The AP describes another ObamaCare landmine:
Penalty could keep smokers out of health overhaul
WASHINGTON (AP) — Millions of smokers could be priced out of health insurance because of tobacco penalties in President Barack Obama's health care law, according to experts who are just now teasing out the potential impact of a little-noted provision in the massive legislation.
The Affordable Care Act — "Obamacare" to its detractors — allows health insurers to charge smokers buying individual policies up to 50 percent higher premiums starting next Jan. 1.
For a 55-year-old smoker, the penalty could reach nearly $4,250 a year. A 60-year-old could wind up paying nearly $5,100 on top of premiums.
And the government won't help help subsidize those penalties, or taxes, or whatever they are:
Several provisions in the federal health care law work together to leave older smokers with a bleak set of financial options, said Pollitz, formerly deputy director of the Office of Consumer Support in the federal Health and Human Services Department.
First, the law allows insurers to charge older adults up to three times as much as their youngest customers.
Second, the law allows insurers to levy the full 50 percent penalty on older smokers while charging less to younger ones.
And finally, government tax credits that will be available to help pay premiums cannot be used to offset the cost of penalties for smokers.
As the story notes, lower income and less formal education is positively associated with more smoking. In other contexts, these are the groups to which Obama is trying to shovel more Federal money.
Well, we had to pass the bill to find out what's in it.
Ditto, Soylent, Jackson does have a certain economy of phrasing doesn't he, it's too bad he is enmeshed in the political correct template, I mean he's Col. Fury,
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2013 at 11:04 PM
Love the Samuel L.Jackson idea! hah!
Here's my idea for rse...maybe we can get us smokers to rise up & demand better schools. Since the tobacco taxes go for education, I'd at least like to be dying for something other than Marxist indoctrination.
I keep wanting my picture in the foyer of the local elementary school. 'We'd like to thank Janet for funding our music department.'
Posted by: Janet | January 25, 2013 at 11:15 PM
I mean he's Col. Fury
Nick Fury is the most real person you know...
Maybe they could have followed up the last line with:
"I recognise the President has made a decision, but given that it's a stupid-ass decision, I've elected to overturn it."
Or we could just go back to Jules...
"Well allow me to retort...Does the Constitution look like a bitch? Then why you trying to f*ck it like a bitch?"
Posted by: Soylent Red | January 25, 2013 at 11:19 PM
Soylent with the HOF comments tonight
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 25, 2013 at 11:27 PM
"I recognise the President has made a decision, but given that it's a stupid-ass decision, I've elected to overturn it."
I was grateful to find out from an earlier Ignatz post that crazy-ass was hyphenated.
I think stupid-ass, crazy-ass, & lazy-ass will be used a lot the next 4 years. :(
Posted by: Janet | January 25, 2013 at 11:30 PM
it's an important modifier, Janet,
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2013 at 11:35 PM
I think stupid-ass, crazy-ass, & lazy-ass will be used a lot the next 4 years. :(
I think that's a safe bet, since they've been on my lips daily since 2009.
Posted by: Soylent Red | January 25, 2013 at 11:36 PM
Soylent with the HOF comments tonight
I'm feeling especially froggy tonight as I was recruited today for a new job giving me a $20K bump in pay.
Baby-stepping my way toward financing my future remote compound and stately Soylent Manor.
Posted by: Soylent Red | January 25, 2013 at 11:43 PM
Drinks all around on Soylent! Congrats!
Posted by: AliceH | January 25, 2013 at 11:50 PM
Hey, I'm toasting with the Sierra Nevada pale ale, congrats Soylent.
Posted by: narciso | January 25, 2013 at 11:53 PM
What did the words of the Constitution mean to those who did not draft it?
Let's ask Tench Coxe how he sold the Constitution to the people of Pennsylvania:
http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=2069&chapter=156256&layout=html&Itemid=27
A lot of good writings at the link.
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 26, 2013 at 12:02 AM
Congrats Soylent. Let me know when the compound is ready.
How is the Triumph?
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 26, 2013 at 12:04 AM
Throw down a shooter for me, Soylent. Heartiest congratulations.
I am allowing myself to entertain the notion that today will be remembered as marking the high-water mark of this arrogant bastard's trashing of the constitution. This particular court will have a lot to say about a number of his actions, and the language and reach of today's opinion suggest a somewhat aggressive approach On its part to reining him in. Put that together with the effective preservation of the filibuster status quo and I think we can see the outlines of a very successful opposition to his overreaching. The 2014 midterms are looming awfully large; if we retain the house we will have performed a remarkably successful rearguard action against this strange, delusional statist.
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | January 26, 2013 at 12:05 AM
Nytol.
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | January 26, 2013 at 12:06 AM
Just checking in... Congrats, Soylent, that's great news. Glad to see DoT in a more upbeat mood. Agreed there's hope that this ruling is a sign of things to come. Let's hope Cordray is next to go.
Are there any particularly egregious rulings this past year that might get reversed? It's remarkable that Barry even has to resort to "recess" appointments with a Democrat-controlled Senate.
Posted by: jimmyk | January 26, 2013 at 12:30 AM
Great news about the raise,Soylent. Hope it doesn't put you in a higher bracket. Love your posts tonight.
Posted by: Caro's iPad | January 26, 2013 at 12:53 AM
High School's a bit young to appreciate the content; so's college by my recollection
Yet they were published in newspapers!
I guess the few people who were educated were much better educated in rhetoric than we are today. Or maybe they really talked like that back then, like grad students showing off their high status and erudition. Wm F Buckley had nothing on them when it came to rococo prose.
Posted by: Ralph L | January 26, 2013 at 01:19 AM
From Narciso's ratification link (thanks):
It was the first time that the people of a nation freely determined their form of government
The second thought in my head: you mean the adult white males of a nation. We've been well trained.
Posted by: Ralph L | January 26, 2013 at 01:26 AM
Speaking of military matters--anyone seen Ranger lately?
I miss him.
Posted by: glasater | January 26, 2013 at 03:33 AM
Soylent Red congratulations on your raise.
----------------------------------------
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/01/25/nlrb-chief-dont-worry-recess-appointments-will-ultimately-be-upheld/
Posted by: pagar | January 26, 2013 at 06:37 AM
I didn't know if everyone saw yesterday's story on requiring extracurricular activities for the disabled.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/25/white-house-requires-school-athletics-for-disabled/
I think this is the blast across the bow in preparation to point out CCSSI explicitly contains comparable commitments involving intellectual disabilities.
They do mean to equalize in a levelling sense. Making it first about wheelchair basketball leagues puts an image to the policy. But I know what is already in place.
The equal opportunity and life lessons references are important. As is the NEA phrase "develop their potential."
I corresponded with a Republican legislator yesterday alerting him that when he wrote that school should allow students to "grown to their full potential" he was parroting Marx without realizing it. A kind sociology prof thinking he was talking to the converted in his book outlined all that recently.
I have long thought the timing on these various disabilities statutes in education meant they were actually intended to be a double edged sword. A right for the disabled but placing limitations on the nondisabled that they may not get ahead either as they pass through the same institutions.
"You get a boost up."
"You on the either hand must now wear this tether and not get ahead. In fact you need to stay here on do the boosting up."
Posted by: rse | January 26, 2013 at 07:24 AM
Skipping to here, as it just occurred to me as I am sitting in the airport--any JOMers in Jackson Hole? My skiing days are behind me (bad knee), so they bring me to carry luggage, cook and keep the home fires burning--lots of free time for a coffee (or wine) date.
Posted by: anonamom | January 26, 2013 at 07:58 AM
daddy-
re the CIA officer's prosecution:
Kiriakou leaked the name of the covert CIA officer to Matthew Cole, ex-ABC News, who passed it to a so-called "human rights activist" with the John Adams Project, which passed it to the defense lawyers for the Gitmo detainees.
The same lawyers now working for Obama's DOJ, who passed on personally identifying info and pics of CIA operatives to the Gitmo detainees (and others, undoubtedly).
Ended up resulting in the publishing of names, pictures, and even home addresses of covert operatives. How nice for al-Qaeda, huh?
More info from Seattle Times at LUN
Posted by: Patriot4Freedom | January 26, 2013 at 08:12 AM
Yippee Soylent! You do us proud!
Posted by: Jane on Ipad | January 26, 2013 at 08:13 AM
Amazing leftist rationalization re the leaking of the names and info on CIA operatives and terrorist interrogators can be found at the LUN
Posted by: Patriot4Freedom | January 26, 2013 at 08:15 AM
Congratulations, Soylent!
Posted by: centralcal | January 26, 2013 at 08:39 AM
Click on Drudge NOW to get a chortle (Biden pic). Guffaw!
Posted by: Jim Ryan | January 26, 2013 at 08:46 AM
Well Pat, I recall Shane's story first, and how the White House had explicitly told the Times mot to print the officer's name, I recall that Cole gave up the name of the officer's superiors in the interrogation program, along with picutres
Posted by: narciso | January 26, 2013 at 08:48 AM
Thanks, Jim R.
-----------------------------------------------Janet, Thanks for the Pro Life March links and info.
Posted by: pagar | January 26, 2013 at 08:55 AM
See this is a problem, when a network proves it is more hospitable for him, then for her;
http://twitchy.com/2013/01/25/fox-news-swaps-sarah-palin-for-dennis-kucinich-whats-next-for-mama-grizzly/
Posted by: narciso | January 26, 2013 at 09:11 AM
Fascinating Patriot. Too bad no one is talking about it.
Does anyone else believe that every liberal "opposed to torture" would scream in glee if someone tortured George bush?
Posted by: Jane (A dog in the crate is better than one on the plate) | January 26, 2013 at 09:12 AM
Well, Jane the fact that they weren't up and arms, about the 'death of a president' or Checkpoint, tells you all you need to know,
Posted by: narciso | January 26, 2013 at 09:15 AM
Patriot4Freedom, thanks for the links.
" How nice for al-Qaeda, huh? "
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/01/myjihad-in-uk-jihad-bombers-given-30-million-in-legal-aid-for-their-defense.html
National suicides!
Posted by: pagar | January 26, 2013 at 09:19 AM
An early morning chuckle at Free Beacon this morning. At a NRO symposium Rich Lowry introduces Charles Krauthammer and asks him (before beginning the audience Q&A):
Lowry: Who is your favorite liberal columnist?
Krauthammer: David Brooks
Posted by: centralcal | January 26, 2013 at 09:24 AM
Meanwhile Osama's propagandist gets his life sentence suspended, but Nakoula stays in jail,
what a 'bearded spock' universe we live in,
Posted by: narciso | January 26, 2013 at 09:29 AM
Seems like they are moving ahead;
http://news.yahoo.com/french-forces-airport-bridge-gao-mali-130143539.html
Posted by: narciso | January 26, 2013 at 09:46 AM
There is abuse of power and then there is abuse of intelligence.
In order to export natual gas, Obama may want a carbon tax for the deal.
Now does that make any sense? Natural gas use lowers greenhouse gases as we have shown in the last 10 years.
This guy is not very smart and is pretty nasty as MarkO would say.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | January 26, 2013 at 09:54 AM
No, jiB, that was just one of those campaign promises he keeps 'electricity prices will neccessarily skyrocket'
Posted by: narciso | January 26, 2013 at 10:00 AM
CC,
Yesterday Caro and I were talking about how we should have gone to that conference (and it's a good thing we didn't)
Posted by: Jane (A dog in the crate is better than one on the plate) | January 26, 2013 at 10:00 AM
Kudos to Soylent; I hit the hay shortly after my last comment. I'm getting together with my music buds tonight and I'll toast him with some Gouden Carolus Noel Ale among other good uses of hops, yeast and water.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 26, 2013 at 10:07 AM
Meanwhile, some of our military leaders continue the Obama regime's efforts to downgrade our military.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/chairman-of-joint-chiefs-of-staff-if-women-cant-meet-military-standard-pentagon-will-ask-does-it-really-have-to-be-that-high/
Posted by: pagar | January 26, 2013 at 10:10 AM
There's some serious monkey banging re: climate change on SeeBS this morning.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 26, 2013 at 10:10 AM
The brass with their standard contact with reality.
Posted by: Captain Hate | January 26, 2013 at 10:13 AM
I'd like to ask the estimable Tench Coxe why his sales pitch left out the congressional power to make exceptions:
"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States...And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
Posted by: Danube of Thought iPad | January 26, 2013 at 10:29 AM
More from Tench:
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM
his character at thirty-five must be fully understood
Unfortunately, the constitution makes no provision for the electorate to gain--or even have--that understanding.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | January 26, 2013 at 11:42 AM
anonamom:
any JOMers in Jackson Hole?
I am very jealous that you are there. We used to have a JOMer back in the Libby days who lived in Jackson -- but he has since departed JOM, and I unfortunately never was able to grab a bite or a beer with him.
Enjoy your stay.
Posted by: hit and run | January 26, 2013 at 11:54 AM
The Federalist Papers are my current Kindle-on-iPhone read. On #55 now.
Posted by: sbwaters | January 26, 2013 at 12:15 PM
Did we miss one?
http://www.thepiratescove.us/2013/01/26/court-blocks-epa-biofuels-mandate/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
"The court sided with the country’s chief oil and gas lobby, the American Petroleum Institute, in striking down the 2012 EPA mandate that would have forced refineries to purchase more than $8 million in credits for 8.65 million of gallons of the cellulosic biofuel. However, none of the biofuel is commercially available."
"
Posted by: pagar | January 26, 2013 at 12:31 PM
--Alexander Hamilton
Federalist #68
http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/fed68.htm
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 26, 2013 at 12:56 PM
--"Unfortunately, the constitution makes no provision for the electorate to gain--or even have--that understanding."--
Tench explains:
Posted by: Threadkiller | January 26, 2013 at 01:01 PM
Surely the courts will never endorse this discrimination which would open the floodgates to all sorts of other exclusions.
Would any level of smoking at any rate and for any period in one's life trigger the higher premium? What about alcohol and drug abusers who suffer organ damage; drivers who have a speeding or dui record that is considered to make them more accident prone?
How about being an inner city Black adolescent who is more liable to be a gun victim?
The laugh here is about how liberal good intentions always finish up by being caught out by their contradictions or their plain authoritarian intolerance.
Posted by: DG Forbes | January 26, 2013 at 04:04 PM
Thanks hit--raining here on the mountain. Hope it cools off soon and turns to snow for my snowboarders.
Posted by: anonamom | January 26, 2013 at 06:37 PM
And if you don't vote democrat you won't get health insurance either.
Posted by: jorod | January 27, 2013 at 12:02 PM
A lot of water pipe smokers will probably explain that one connected with life's best pleasures is to like a great cigarette smoking inside.
Posted by: Ash Cathers | January 29, 2013 at 02:04 AM