That’s what usually happens… But not this time

This time, Republican Leader McConnell (at the behest of Sen. DeMint) actually objected to the appointment of the conferees something that’s almost never done. That means that the Senate ObamaCare bill must be amended on the House floor to gain the votes they need to pass it on the House floor. And because of Sen. DeMint’s objection to the appointment of the conferees, there will be no conference, or conference report. Democrats can resort to a fallback: they can propose a motion to appoint conferees, but that motion is subject to filibuster. It would likely require three separate cloture votes just to pass the motion to appoint conferees! So … the Senate bill goes back to the House, which will have to debate it all over again… including amending it.

If the House amends the Senate bill, they then have to send the amended bill back to the Senate where all the 60 vote margin cloture votes still apply cloture on the motion to proceed, cloture to end the filibuster, and cloture on any amendment.

And you can bet that the House WILL amend the Senate bill. There are plenty of disagreements among Democrats in the House over Harry Reid’s compromise bill, in areas like abortion, the public option, illegal immigrant coverage, taxation of union health care plans, and the degree of subsidy available for purchase of health care. Any one of these can sink Obamacare!

On abortion, the Senate bill contains massive abortion funding by virtue of the Nelson-Reid abortion language in the bill that allows states to force taxpayers to fund abortions with government funds. It also contains the Mikulski amendment, which would allow the Obama administration to define abortion as "preventative care" and force insurance companies to use taxpayers’ premiums to pay for them. The House initially approved its bill on a three-vote margin only because it contained the Stupak amendment to ban abortion funding. Now, with the Senate’s Nelson-Reid language and Mikulski amendment in place, a group of 10-12 pro-life Democrats led by Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan may very well revolt on supporting the bill, unless the Stupak amendment is added to the Senate version of the legislation. And if the Stupak amendment is added, that would probably prompt some pro-abortion Democrats to vote against the bill.

On the issue of having a "public option" completely run by the government, there are a bunch of hard-core leftist Democrats in the House who have pledged to vote AGAINST any healthcare bill that doesn’t include that public option which the Senate bill doesn’t. The leftists themselves count sixteen Members — and the House bill only won by a margin of two votes last time. In order to pass the bill, it will have to be amended to include a public option but several Democrat Senators said they will vote AGAINST any bill that includes a public option and the Senate bill only won by one vote last time. .

Leftist Democrats are also starting to balk at the idea that, in the Senate bill, millions of Americans will be forced into private insurance company plans, which will be subsidized by taxpayers. They see that alternative will do almost nothing to "reform health care" but will be a windfall for insurance companies and they hate that.

Another real sticking point in this bill is a big one Illegal Aliens, and whether illegals should be covered. The final Senate bill prohibits any unauthorized immigrants from purchasing private health-care plans on the insurance exchange, whereas the House bill would allow them to buy private insurance but prohibits them from receiving any government subsidies to do so. When the White House tried to pressure the House to change its immigration provisions to resemble the Senate bill, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus revolted and threatened to vote against the legislation. While they managed to secure a victory at the time, the Senate put the prohibition back in which can kill it in the House. If the House amends it and puts it back in, it will kill it in the Senate. :

Whew !!

Question : Do you still think the health care (aka Obanacare) will b
Question in complete form
sorry
Do you think Obamacare will be passed into law??
Washlyn
No it is not ready yet for Obama’s signature.If you read the entire details you would see what I am referring to.
But thank you for your answer

money, promises and threats can get anything

However, I am still covered by their health insurance policy. I do not have health benefits with my current job.

If my parents do not declare me as a dependent on this year’s tax return, how does that affect my health coverage?

This question is a little silly, don’t you think?

Health insurance is like auto insurance, in that you have a deductible to pay before insurance pays. This is stop you from going to the doctor for a wart, sniffles, or other small things but maybe once a year for say a yearly exam.

You could call another agent to see if you can find cheaper insurance with a lower deductible, but most likely you wont find. If you want your insurance company to pay the $220 and only a $20 copay, you will most likely pay at least $400 or more a month for that coverage. Since you are an independent contractor, you are forced to find "private insurance" vs a "group policy" with a employer.

good luck

1. Is it correct that if both my wife and I are paid employees of my LLC I would be able to qualify for a group health insurance policy for the 2 employees – even if it is just me and my wife?

2. Will we be more likely to secure better health coverage (i.e. maternity, lower deductibles, etc) with a group policy than an independent family plan?

3. Are there any prohibitive costs which would make this approach unreasonable compared to private health insurance?

Any other suggestions are welcome, I want to begin comparing rates but need some guidance first. Thanks in advance.
Thank you for the information, I will investigate this further with an agent next week. Indeed I do not know the policies in my state (Ohio) but the individual who recommended this approach to me found great benefits in Connecticut.

As a new family we can’t take the chances of not having adequate health coverage. All the private plans that I investigated required riders for maternity coverage so it would be nice to get an expert opinion.
Thank you for the new responses. The purpose of forming the LLC is to protect my personal liability in the event that a future client would take legal action against me for whatever reason. I was curious about this approach since it was suggested by someone I trust, though I was not sure it would hold up in an audit.

It seems that it might be better to just buy a private plan and then take the deduction for self employment health insurance, as long as my wife’s employer does not provide health insurance benefits. Is that a better approach?

Most companies will offer group coverage for 2 employees. It is worth looking into but don’t expect that a group plan will be any less expensive. Depending on your state regulations groups are mandated to cover certain procedures, such as mental health, that you may not want or need, which will increase the premium. Contact a local agent that can do quotes for both group and individual from a number of companies.

Group policies of fewer than 10 employees are individually underwritten and the premium is based on those results, just like with individual policies. Companies can decline to offer group policies based on those results as well. Group policies choices are limited compared to what is available with individual policies. You will not be more likely to secure better coverage because of those limitations.

You can deduct the premiums of either type on your taxes.

That’s the hardball message liberal groups are hurling at moderate Democratic senators in a battle that is dividing their party. Their demands: Support a bill that offers optional government-run health coverage and oppose Republican attempts to derail the legislation.

The groups are unleashing blunt and personal broadcast ads and e-mails at moderates even as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., tries to shape a health care bill that can attract the 60 votes it needs to pass. Assuming no Republican support, Reid needs backing from all 58 Democrats and both Democratic-leaning independents — including about a half-dozen moderates who have drawn liberals’ ire.

It’s all taking place a year out from elections in which Republicans hope to trim the Democrats’ congressional majorities. The intraparty conflict especially threatens moderates facing tough re-election fights in 2010, like Sens. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., and Reid himself. It could mean less enthusiasm on the part of liberal and labor groups, which supply campaign workers, contributions and votes to Democratic

United they stand, Divided, they will fall.. It seems some of the Dem’s are finally realizing the futility of this Plan. NOBODY knows what’s in those 2000 pages of spaghetti! Maybe their consciences are beginning to get to them! These guys are NOT fighting for a National Healthcare Plan, it’s nothing but a power struggle between the Dem’s and the Reps! I am beginning to wonder what these guys DO in private life!? Do they actually have businesses? OR, are they just rich people who have never worked a day in their lives!? They talk about an affordable Health Plan – by whose standards? Theirs?? Why don’t they just get off trying to run our lives, and do the job they were voted into office for!! LOL! I will bet, they don’t know what that is!!! Take my State for example! It took our Governmor over 100 days to get a Budget!! First thing he does, is lay people off, UP the taxes on cigarettes, making them worth their weight in gold! Good time to stop smoking, right! THAT would put HIS smoking lamp out in a hurry!!! Just got my tax bill for my Mortgage! Yep! THAT went up too!!! Hundreds more are due to be laid off. He DID have a few construction workers hired to work on the roads, and can you believe this!!! Driving by, and they are ALL sitting on the road side, doing absolutely nothing!! Nice eh! I would like to know WHO is nominating ANY of these guys for ANY Government and State job! There ain’t ONE of them I would vote for!

1) Balance the federal budget.

2) Restrict immigration, both legal and illegal(especially illegal). Everything should be done to ensure that ONLY tax-paying citizens can receive government healthcare. The U.S shouldn’t become more of a magnet for unskilled 3rd world immigrants than it already is; you can’t have open borders and a welfare state, this is a recipe for disaster and bankruptcy.

Accomplish these 2 things, and you may win me over to supporting universal health coverage, along with possibly thousands or millions of other independents and conservatives. We can argue over the details later, and I may withdraw my support in part or in full, but I will continue to oppose all efforts to bring about universal socialized health care if we do not balance the budget and restrict immigration FIRST.

Both parties have avoided the hottest and most delayed issue……..
Immigration Reform. That is ONE issue they can’t JAM down our throats like the Stimulus and Healthcare Bill (soon).
Yet, just like Wilson inexcusably yelled out, Obama has lied through his teeth, KNOWING full well no matter what the wording in the Bill, illegals will STILL receive medical care. And don’t forget those "safe haven" liberal cities like San Francisco………….do you really believe they would ever do anything to restrict access to health care for these people ?

1) Balance the federal budget.

2) Restrict immigration, both legal and illegal(especially illegal). Everything should be done to ensure that ONLY tax-paying citizens can receive government healthcare. The U.S shouldn’t become more of a magnet for unskilled 3rd world immigrants than it already is; you can’t have open borders and a welfare state, this is a recipe for disaster and bankruptcy.

Accomplish these 2 things, and you may win me over to supporting universal health coverage, along with possibly thousands or millions of other independents and conservatives. We can argue over the details later, and I may withdraw my support in part or in full, but I will continue to oppose all efforts to bring about universal socialized health care if we do not balance the budget and restrict immigration FIRST.

Both parties have avoided the hottest and most delayed issue……..
Immigration Reform. That is ONE issue they can’t JAM down our throats like the Stimulus and Healthcare Bill (soon).
Yet, just like Wilson inexcusably yelled out, Obama has lied through his teeth, KNOWING full well no matter what the wording in the Bill, illegals will STILL receive medical care. And don’t forget those "safe haven" liberal cities like San Francisco………….do you really believe they would ever do anything to restrict access to health care for these people ?

- Prevent bureaucrats from making personal medical decisions for patients. Rep. Phil Gingrey, M.D. (R-GA) offered an amendment in the Energy & Commerce Committee to bar federal political appointees and bureaucrats from intervening in patient treatment decisions. The Gingrey amendment would have ensured patients and doctors remain as the sole individuals responsible for making these critical decisions. Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) led Democrats in opposition to the amendment, which was defeated.

- Require all Members of Congress to get their health insurance through the proposed government-run plan. Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered an amendment in the Ways & Means Committee that would have required Members of Congress to enroll immediately in the government-run health plan that would be established under the Democratic bill. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) offered an amendment to put his committee on the record in support of enrolling Members of Congress in the government-run plan as well. While the Wilson amendment was approved by voice vote in the Education & Labor Committee, the Heller amendment was killed in the Ways & Means Committee.

- Establish a $1 trillion deficit cap. During Energy & Commerce Committee consideration of the Democrats’ government-run health care plan, Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) offered an amendment to delay “disease prevention” spending for items like municipal jungle gyms and bicycle trails until Washington’s budget deficit dips below $1 trillion. Democrats defeated the amendment, paving the way for more unchecked spending.

- Keep the federal government out of health care decisions. Rep. Wally Herger (R-CA) offered an amendment to prohibit the federal government from conducting so-called comparative effectiveness research, in which the federal government would ultimately help determine which medical treatments are administered to whom in America – otherwise known as government rationing of health care. The Herger amendment was defeated. Days later, in a July 22 prime-time press conference, President Obama told the nation the health care bill “will keep government out of health care decisions,” despite the fact that the comparative effectiveness language remains in the bill.

- Protect Americans from “hurry up and wait.” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) offered an amendment that would repeal the government-run health plan if wait times exceed the average wait times in private plans. The Brady amendment was not passed.

- Stop the job-killing employer mandate. Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) offered an amendment in the Committee on Ways & Means to improve the Democratic legislation by taking out the section of the bill that requires American employers to provide health coverage for all of their employees, and Reps. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) offered similar amendments in the Committee on Education & Labor. Independent analysts agree this Democratic mandate on employers is likely to result in the elimination of millions of American jobs, and it could hardly come at a worse moment for the nation’s economy. The GOP amendments were killed in committee.

- Suspend the job-killing employer mandate if the national unemployment rate reaches 10 percent. Reps. Wally Herger (R-CA) and Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) offered amendments in their committees that would suspend the job-killing employer mandate in the bill if the national unemployment rate reaches or goes above 10 percent. (It is currently at 9.5 percent.) The Herger and Hoekstra amendments were killed in both the Ways & Means and Education & Labor Committees.

- Waive the employer mandate if it will cause layoffs, worker salary cuts, or reductions in hiring. Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA) offered an amendment that would waive the employer mandate in the Democrats’ health care bill for any employer who certifies, under procedures developed by the Secretary of the Treasury, that it would pose a financial hardship resulting in layoffs of existing workers, reductions in salary of existing workers, or the inability to expand via hiring new employees. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) offered a similar amendment in the Education & Labor Committee, and it was adopted by voice vote. However, the Reichert amendment was killed in the Ways & Means Committee.

- Protect employers from unfair taxation. Under the Democratic bill as written, if an employer offers qualifying health care coverage but an employee rejects it for any reason, the employer can still be slapped with an 8 percent tax on the value of that employee’s wages as a result of the job-killing emp

Now now now stop showing facts to the other side. It might make them mad and call you racist.
The real problem is that the " left out media" does not want to put out the real facts of what is going on in Washington D.C. because if they did then they would not get the interviews that they love to get.

- Prevent bureaucrats from making personal medical decisions for patients. Rep. Phil Gingrey, M.D. (R-GA) offered an amendment in the Energy & Commerce Committee to bar federal political appointees and bureaucrats from intervening in patient treatment decisions. The Gingrey amendment would have ensured patients and doctors remain as the sole individuals responsible for making these critical decisions. Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) led Democrats in opposition to the amendment, which was defeated.

- Require all Members of Congress to get their health insurance through the proposed government-run plan. Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) offered an amendment in the Ways & Means Committee that would have required Members of Congress to enroll immediately in the government-run health plan that would be established under the Democratic bill. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) offered an amendment to put his committee on the record in support of enrolling Members of Congress in the government-run plan as well. While the Wilson amendment was approved by voice vote in the Education & Labor Committee, the Heller amendment was killed in the Ways & Means Committee.

- Establish a $1 trillion deficit cap. During Energy & Commerce Committee consideration of the Democrats’ government-run health care plan, Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) offered an amendment to delay “disease prevention” spending for items like municipal jungle gyms and bicycle trails until Washington’s budget deficit dips below $1 trillion. Democrats defeated the amendment, paving the way for more unchecked spending.

- Keep the federal government out of health care decisions. Rep. Wally Herger (R-CA) offered an amendment to prohibit the federal government from conducting so-called comparative effectiveness research, in which the federal government would ultimately help determine which medical treatments are administered to whom in America – otherwise known as government rationing of health care. The Herger amendment was defeated. Days later, in a July 22 prime-time press conference, President Obama told the nation the health care bill “will keep government out of health care decisions,” despite the fact that the comparative effectiveness language remains in the bill.

- Protect Americans from “hurry up and wait.” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX) offered an amendment that would repeal the government-run health plan if wait times exceed the average wait times in private plans. The Brady amendment was not passed.

- Stop the job-killing employer mandate. Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX) offered an amendment in the Committee on Ways & Means to improve the Democratic legislation by taking out the section of the bill that requires American employers to provide health coverage for all of their employees, and Reps. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) and Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) offered similar amendments in the Committee on Education & Labor. Independent analysts agree this Democratic mandate on employers is likely to result in the elimination of millions of American jobs, and it could hardly come at a worse moment for the nation’s economy. The GOP amendments were killed in committee.

- Suspend the job-killing employer mandate if the national unemployment rate reaches 10 percent. Reps. Wally Herger (R-CA) and Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) offered amendments in their committees that would suspend the job-killing employer mandate in the bill if the national unemployment rate reaches or goes above 10 percent. (It is currently at 9.5 percent.) The Herger and Hoekstra amendments were killed in both the Ways & Means and Education & Labor Committees.

- Waive the employer mandate if it will cause layoffs, worker salary cuts, or reductions in hiring. Rep. Dave Reichert (R-WA) offered an amendment that would waive the employer mandate in the Democrats’ health care bill for any employer who certifies, under procedures developed by the Secretary of the Treasury, that it would pose a financial hardship resulting in layoffs of existing workers, reductions in salary of existing workers, or the inability to expand via hiring new employees. Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) offered a similar amendment in the Education & Labor Committee, and it was adopted by voice vote. However, the Reichert amendment was killed in the Ways & Means Committee.

- Protect employers from unfair taxation. Under the Democratic bill as written, if an employer offers qualifying health care coverage but an employee rejects it for any reason, the employer can still be slapped with an 8 percent tax on the value of that employee’s wages as a result of the job-killing emp

Now now now stop showing facts to the other side. It might make them mad and call you racist.
The real problem is that the " left out media" does not want to put out the real facts of what is going on in Washington D.C. because if they did then they would not get the interviews that they love to get.

Why is there a debate since the health insurance companies screw people regardless of party?

Republican efforts to defeat health care reform really are rooted in the fear — famously articulated in Bill Kristol’s 1993 memo, and reiterated since — that the realization of reform could banish the GOP to the minority for a generation, by cementing the Democrats as the party that’s resurrected the notion that government can improve the lives of the middle class. This is shown in Republican senators that will vote against health care reform without even reading the details.