Imagine the following scene: A handful of union bosses crowd around an old card table, punching numbers into their calculators. Theyâve been up all night. Someone puts on another pot of coffee and a few of the older bosses are starting to fall asleep. Those who are still alert and active scratch their heads and re-enter their calculations. âOh, my gosh!â one of them shouts, concluding the all-night exercise. ââObamacareâ is going to cost us!â Yes, according to a recent report from the Wall Street Journal, union leaders (i.e. the same people who campaigned tirelessly in favor of universal healthcare) are trying to figure out a way to avoid paying for the costs associated with âObamacare.â From the WSJ: Labor unions enthusiastically backed the Obama administrationâs health-care overhaul when it was up for debate. Now that the law is rolling out, some are turning sour. Union leaders say many of the lawâs requirements will drive up the costs for their health-care plans and make unionized workers less competitive. Among other things, the law eliminates the caps on medical benefits and prescription drugs used as cost-containment measures in many health-care plans. It also allows children to stay on their parentsâ plans until they turn 26. To offset that, the nationâs largest labor groups want their lower-paid members to be able to get federal insurance subsidies while remaining on their plans. In the law, these subsidies were designed only for low-income workers without employer coverage as a way to help them buy private insurance. . In early talks, the Obama administration dismissed the idea of applying the subsidies to people in union-sponsored plans, according to officials from the trade group, the National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans, that represents these insurance plans. As financial reality sets in, and rather than figure out a way to pay for the bill they helped pass, unions are trying to see if Washington will bail them out. âTop officers at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the AFL-CIO and other large labor groups plan to keep pressing the Obama administration to expand the federal subsidies,â the WSJ notes, âwarning that unionized employers may otherwise drop coverage.â âA handful of unions say they already have examined whether it makes sense to shift workers off their current plans and onto private coverage subsidized by the government. But dropping insurance altogether would undermine a central point of joining a union, labor leaders say,â the report adds. No, really, union heads are acting like no one warned them that costs would go up. âWe are going back to the administration to say that this is not acceptable,â said Ken Hall, general secretary-treasurer for the Teamsters. âI heard him say, âIf you like your health plan, you can keep it,ââ said John Wilhelm, chairman of Unite Here Health, the insurance plan for 260,000 union workers. âIf Iâm wrong, and the president does not intend to keep his word, I would have severe second thoughts about the law.â Why? Why? Why didnât anyone tell these leaders about the costs associated with âObamacareâ? âIt seems someone finally noticed that mandating benefits and imposing regulations has a tendency to ⦠increase costs,â Doug Bandow writes for the American Spectator. âIncreases which workers are stuck paying. Who would have imagined such a result? Itâs not like anyone warned them, right?â http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ait-obamacare-is-going-to-drive-up-our-costs/
This is very interesting. If the union provides health care and pension benes. The unions are under attack. Why join the union when they can't offer either. Shit, obama may break the unions. ---------------------- Check this out. WASHINGTON â Thereâs still a way to avoid paying the new ObamaCare tax â get religion. The IRS yesterday released 73 pages of new regulations for the lawâs âindividual mandate,â outlining groups that wonât be subject to federal fines if they fail to get health insurance. Among the exempt: people whose âreligious beliefs conflict with acceptance of the benefits of private or public insurance.â Those with religious objections are among several groups who can apply for a special exemption from the mandate, which the IRS calls a âresponsibility paymentâ â intended to goad people into buying health insurance. http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/staying_obamacarefree_TS8R1EB5BBlNgHFM3sAVfP
Wait a minute. SCOTUS ruled the penalty was a "Tax." How does the IRS get to redefine it as a "responsibility payment?" It's only legal if it is a tax.