Obama Pushing ObamaCare on Troops, Forcing Them to Pay at Least Triple for Care

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kati..._obamacare


The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched.

The administration is also pushing for more expensive Tricare payments for military members in order to force them onto ObamaCare, just like they are doing with private insurance plans. It's all part of the move toward single payer healthcare.



And just how much more will military have to pay?

Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels.

According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048.

The military disapproves of the push:

Military personnel from several of the armed services voiced their opposition to a means-tested tier system for Tricare, prompting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey to issue a statement Feb. 21.

Dempsey said the military is making tough choices in cutting defense spending. In addition to the $487 billion over 10 years, the Pentagon is facing automatic cuts that could push the total reductions to $1 trillion.

“I want those of you who serve and who have served to know that we’ve heard your concerns, in particular your concern about the tiered enrollment fee structure for Tricare in retirement,” Dempsey said. “You have our commitment that we will continue to review our health care system to make it as responsive, as affordable, and as equitable as possible.”

Quote from DarthSaver : http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kati..._obamacare The Obama administration’s proposed defense budget calls for military families and retirees to pay sharply more for their healthcare, while leaving unionized civilian defense workers’ benefits untouched. The administration is also pushing for more expensive Tricare payments for military members in order to force them onto ObamaCare, just like they are doing with private insurance plans. It's all part of the move toward single payer healthcare. And just how much more will military have to pay? Significantly, the plan calls for increases between 30 percent to 78 percent in Tricare annual premiums for the first year. After that, the plan will impose five-year increases ranging from 94 percent to 345 percent—more than 3 times current levels. According to congressional assessments, a retired Army colonel with a family currently paying $460 a year for health care will pay $2,048. The military disapproves of the push: Military personnel from several of the armed services voiced their opposition to a means-tested tier system for Tricare, prompting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey to issue a statement Feb. 21. Dempsey said the military is making tough choices in cutting defense spending. In addition to the $487 billion over 10 years, the Pentagon is facing automatic cuts that could push the total reductions to $1 trillion. “I want those of you who serve and who have served to know that we’ve heard your concerns, in particular your concern about the tiered enrollment fee structure for Tricare in retirement,” Dempsey said. “You have our commitment that we will continue to review our health care system to make it as responsive, as affordable, and as equitable as possible.”

And yet the unions still get free or greatly reduced insurance. I guess we see now who Obama thinks more highly of. Maybe if the military was able to do more to help in with his campaign, he would take care of them. Too bad they were off having too much fun to have time to help him.

Imagine that...

the level of abuse of power, strong-arm tactics, bullying, intimidation, enemies "list-keeping", and outright thuggery of this administration is amazing...I can't say "unprecedented" in history (eg FDR), but certainly unprecedented in my lifetime.

The typical traits and actions of tyrants and dictators in the making....I grow more and more convinced that if Obama wins re-election, this country is finished as we know it (and as it was founded). It will become a big-government tyranny that would be near-impossible to get rid off.

The technology available to the government and levels of citizen monitoring, the NDAA, the increasing ease and effectiveness of monitoring of the Internet, a complicit media that is under the government's thumb (if not up their @ss), etc will make it impossible to stage another 1776 revolution for freedom.

Quote from Radeck : The technology available to the government and levels of citizen monitoring, the NDAA, the increasing ease and effectiveness of monitoring of the Internet, a complicit media that is under the government's thumb (if not up their @ss), etc will make it impossible to stage another 1776 revolution for freedom.

Why chance it? Have you considered moving to another country with less evil gov't regulation? Perhaps Mexico, or Somalia, or Turkmenistan?

I'm pretty sure that if the Founding Fathers were alive today and they believed that the US is as "oppressed" as you claim, their advice would not be "go ye to the internet and whine a lot."

Quote from gunnerusa : Why chance it? Have you considered moving to another country with less evil gov't regulation? Perhaps Mexico, or Somalia, or Turkmenistan?

so you support a 'race to the bottom' mentality? Because these bully tactics things are used in other countries, we should use them here too? we should not be a beacon for freedom from oppressive government? we should just join the rest of the corrupt dictatorships and banana republics?

is that your idea of what freedom is about?

Quote from Radeck : so you support a 'race to the bottom' mentality? Because these bully tactics things are used in other countries, we should use them here too? we should not be a beacon for freedom from oppressive government? we should just join the rest of the corrupt dictatorships and banana republics? is that your idea of what freedom is about?

They're banana republics because they have weak governments.

Plus if you don't like it here, well...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iQ7ZDUutU4

Just some quick thoughts on the post:

1) This doesn't sound like it has anything to do with the Healthcare overhaul, and only to do with military budgets.


2) Very few people in the private workforce receive retirement medical benefits at all. The story you site is for a retired Army Colonel. I'd be interested in examples of active personnel considering it is their only source of medical benefits rather than a retiree who is likely re-employed or receiving Medicare.


3) The rate they list for the Colonel is very low to begin with. For example, as part of a large company group plan, my portion is $2080 per year for myself alone (and my cost is lower than anyone else I know). His example said he was only paying ~$460 for his family.

Quote from gunnerusa : They're banana republics because they have weak governments.

false dichotomy / false comparison...small government =/ weak government
and the corollary is true, over-regulating/micro-managing government =/ strong government

Quote from ShengD : 3) The rate they list for the Colonel is very low to begin with. For example, as part of a large company group plan, my portion is $2080 per year for myself alone (and my cost is lower than anyone else I know). His example said he was only paying ~$460 for his family.

Did you serve your country?

Quote from Radeck : false dichotomy / false comparison...small government =/ weak government and the corollary is true, over-regulating/micro-managing government =/ strong government

In what fantasy land?

Small governments almost always lack much influence because they lack money. IE. weak.

That's why the wealthy like small governments. They want to keep the influence for themselves.

Quote from DarthSaver : Did you serve your country?

What a lousy retort. There are many ways one can serve the country than just fighting in wars (especially voluntary wars). I have no problem with committing more resources to the health and well-being of servicemen, but I don't believe volunteer soldiers are necessarily more honorable than many other professions. I was a member of ROTC, have multiple family members in the service, and I know many who have fulfilled their commitment. I respect their choice to serve, but for many that choice includes many factors including money for college, citizenship, respect, just having a job, or a slick recruiter. Serving because of a draft is a different story.


But to your point, it so happens, most of the people I work with ARE veterans (from the Navy). Since my employer is a Nuclear power station, they draw heavily from the nuclear sub crews. And we are all in the same healthcare system.

Quote from ShengD : What a lousy retort.

You're the one trying to make a comparison between yourself and a retired Colonel who HAS served their country. If you think retired military personnel should pay the same as you wrt to healthcare, explain your reasoning. So far, you have failed.

Quote from ShengD : I don't believe volunteer soldiers are necessarily more honorable than many other professions

Geez, I never would have guessed

I for one am fine with this. The economy is down. Many of us have taken pay cuts, lost bonuses, lost other benefits, been forced to give up their vacation time, and pay a boat load more for insurance because the percentage their employer pays was dramatically reduced.

Why shouldn't those serving their country also be impacted? The Pentagon could have easily saved in other areas such as advanced weaponry and put them on the battlefield with less advanced weapons/armor but personally if I were out there I'd want the most advanced shit to safeguard my life! Even if that means I have to pay a little more for coverage.

Why does their chosen profession somehow make them above those who aren't currently in service or who haven't been? Simple, it doesn't in this country. Their job = their choice, and one that many people graciously thank them for. Anything else people say is just BS.

Personally I say keep it where it's at and just reduce the number of troops but then again that'd mean that we take a stance on not being the world police anymore and actually focus our efforts on defending ourselves at home...