Well, there should be 50 web sites, one for each state. But 34 (or 36?) states decided they didn't want to do it, so healthcare.gov had to be extended to handle way more states than they expected.
No, 36 States took the Feds up on the offer of doing the exchange for them. That's in the original law - the Feds would do the State's exchange for it, if the State didn't want to do its own. The Feds offered, the States took the offer, yet somehow the States are to blame...
This is a function of the problems of doing anything with or for the federal government. The fact that a large state like California could pull off a similar system successfully demonstrates this to be true. The problem is the federal beaurocracy.
Not to mention the belief that you can find a "one size fits all" solution for the entire United States...
Well it is worse then that. Most Politicians were Lawyers, Every once in a while you may get a Businessman, a Professor or a MD. But most come from the Legal background.
And even worse, those few politicians who were businessmen or doctors are the ones most reviled during economic or healthcare related debates... I mean, we can't trust people who have actual experience in the issue being debated, that might show the rest of the politicians in a bad light!
The temperature predictions would be sufficient. Which prediction made in the 80s and 90s related to a stalled global temperature for the entire 21st century, so far?
I guess the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation aren't worth considering, being natural cycles that influence weather patterns over large swaths of the US...
Government is the most powerful entity in our mixed society.
That stopped being true thirty years ago.
Corporations can dictate what is and what isn't allowed, in your own personal life and in how you choose to conduct it? Corporations can choose to arrest or detain or kill whomever they want, without repercussion? Corporations can force you to buy their product, or ban possession of another's product?
Corporations are light-years behind Government in terms of power. Sometimes they play together (witness Obamacare), but the real power is Government. It, literally, has the power to take everything you have (eminent domain, drug forfeiture laws), and even execute you without trial. The kind of power that corporations can only dream of.
No, you can sell cars plenty easy in Texas - you just need to first get a business license IN Texas. Tesla could rent a tiny mailbox, register with the State as a car dealer, and then sell to its heart's content. This is pretty common for many States; for example, in CA you can only procure a firearm from a licensed dealer within the State. Buy from out of State? You need to pass it through an in-State dealer. Buy a handgun from another Californian? You have to do it through a licensed in-State dealer.
That's exactly what this program is. You can get into TSA PreCheck when you sign up for Global Entry. You volunteer to do it, so you can speed your immigration/customs/security screening in the future. It's really nice to blast through customs in a matter of minutes rather than hours, and to show up at my airport (LAX) just 30 minutes before boarding - and still arrive at the gate with 15 minutes to spare.
See, they aren't even attempting to cloak this under a new threat of some kind. Now they are just trying to pretend it makes things more efficient. It won't. They will still scan you and your belongings. You will still not be able to save a few bucks by bringing your own drinks on board or even within the airport. You will still have to spend extra money on "travel-sized" things in order to comply with their nonsense.
I've been a precheck user since the program began (side benefit of having Global Entry - meaning I can sail through customs/immigration in a matter of a few minutes instead of an hour or more - I travel internationally 12-15 times a year). I go to the TSA security kiosk (I have never had a line of more than 1 person in front of me), drop my carry-on bags on a conveyor belt, and walk through the metal detector. No need to remove my laptops from my bag, pull out my toothpaste (4.5 ounce tube - oversized), take my shoes and coat off, etc. Basically the same thing that happened pre-9/11.
I now make it a habit to show up at the airport (LAX) about 30 minutes before my plane starts boarding. Five minutes to walk to the terminal, 5 minutes through security, 5 minutes to the gate - I still have 15 minutes before they start boarding. I love it - and it definitely is more efficient, having the same processing that we had back pre-9/11.
The jab was very specific: legislators can't just write a law "only for 30 million uninsured". The law is the law, for everyone.
They do it all the time - with exemptions for fiscal or racial standing. You don't get a subsidy/tax cut because you make too much. You do not get preferential treatment for Government bids because you're the wrong gender or race. Legislators thrive by writing targeted laws and working to buy-off/pander-to small segments of the population, and build their own coalition of power.
Given that users have from Oct 1 to Dec 31 to successfully sign up before any consequences of any sort (in this case they are tiny) kick in, the service doesn't need the availability of a stock brokerage or bank in order to be successful. Yet, it's being echoed over and over that the exchange "is a failure" simply to score political points.
What happens if the exchange is not stable nor ready by December 31st? Do those who have not been able to sign up still have to pay the penalty because the Federal Government couldn't get the website working?
You must use this site and register and sign up by the 31st or pay a penalty. Of course, if the site simply doesn't work you still get to pay the penalty...
I've heard an interesting angle but have yet to confirm it.
Allegedly the DHHS originally assumed most states would run their own website for such because a lot of the service comparing info is state-centric anyhow.
However, many red states refused to go along out of their usual anti-federal-government stance. This put more burden on the DHHS to handle the red-state traffic and their state-specific logic, and Congress refused to fund the extra resources needed.
If this is the case, then the GOP is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Is that why blue States like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania - which voted for President Obama - did not implement their own exchange, but red States like Kentucky, Idaho, and Arkansas implemented an exchange?
It's not a red State/blue State thing, but a Federal Government/State thing.
My wife's birth control is covered; I've never asked about Viagra or Cialis for me, but I assume if it was prescribed by our primary care physician I would get it covered. Just like my wife's birth control.
Even more, more interesting, is what are the penalties applied to individuals who cannot sign up for Obamacare in time because of a broken website. If it's still broken by March 15th (the deadline for individuals to sign up), will the IRS still enforce its penalties, given that the tool the Federal Government provided didn't work?
Interestingly, without "for-profit", there is no income tax - and thus the lion's share of Government revenue goes away. It is in Government's own interest to pump up for-profit entities, to maximize its own income; it's just a great "benefit" that it can do so whilst increasing control and regulation of those same for-profit entities and thus gain tighter control of its own destiny, independent of the will of the people.
Equal protection? Is that why I can buy insurance across state lines, must report my ethnic background on Federal forms, or carry a firearm throughout These United States? There is plenty of State AND Federally-imposed unequal protection.
Slashdot Mirror
You're a fool if you think that Republicans don't do the exact same thing.
Cool, where's the Republican health care law?
Well, there should be 50 web sites, one for each state. But 34 (or 36?) states decided they didn't want to do it, so healthcare.gov had to be extended to handle way more states than they expected.
No, 36 States took the Feds up on the offer of doing the exchange for them. That's in the original law - the Feds would do the State's exchange for it, if the State didn't want to do its own. The Feds offered, the States took the offer, yet somehow the States are to blame...
You realize the law has a lot of things in it to make Republicans happy right (such as dropping the government option from the plan)?
It does? That must explain the fact not a single Republican voted for it - they were so happy with the things in it!
This is a function of the problems of doing anything with or for the federal government. The fact that a large state like California could pull off a similar system successfully demonstrates this to be true. The problem is the federal beaurocracy.
Not to mention the belief that you can find a "one size fits all" solution for the entire United States...
Well it is worse then that. Most Politicians were Lawyers, Every once in a while you may get a Businessman, a Professor or a MD. But most come from the Legal background.
And even worse, those few politicians who were businessmen or doctors are the ones most reviled during economic or healthcare related debates... I mean, we can't trust people who have actual experience in the issue being debated, that might show the rest of the politicians in a bad light!
The temperature predictions would be sufficient. Which prediction made in the 80s and 90s related to a stalled global temperature for the entire 21st century, so far?
Who enforces the law? Government or Corporations?
I guess the Pacific Decadal Oscillation and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation aren't worth considering, being natural cycles that influence weather patterns over large swaths of the US...
Hmmm, which prediction in the 80s and 90s included record Antarctic ice cover and a stalled temperature for 17 years?
Government can revoke NewsCorp's charter and thus terminate it - lock, stock and barrel. Can NewsCorp do the same to the Government?
That stopped being true thirty years ago.
Corporations can dictate what is and what isn't allowed, in your own personal life and in how you choose to conduct it? Corporations can choose to arrest or detain or kill whomever they want, without repercussion? Corporations can force you to buy their product, or ban possession of another's product?
Corporations are light-years behind Government in terms of power. Sometimes they play together (witness Obamacare), but the real power is Government. It, literally, has the power to take everything you have (eminent domain, drug forfeiture laws), and even execute you without trial. The kind of power that corporations can only dream of.
Agreed. Traveling in countries outside the US is a breeze; TSAPre makes traveling in the US as easy as in all other countries.
No, you can sell cars plenty easy in Texas - you just need to first get a business license IN Texas. Tesla could rent a tiny mailbox, register with the State as a car dealer, and then sell to its heart's content. This is pretty common for many States; for example, in CA you can only procure a firearm from a licensed dealer within the State. Buy from out of State? You need to pass it through an in-State dealer. Buy a handgun from another Californian? You have to do it through a licensed in-State dealer.
That's exactly what this program is. You can get into TSA PreCheck when you sign up for Global Entry. You volunteer to do it, so you can speed your immigration/customs/security screening in the future. It's really nice to blast through customs in a matter of minutes rather than hours, and to show up at my airport (LAX) just 30 minutes before boarding - and still arrive at the gate with 15 minutes to spare.
See, they aren't even attempting to cloak this under a new threat of some kind. Now they are just trying to pretend it makes things more efficient. It won't. They will still scan you and your belongings. You will still not be able to save a few bucks by bringing your own drinks on board or even within the airport. You will still have to spend extra money on "travel-sized" things in order to comply with their nonsense.
I've been a precheck user since the program began (side benefit of having Global Entry - meaning I can sail through customs/immigration in a matter of a few minutes instead of an hour or more - I travel internationally 12-15 times a year). I go to the TSA security kiosk (I have never had a line of more than 1 person in front of me), drop my carry-on bags on a conveyor belt, and walk through the metal detector. No need to remove my laptops from my bag, pull out my toothpaste (4.5 ounce tube - oversized), take my shoes and coat off, etc. Basically the same thing that happened pre-9/11.
I now make it a habit to show up at the airport (LAX) about 30 minutes before my plane starts boarding. Five minutes to walk to the terminal, 5 minutes through security, 5 minutes to the gate - I still have 15 minutes before they start boarding. I love it - and it definitely is more efficient, having the same processing that we had back pre-9/11.
It seems like the ones working on that website don't have brain STEMs...
The jab was very specific: legislators can't just write a law "only for 30 million uninsured". The law is the law, for everyone.
They do it all the time - with exemptions for fiscal or racial standing. You don't get a subsidy/tax cut because you make too much. You do not get preferential treatment for Government bids because you're the wrong gender or race. Legislators thrive by writing targeted laws and working to buy-off/pander-to small segments of the population, and build their own coalition of power.
Given that users have from Oct 1 to Dec 31 to successfully sign up before any consequences of any sort (in this case they are tiny) kick in, the service doesn't need the availability of a stock brokerage or bank in order to be successful. Yet, it's being echoed over and over that the exchange "is a failure" simply to score political points.
What happens if the exchange is not stable nor ready by December 31st? Do those who have not been able to sign up still have to pay the penalty because the Federal Government couldn't get the website working?
You must use this site and register and sign up by the 31st or pay a penalty. Of course, if the site simply doesn't work you still get to pay the penalty...
I've heard an interesting angle but have yet to confirm it.
Allegedly the DHHS originally assumed most states would run their own website for such because a lot of the service comparing info is state-centric anyhow.
However, many red states refused to go along out of their usual anti-federal-government stance. This put more burden on the DHHS to handle the red-state traffic and their state-specific logic, and Congress refused to fund the extra resources needed.
If this is the case, then the GOP is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Is that why blue States like Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania - which voted for President Obama - did not implement their own exchange, but red States like Kentucky, Idaho, and Arkansas implemented an exchange?
It's not a red State/blue State thing, but a Federal Government/State thing.
My wife's birth control is covered; I've never asked about Viagra or Cialis for me, but I assume if it was prescribed by our primary care physician I would get it covered. Just like my wife's birth control.
Even more, more interesting, is what are the penalties applied to individuals who cannot sign up for Obamacare in time because of a broken website. If it's still broken by March 15th (the deadline for individuals to sign up), will the IRS still enforce its penalties, given that the tool the Federal Government provided didn't work?
Interestingly, without "for-profit", there is no income tax - and thus the lion's share of Government revenue goes away. It is in Government's own interest to pump up for-profit entities, to maximize its own income; it's just a great "benefit" that it can do so whilst increasing control and regulation of those same for-profit entities and thus gain tighter control of its own destiny, independent of the will of the people.
Equal protection? Is that why I can buy insurance across state lines, must report my ethnic background on Federal forms, or carry a firearm throughout These United States? There is plenty of State AND Federally-imposed unequal protection.
If only there was a way to create a UI that was independent of pixel density, so that UI elements take up the same percentage of the screen...
All these words are yours except for Europa. Oh, and this one about 25,000 light years away - you don't get that one either.
Sorry for the inconvenience.