Since we'll discuss health insurance today...

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Did we discuss this? Sincere mea culpa if I missed it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014...or-in-firings/

THOUGHT POLICE: FIRMS MUST SWEAR OBAMACARE NOT A FACTOR IN FIRINGS
Is the latest delay of ObamaCare regulations politically motivated? Consider what administration officials announcing the new exemption for medium-sized employers had to say about firms that might fire workers to get under the threshold and avoid hugely expensive new requirements of the law. Obama officials made clear in a press briefing that firms would not be allowed to lay off workers to get into the preferred class of those businesses with 50 to 99 employees. How will the feds know what employers were thinking when hiring and firing? Simple. Firms will be required to certify to the IRS – under penalty of perjury – that ObamaCare was not a motivating factor in their staffing decisions. To avoid ObamaCare costs you must swear that you are not trying to avoid ObamaCare costs. You can duck the law, but only if you promise not to say so.

War of words - With millions of insurance cancellations and workers dumped from employer-based policies due to ObamaCare, a relatively narrow exemption for medium-sized employers might sound like a trifling thing. But to Obama Democrats desperate to hold the Senate in the face of simmering anger over the botched rollout and false promises of the law, any little bit helps. And having the IRS serve as the talking-point enforcer for businesses tempted to speak out about firings under the law will sure help message discipline. Remember, the administration wants to focus on Americans being “transitioned” to ObamaCare not dumped from existing policies, and “freed” from having to work in order to get insurance rather than quitting their jobs in order to get free coverage.

[speedysst]

Well, until recently, I understood that the President cannot create laws including punishments for violating such laws. These days it seems that Constitution is just an inconvenience.

[Great-Kazoo]

Well, until recently, I understood that the President cannot create laws including punishments for violating such laws. These days it seems that Constitution is just an inconvenience.

How many crimes has O committed with his "changes" in the ACA without congressional approval?

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

How many crimes has O committed with his "changes" in the ACA without congressional approval?

This really is the tragedy in changing US Politics. How much has been changed from congressional law to regulatory law?
Congress keeps abdicating legislative powers to the alphabet soup of .gov agencies. Law becomes arbitrary and contradictory and everyone is a potential criminal.

[Gman]

Presidential fiat. All hail the king.

[Skip]

How can employment costs (of which healthcare insurance is a component) not be a consideration in staffing level decisions?

If employees were free, I'd hire thousands of them! If they cost me six figures each, I couldn't afford to hire any more. When the costs of insurance for an employee vary from $8k all the way up to $30k, that is going to be a factor.

This is just an attempt to bribe business into supporting the fictitious narrative that Obamacare is working and not creating negative impacts. "Say I'm not the bad guy and I'll let you off the hook. We both win."

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

That sounds like economics, Skip. We don't make policy that way!

[Aloha_Shooter]

While Congress has certainly been culpable in a shift to regulatory law, that's not the case here. The President's unconstitutional actions have no basis in law and Congress has given him no authorization to arbitrarily reinterpret the law as he sees fit.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

I do not believe they will stop him.

[Skip]

That sounds like economics, Skip. We don't make policy that way!

Yeah, I should stop thinking and just feel my way through life. Seems to be working for Democrats...