the appearance that those who wrote the bill wrote themselves out of this requirement.

The White House is also exempt from moving from the current federal employee plan to state-run exchanges, although the White House said Wednesday that Obama will participate in the exchanges if he is still president in 2014.

It remains unclear why the law was written this way. Efforts to understand the reasoning behind the carving out of leadership staff from this part of the new law were unsuccessful. Phone and e-mail requests for comment from the committees involved in the drafting of the Senate bill were either directed elsewhere or not returned.

A Congressional Research Service report stated that the definition of the law as it stands now would likely be interpreted as applying only to congressional members' personal staff, and exempting both leadership and committee staff.

The definition of "congressional staff," according to the CRS report, could be interpreted narrowly to refer only to staff members directly affiliated with a member's individual or personal office. As an example, that would mean that staffers who work with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's constituents out of her California office would be classified as "congressional staffers" and have to switch over to the exchanges -- but the staffers who work in association with her role as speaker of the House would be allowed to keep their current policies.

It is still unclear if congressional offices will get subsidies to pay for their employees or if staffers with income below the pay threshold will get subsidies to buy insurance for themselves. Calls to about a dozen different offices yielded the same response: No one seems to know yet exactly how to interpret the law.

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid acknowledged that some committee staffers are exempt, but said leadership staff will have to buy into the exchanges like other Capitol Hill employees.

But Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said he believes the current wording means that committee and leadership staff in Congress, as well as the president, vice president, the Cabinet and White House staff, will continue to access the Federal Employees Health Benefit Program, while all other congressional staffers will have to find their insurance policies on the exchange.

A Democratic aide said he thought it would be difficult enough under the new law to figure out how to navigate his insurance, but he wouldn't mind as much if everyone else had to do the same.

"It appears that some of my colleagues will not have to make these changes, which is annoying to say the least," he said.

"The president continues to say if you like the health care coverage you have, you can keep it, and it's simply not true," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner. "This is just one example of the bad consequences of this law."

"Large parts of this bill were thrown together hastily and behind closed doors, I'm afraid this is not going to be the only surprise going forward," he said.

Grassley and Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., are heading the charge to introduce legislation that would require all federal employees to have the same health care requirements and options. Both made efforts to close this loophole last year, but the Senate rejected Grassley's amendment in December.

"If this amendment isn't passed, then President Obama will not live under the Obama health care reforms, and neither will the congressional staff who were most responsible for helping to write the overhaul," Grassley said in a statement to FoxNews.com on Wednesday. "That sends a message to the people at the grassroots that the health reforms are good enough for you, but not for us."

But a spokesman for Reid said Coburn's objection to the law was disingenuous, charging that Coburn himself had created the "two-tiered" status.

"In his rush to make political statements instead of policy achievements, Senator Coburn clearly wasn't paying attention to what he was doing," Jim Manley said.

"The amendment that created this committee and personal office distinction was authored by Senator Coburn. It's WORD for WORD what Coburn proposed in Committee.

"If he wonders why committee staff aren't in the exchange, perhaps he should ask himself," Manley said. "Senator Coburn's newest complaints on health reform are too little, too late."

But Coburn said Reid's spokesman has it all wrong.

"This special deal for unelected staff underscores everything the public detests about the arrogance of power in Washington," he said. "I tried to fix this inequity along with Senators Grassley, Burr and Vitter, but Majority Leader Reid obstructed our effort."

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Not like I didn't expect what they did, but if it isn't good for the goose then why is it good for the gander?

Maybe a new constitutional amendment?  "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ".

« Last Edit: March 25, 2010, 08:56:05 PM by adively »
Quote
Hawkmoon - Never underestimate another person's capacity for stupidity. Any time you think someone can't possibly be that dumb ... they'll prove you wrong.

Bacon and Eggs - A day's work for a chicken; A lifetime commitment for a pig.
Stupidity will always be its own reward.
Bad decisions make good stories.

Quote
Viking - The problem with the modern world is that there aren't really any predators eating stupid people.

cosine

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,734
"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
Andy

MechAg94

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 33,751
Did all those staffers just wake up Monday?  Or is this loophole just now seeing the light of day? 

On the other hand, their own bosses are exempt from other things, why not them? 
“It is much more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones.”  ― Calvin Coolidge

TechMan

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,562
  • Yes, your moderation has been outsourced.
Did all those staffers just wake up Monday?  Or is this loophole just now seeing the light of day? 

On the other hand, their own bosses are exempt from other things, why not them? 

MechAg94,

It is now just seeing the light of day.  IIRC most of them (congresscritters) admit that they didn't read the bill since it is so long.
Quote
The definition of "congressional staff," according to the CRS report, could be interpreted narrowly to refer only to staff members directly affiliated with a member's individual or personal office. As an example, that would mean that staffers who work with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's constituents out of her California office would be classified as "congressional staffers" and have to switch over to the exchanges -- but the staffers who work in association with her role as speaker of the House would be allowed to keep their current policies.
The staffers who wrote this bill have created a bunch of haves and have-nots inside certain congresscritters' offices.  If you worked in the office you could be exempt and your buddy next to you might not be exempt from the exchanges depending upon what you did for that congresscritter.

Quote
Hawkmoon - Never underestimate another person's capacity for stupidity. Any time you think someone can't possibly be that dumb ... they'll prove you wrong.

Bacon and Eggs - A day's work for a chicken; A lifetime commitment for a pig.
Stupidity will always be its own reward.
Bad decisions make good stories.

Quote
Viking - The problem with the modern world is that there aren't really any predators eating stupid people.

Fjolnirsson

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,231
  • The Anti-Claus
Quote
It remains unclear why the law was written this way.

Seriously? I refuse to believe anyone could be that stupid.
Hi.

mellestad

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 834
I hope there is follow up to this.  The he-said-she-said at the bottom is confusing...the Dem says the provision was inserted by the Head Republican who is now trying to fight it, and they both say the other one is lying.  So yea, needs more coverage.

Google confused me even more, because a search of "congress exempt from health care reform" brought up multiple conflicting viewpoints, some saying they were bound by the reform others saying they are not.

(Edit: http://mediamatters.org/research/201003250022  <-- no idea if this site is legitimate, but at least it actually quoted some of the bill)

mellestad

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 834
Ok, so I might understand this now.  When the committee was drafting the Bill, a republican put in an amendment that said certain members of congress would be forced to take a state exchange option, this was unanimously passed in the committee...I imagine so that they could show their constituents they were a part of the system.

Since the broad reform bill does not force anyone to abandon their existing coverage, anyone not specifically listed in the amendment can continue to use their existing plans, including politicians who are not in the amendment and are currently using the existing Federal insurance program.

The complaint seems to be that some .gov people are not forced to change.  The irony is that one of the main complaints against this bill is that it might force people to change their coverage.



So...I'm not seeing any issue besides low ranking politicians whining about being caught in some bipartisian 'we're part of the people' stuff inserted into the bill by members of the original congressional committee, unless I have missed something (which is possible!).

Inor

  • New Member
  • Posts: 56
  • Just this guy
(Edit: http://mediamatters.org/research/201003250022  <-- no idea if this site is legitimate, but at least it actually quoted some of the bill)

Media Matters is legitimate, albeit a hard left site.  I put them in the same category as Huffington Post and MSNBC.

They will get the words of a quote right, but double check the context...

Desertdog

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,360
Quote
"If we're forced on the exchange, then everyone should be," a Democratic staffer said.
Maybe we will get lucky.  When the Big Shots are the only ones left as the insured, maybe there will not be enough policy holders to keep the insurance company afloat.

longeyes

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,405
The crack that brings down the dam.
"Domari nolo."

Thug: What you lookin' at old man?
Walt Kowalski: Ever notice how you come across somebody once in a while you shouldn't have messed with? That's me.

Molon Labe.

sanglant

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,475
quick dig up teddy and stuff him in there. :O the dam must be saved. [popcorn]