5 Senate Democrats In Group Calling For Easing Health Care Law's Small Business Mandate
Source: Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Several Senate Democrats want to eliminate a requirement in the health care law for companies to provide coverage if they have fewer than 100 workers.
The current cutoff is 50 employees, although the Obama administration has suspended the so-called small business mandate temporarily. The legislation would mean an estimated 98 per cent of businesses could decline to provide insurance without fear of a penalty.
The bill is backed by five Democrats and one independent.
Three of the Democrats are seeking re-election at a time Republicans are emphasizing their demand for repeal of the law. Democratic strategists are urging their candidates to emphasize changes they would make as well as to stress parts they support.
Read more: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/the-canadian-press/140327/5-senate-democrats-group-calling-easing-health-care-laws-sma
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Loudly
(2,436 posts)The campaign should be Medicare for All. Not this anemic piecemeal abandonment of ACA. That's not going to get ANYBODY elected except Tea Partiers and Republicans.
bornskeptic
(1,330 posts)It doesn't include prescription drug coverage, and if the enrollee gets prescription drug coverage from a private insurer, it still has a donut hole. Also Medicare, unlike coverage under the ACA, doesn't have a limit on out of pocket costs, so enrollees need to buy a Medigap policyfrom a private insurer if they want protection from catastrophic illness. Millions of Americans, including myself, have better insurance than Medicare through their employers. It's great that Medicare exists for Seniors, but it needs to be fixed before we try to shove everyone into it.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)No matter where you live in the USA.
And eligibility for treatment doesn't depend on any religious test.
Improve Medicare and usher the for-profit finance out of it.
Medicare for All should be the very definition of adequate coverage.
ACA is a distraction from that, besides being electoral poison.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)alp227
(32,015 posts)Let me guess the five:
Begich (AK)
Hagan (NC)
Heitkamp (ND)
Landrieu (LA)
Pryor (AR)
brett_jv
(1,245 posts)A) Qualifying companies must have implemented the internal infrastructure that allows employees to sign up for some sort of group plan that's administered through the employer (i.e. the employer finds the broker, figures out what plans are to be offered, etc), or
B) All of A, PLUS the Employer is responsible for covering some % of the monthly premiums for health insurance coverage?
And if the answer is B, then what is that % the employer must cover? 10%, 25%, 50%, 100%?
PSPS
(13,584 posts)PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Basically they must offer affordable qualifying coverage:
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Questions-and-Answers-on-Employer-Shared-Responsibility-Provisions-Under-the-Affordable-Care-Act
Xithras
(16,191 posts)If the employer offers health coverage to more than 95% of their full time employees, it is considered "affordable" if the annual cost of the coverage is 9.5% or less of their annual pre-tax income.
pnwmom
(108,973 posts)their choice of an individual plan on the exchange? I remember hearing about some company that had decided to do that, and their employees were fine with the idea.