¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io

ACA reduces insurance premiums almost 20%

Sheila Beaudry
 




¡°Today¡¯s report shows that the Affordable Care Act is working to increase transparency and competition among health insurance plans and drive premiums down,¡± said Secretary Sebelius.? ¡°The reforms in the health care law ensure consumers will have access to better coverage at a lower cost in 2014.¡±
Specifically the report finds that:
  • In the 11 states (including the District of Columbia) that have made information available for the individual market, proposed premiums for 2014 are on average 18 percent lower than HHS¡¯ estimate of 2014 individual market premiums derived from CBO publications.
  • In the six states that have made information available in the small group market, proposed premiums are estimated to be on average 18 percent lower than the premium a small employer would pay for similar coverage without the Affordable Care Act.
  • Both estimates are based on premium proposals for the lowest cost silver plan in the individual and small group markets.? Actual premiums in 2014 may be even lower when health plans are offered in the Marketplace this fall.? Already, in a number of states (DC, OR, RI, VT), the rate review process and competition are resulting in final rates that are significantly below what was proposed earlier this spring.
  • Preliminary premiums appear to be affordable even for young men. For example, in Los Angeles - the county with the largest number of uninsured Americans in the nation - the lowest cost silver plan in 2014 for a 25-year-old individual costs $174 per month without a tax credit, $34 per month for an individual whose income is $17,235, and a catastrophic plan can be purchased for $117 per month for an individual.
Further, data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Insurance Component shows that the average premiums for employer sponsored insurance increased by only 3 percent from 2011 to 2012, the lowest rate of increase observed since the data series started in 1996.
Already the 80/20 rule, or medical loss ratio, has saved 77.8 million consumers $3.4 billion up front on their premiums as insurance companies operated more efficiently and spent more on health care than administrative expenses, and 8.5 million consumers can expect an average rebate of approximately $100 per family.? Since the health law¡¯s rate review provisions were implemented, the number of requests for insurance premium increases of 10 percent or more has dropped dramatically, from 75 percent to 14 percent.? To date, the rate review program has helped save Americans an estimated $1 billion.
The report is available at:?
.


Re: Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

Sheila Beaudry
 



I believe most people would be willing to pay 4 cents more per pizza so workers can get healthcare.

Franchise Owners Take ObamaCare Costs out on Workers

Franchise owners of chains like Papa John's, KFC, Taco Bell, Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Denny's, Longhorn Steakhouse, The Capital Grille and Applebee's say ObamaCare will force them to cut employees' hours since they can't afford to provide more full-time workers with?health insurance?or pay the fines for leaving them uninsured.
Many of these chains' franchise owners have taken the opportunity to talk about the horrors of the cost of ObamaCare, which of course must be taken out on customers and employees, on Fox News. Other sources for the "job killer" rumors include crossroads GPS, Forbes, Heritage Foundation among other openly anti-ObamaCare sources. For our information, we have turned to cross referenced studies by experts, including the CBO report on ObamaCare.

What the "Job Killers" Aren't Telling You

The corporate loudmouths want to blame?health care?for "killing jobs", but companies are the ones in control of their hiring and firing process. If they want to slow down productivity, deal with sick workers, low-job retention and the costs of training and re-training by cutting jobs and wages, then that makes them "job killers"- not ObamaCare. Is there more to this picture? What aren't these companies telling us?
What they don't tell you is that over the past decade, the amount of small businesses who can afford to provide health insurance to their employees has dropped dramatically, while larger businesses have been mostly unaffected. 3/4 of small businesses who dropped employee benefits because of the rising costs of health care will receive tax credits to offer their employees insurance. This will help to increase hiring rates and decrease turn over, making small business jobs more attractive.
ObamaCare helps small business, and forces bigger businesses who don't want to provide benefits to do something that the big boys already do: treat their workers with respect.
Perhaps it's time to start supporting the 96% of large employers who already offer benefits including WholeFoods, Nordtrom, Starbucks, UPS, Lowe's, JCPenny, Land's End, JP Morgan Chase, Barnes & Noble, Target, Home Depot, Costco, among many others who all offer part-time employees health benefits.


From: "zimowski@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2013 10:37 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

?
Your NBC reference predates the NBC news report I referenced. Looks like the NBC news room has changed it's mind.

Regarding Medicare, who would pay for it, if it covered everyone? Obamacare is much more than just a health care plan. As we all know, it's also a tax, per the Supreme Court, and also many other things.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Of course the real solution would be Medicare for all and no employer would have to provide healthcare insurance.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...>
> To: ibmpensionissues@...
> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 1:19 PM
> Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours
>
>
>
> ??
> Finally, the main stream prime-time news stations are beginning to report the truth about the effects of Obamacare:
>
> Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours
> By Lisa Myers and Carroll Ann Mears
> NBC News
>
> Employers around the country, from fast-food franchises to colleges, have told NBC News that they will be cutting workers' hours below 30 a week because they can't afford to offer the health insurance mandated by the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.
>
>
>




Re: Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

 

Your NBC reference predates the NBC news report I referenced. Looks like the NBC news room has changed it's mind.

Regarding Medicare, who would pay for it, if it covered everyone? Obamacare is much more than just a health care plan. As we all know, it's also a tax, per the Supreme Court, and also many other things.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...> wrote:




Of course the real solution would be Medicare for all and no employer would have to provide healthcare insurance.


________________________________
From: "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 1:19 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours



??
Finally, the main stream prime-time news stations are beginning to report the truth about the effects of Obamacare:

Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours
By Lisa Myers and Carroll Ann Mears
NBC News

Employers around the country, from fast-food franchises to colleges, have told NBC News that they will be cutting workers' hours below 30 a week because they can't afford to offer the health insurance mandated by the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.



Re: Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

buckwildbeemer
 

Yeah right. Your story is from July 24th!!!

1. Comcast owns NBC.
2. Obama dines with Comcast CEO Brian Roberts between golfing at Martha's Vinyard. Something went wrong?
3. On Aug 13th:

Duh.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...> wrote:


Re: Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

Sheila Beaudry
 



Of course the real solution would be Medicare for all and no employer would have to provide healthcare insurance.


From: "zimowski@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 1:19 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

?
Finally, the main stream prime-time news stations are beginning to report the truth about the effects of Obamacare:

Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours
By Lisa Myers and Carroll Ann Mears
NBC News

Employers around the country, from fast-food franchises to colleges, have told NBC News that they will be cutting workers' hours below 30 a week because they can't afford to offer the health insurance mandated by the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.






Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours

 

Finally, the main stream prime-time news stations are beginning to report the truth about the effects of Obamacare:

Businesses claim Obamacare has forced them to cut employee hours
By Lisa Myers and Carroll Ann Mears
NBC News

Employers around the country, from fast-food franchises to colleges, have told NBC News that they will be cutting workers' hours below 30 a week because they can't afford to offer the health insurance mandated by the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.


Why The ACA Data Hub Will Lead To Identity Theft - Forbes

buckwildbeemer
 



Wow.


Re: Future Health Account

catfishweiner
 

speaking of music, check this song list:

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., <c.mankat@...> wrote:

If BS was music, Obama would be a symphony conductor


Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

icarlosdanger
 

Mel,
Hunch: Rules don't have to say "why" they say "what".

Not sure what you are smoking. (weed leftover from Berkeley?)
Just kidding.

Both links work for me.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...> wrote:

The point I was trying to make is that the text of the proposed rule doesn't tell the real story. Interesting to read, especially the part that makes it clear that Congress has written the rule so that it is conveniently vague as to who exactly it applies to and, of course, there is no provision for any kind of oversight.

ACA as originally written and passed raised the health care costs of most members of congress and their staff. Does anyone still believe that the Pelosi and Reid didn't force a vote on this legislation before most even had a chance to read it?

BTW, neither of your links are valid.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., icarlosdanger <no_reply@> wrote:

Duh--


was the motivator!



quote:
"Last week, when President Barack Obama came to the Hill to meet with Senate Democrats, he informed them that he would personally get involved to sort out the confusion, and the White House said that OPM would issue guidelines this week."

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:

The text of the proposed rule does not explain any of the motivation behind the proposed rule.


Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

 

The point I was trying to make is that the text of the proposed rule doesn't tell the real story. Interesting to read, especially the part that makes it clear that Congress has written the rule so that it is conveniently vague as to who exactly it applies to and, of course, there is no provision for any kind of oversight.

ACA as originally written and passed raised the health care costs of most members of congress and their staff. Does anyone still believe that the Pelosi and Reid didn't force a vote on this legislation before most even had a chance to read it?

BTW, neither of your links are valid.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., icarlosdanger <no_reply@...> wrote:

Duh--


was the motivator!



quote:
"Last week, when President Barack Obama came to the Hill to meet with Senate Democrats, he informed them that he would personally get involved to sort out the confusion, and the White House said that OPM would issue guidelines this week."

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:

The text of the proposed rule does not explain any of the motivation behind the proposed rule.


Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

icarlosdanger
 

Duh--


was the motivator!



quote:
"Last week, when President Barack Obama came to the Hill to meet with Senate Democrats, he informed them that he would personally get involved to sort out the confusion, and the White House said that OPM would issue guidelines this week."

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...> wrote:

The text of the proposed rule does not explain any of the motivation behind the proposed rule.


Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

 

The text of the proposed rule does not explain any of the motivation behind the proposed rule.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., icarlosdanger <no_reply@...> wrote:

all 13 pages of it, in case you posted about it before you read the proposed rule... (snicker)



--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:

Here's a more in depth view of what this is all about:


Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

icarlosdanger
 

all 13 pages of it, in case you posted about it before you read the proposed rule... (snicker)

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...> wrote:

Here's a more in depth view of what this is all about:


Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

 

Here's a more in depth view of what this is all about:

Congress Pulls a Fast One; Obamacare Premiums Won't Apply to Them

s it any wonder that the American people are fed up with politics? Barack Obama's approval numbers are terrible, but American's feelings toward Congress are even worse. So, it shouldn't be hard to believe that members of Congress (with the help of Obama) are hard at work to make sure that sky-high Obamacare premiums will NOT apply to them.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, the annual salary of members of Congress and their higher paid aides put them in a category where they won't qualify for Obamacare subsidies. Thus, the premiums and potential out of pocket expenses for them are about to go up, up, and up. So what are they going to do about it? You guessed it...

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...> wrote:

They are still getting their insurance through the ACA it is just that they will still get the gov employee??subsidy they are currently getting for healthcare insurance, but since they are getting that, they cannot also get additional ACA subsidy based upon their salaries.?? It is like saying IBM can continue their employee subsidy to health insurance.


From: weinerisnospitzer <no_reply@...>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 5:35 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Fed. Lawmakers & Staffies Freak Over ACA

??


transcript

MSNBC
Morning Joe
August 2, 2013
6:04 a.m. Eastern

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: The White House is stepping in once again when it comes to the way ObamaCare is being implemented. First it was a decision to delay the employer mandate, and now the president has personally intervened to allow the government to continue helping members of Congress and their staff when it comes to paying their premiums. Members of Congress were furious that they would soon be forced to pay thousands of dollars ?€"

JOE SCARBOROUGH [laughing]: Hold on, hold on. Members of Congress, Harold [Ford, Jr.], were furious that they were going to be held to the same law that they passed, right?

HAROLD, FORD, JR.: It's odd.

BRZEZINSKI [laughing]: Ah!

SCARBOROUGH: It is odd. They got so angry.

BRZEZINSKI: There's a lot of odd things going around.

SCARBOROUGH: And, by the way, the president goes up to see the Democrats this week. What is the first thing, Mike [Barnicle], they are yelling at him about?

MIKE BARNICLE: What about my premiums?

SCARBOROUGH [laughing]: Exactly. [Mocking members of Congress:] You mean we're going to have to live by the laws that we passed on the American people?

BARNICLE [mocking members of Congress]: We're going to have to worry about the same things that our constituents are forced to worry about? Please!

SCARBOROUGH: Oh, God. I'm sorry, Mika ?€"

BRZEZINSKI: No, actually, they take their vacations when their ?€"

BARNICLE: Five weeks. Five weeks.

BRZEZINSKI: Usually when things are just, like, happening, they leave. Alright. They [members of Congress] would soon be forced to pay thousands of dollars in additional costs through ObamaCare's insurance marketplaces. Some even warned that lawmakers would leave Washington and their staffers would look for work outside of government service.

BARNICLE [laughing]: The horror!

SCARBOROUGH [laughing]: Hold on a second!

BARNICLE: The horror!

SCARBOROUGH: So hold on. So Harold, when small business owners are telling the Obama administration: you know, if you do this we're going to lose some of our best employees ?€" and the administration says oh, no no. You all are so crazy. What? What are you talking about? It's happening on Capitol Hill. They said: we're going to lose our best staffers if ObamaCare is implemented up here.

FORD, JR.: You would have thought they would have come up with a different set of answers or excuses for why ?€" it's not the exact same argument ?€"

SCARBOROUGH [laughing]: Oh, it's awful.

BARNICLE: The three scariest words on Capitol Hill, among the staff and among the elected officials, are: the private sector.

BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.

BARNICLE: Forced to go look in the private sector. Woo!

SCARBOROUGH: So what's the way ?€"

BRZEZINSKI: But now the administration is set to announce a plan that lets the federal government continue paying its share of congressional health plans. In turn, those employees would be ineligible for any tax credits or subsidies.

SCARBOROUGH: It's crazy. You know, one of the first things we passed when we got up there. In fact, it was the first thing ?€" you remember [former Connecticut Congressman] Chris Shays? Great guy, great congressman from Connecticut, love Chris. We passed what was called the Shays Act. And it was radical, first day we were up there, and it made Congress live by the same rules that the rest of the country lived by.

BARNICLE [joking]: That's terrible.

SCARBOROUGH: That didn't last long. So now, seriously, how embarrassing that they passed this law. Again, small business owners, Harold, have been complaining about it ?€"

FORD, JR.: This is one of those things that ?€" you know, you and I understand you are going to hear, come next summer and fall as the campaigns get going.

SCARBOROUGH: This is the 30-second ad.

FORD, JR.: Right, it's one of those things that's easy to explain, easy to convey and it's hard to dispute. There may be some caveats to this ?€" I don't know what they are ?€" but this is an easy one to make a 30-second ad out of.

SCARBOROUGH: Listen. The 30-second ad ?€" how you would not like and I would not like [in mocking, ominous narrative voice] ?€" Congressman Scarborough voted for ObamaCare to raise your health premiums. And yet, he had the president exempt him from ObamaCare. Let's exempt Congressman Scarborough from Congress.

[Laughing:] Or something like that. This is set up so easily for these Democrats who have been ?€" these Democrats who passed this.

Read more:

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, pawnedmyrolex <no_reply@> wrote:

Video of the Day:

IRS chief Daniel Werfel says he wants to keep his health care plan, not switch to Obamacare



Maybe, his testimony today could be career-limiting as acting commissioner of the IRS.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, edward_berkline <no_reply@> wrote:

You left out the most important part...

"In battles over the health care law in 2009-10, Republicans proposed a requirement for lawmakers and aides to join the exchanges, and Democrats accepted it.

Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who proposed an early version of the idea, said he wanted to make sure that "members of Congress and Congressional staff get their employer-based health insurance through the same exchanges as our constituents."

It has been a headache for many in Congress ever since."

So it was a Republican idea that is causing all the problems!
How about those dumb-ass Republicans? They screwed things up again.


User's Guide To Committing Fraud On The Obama?care Exchanges

icarlosdanger
 

Let me stipulate that I do not condone fraud in any form!


Re: Honest discussions are needed on this board, not personal attacks

weinerisnospitzer
 

If any of you (non-Medicare folks) volunteer at or attend any of these:
please share your honest experiences!


Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

 

Reminds me of what someone (not sure who) once said: "You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time".

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...> wrote:

Notice they made it more lenient for absentee votes which are a much higher percentage of Republican voters than they did for in-person voters.?? They also reduced the early voting time and days where the early voters have a higher percentage of Democratic voters.?? They also redistricted in 2010 and pushed most minorities into just a few districts.?? Even though 51% of the votes in 2012 were for Democratic representatives only 4 Democrats were elected and 9 Republicans.?? There needs to be unbiased, neutral redistricting.


From: "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2013 1:39 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

??
The North Carolina rules for absentee ballot voters seems very flexible to me. The only time any kind of identification is required is when an individual who is registered to vote by mail has not previously voted in an election that includes a ballot item for federal office. The individual then includes one of the following types of identification in the envelope containing the absentee ballot: A copy of a current and valid photo identification or a copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.

Thanks for providing this information. I'm now even more convinced that the voter id requirements in NC are reasonable.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

7/29/13 This is the Technical corrections bill to several of the bills passed.???? See


From: "zimowski@" <zimowski@>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 1:07 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

????
The date on my reference is July 27, 2013. How current is your reference?

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

This is where I read it:SECTION 14.(b) G.S. 163-166.12 reads as rewritten:
"???€????¡ì 163-166.12. Requirements for certain voters who register by mail.
(a) Voting in Person. ???????€???" An individual who has registered to vote by mail on or after January 1, 2003, and has not previously voted in an election that includes a ballot item for federal office in North Carolina, shall present to a local election official at a voting place before voting there one of the following:
(1) A current and valid photo identification.
(2) A copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.
(b) Voting Mail-In Absentee. ???????€???" An individual who has registered to vote by mail on or after January 1, 2003, and has not previously voted in an election that includes a ballot item for federal office in North Carolina, in order to cast a mail-in absentee vote, shall submit with the mailed-in absentee ballot one of the following:
(1) A copy of a current and valid photo identification.
(2) A copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.

From: "zimowski@" <zimowski@>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 11:27 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

???€?????
There are some that disagree with you. They quote from H589. Are they wrong?



Here's an extract from the article:

From the text of the H589:

PART 2. PHOTO IDENTIFICATION

SECTION 2.1. Article 14A of Chapter 163 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new section to read:

"???€????¡ì 163???????€???`166.13. Photo identification requirement for voting in person.

(a) Every qualified voter voting in person in accordance with this Article, G.S. 163???????€???`227.2, or G.S. 163???????€???`182.1A shall present photo identification bearing any reasonable resemblance to that voter to a local election official at the voting place before voting, except as follows: [bold emphasis added by me above]

The requirement to show an ID to vote is limited to those voting in person, with an allowance made for curbside voting outside a precinct where a poll worker comes to the car (this is considered in person). If you request an absentee ballot you do have to provide some identifying information in written form; options include providing a NC DL number, the last 4 digits of a Social Security number, etc [see ???€????¡ì 163???????€???`230.2. (4)].

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

In NC the voter ID is required for absentee too.
???'??????????€?????

From: "zimowski@" <zimowski@>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 12:22 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

???'??????????€?????
My, my, my.... you do like to twist what others say. Not a winning argument if you're really trying to convince that I'm mistaken and should change my mind about the need for voter ids. You and I both know that I believe very strongly in everyone's right to vote. I also believe that legal immigrants should obtain their citizenship as quickly as possible so they can participate.

There are clear disadvantages to living in rural areas. If you get sick, the health care you need may not be readily available. You'll probably not be able to watch the latest movies when they're first released. You may or may not have good internet support or reliable cell phone service, etc.. And you may not be able to obtain a voter id as easily as you might like. But, if you get sick, you go to where the proper healthcare is available. Likewise, if voting is important to you and you need a voter id , then you do what it takes to get one. But having said that, it's my understanding that a voter id is not required to vote by absentee ballot. So is having to have a voter id a real problem for anyone? Why can't they just vote by absentee ballot? Their signature will be on file from when they originally registered to vote. Which reminds me, we are not talking about registering to vote, which is what you last post is all about. We're just talking
about
the
requirement for the voter id.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, edward_berkline <no_reply@> wrote:

So your argument is that it is ok to make it inconvenient and difficult to register to vote and disenfranchise voters so long as those votes wouldn't make a difference in the outcome of the election? Something that can't be known with 100% certainty in advance!

Shouldn't the policy be that no citizen, no matter what party, should not be disenfranchised and should be allowed to register to vote with no unnecessary roadblocks?

Oh, I know, next you'll argue that the massive degree of voter fraud makes this necessary. But the truth is, the actual level of voter fraud is far, far below the level of being significant.



--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, "zimowski@" <zimowski@> wrote:

It is possible to convince me that my view on something may be incorrect. Arguments that teach me something new and that support the point being made will have the best chance of success.

As far as Texas is concerned, I stand by the statement I made. Most rural Texans are Republican. If, in fact, a few rural Texans were unable to vote in the 2012 presidential election due to burdensome voter id laws, then I seriously doubt that these uncast votes if cast for Obama would have made any difference at all. From the wikipedia web site:

,_2012

"Mitt Romney won the state of Texas with 57.17%, over Barack Obama's 41.38%. As in past elections, President Obama and the Democrats won in major metropolitan areas such as Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston, but Republicans were able to overwhelm the urban vote by sweeping the vast rural areas and suburbs of Texas by large margins."

Take a look at the pictorial county by county results and draw your own conclusions:



???€?????


Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

Sheila Beaudry
 

Notice they made it more lenient for absentee votes which are a much higher percentage of Republican voters than they did for in-person voters.? They also reduced the early voting time and days where the early voters have a higher percentage of Democratic voters.? They also redistricted in 2010 and pushed most minorities into just a few districts.? Even though 51% of the votes in 2012 were for Democratic representatives only 4 Democrats were elected and 9 Republicans.? There needs to be unbiased, neutral redistricting.

From: "zimowski@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2013 1:39 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life
?
The North Carolina rules for absentee ballot voters seems very flexible to me. The only time any kind of identification is required is when an individual who is registered to vote by mail has not previously voted in an election that includes a ballot item for federal office. The individual then includes one of the following types of identification in the envelope containing the absentee ballot: A copy of a current and valid photo identification or a copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.

Thanks for providing this information. I'm now even more convinced that the voter id requirements in NC are reasonable.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:
>
> 7/29/13 This is the Technical corrections bill to several of the bills passed.?? See
>
>
> From: "zimowski@..."
> To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 1:07 PM
> Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life
>
> ??
> The date on my reference is July 27, 2013. How current is your reference?
>
> --- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:
> >
> > This is where I read it:SECTION 14.(b) G.S. 163-166.12 reads as rewritten:
> > "???¡ì 163-166.12. Requirements for certain voters who register by mail.
> > (a) Voting in Person. ?????" An individual who has registered to vote by mail on or after January 1, 2003, and has not previously voted in an election that includes a ballot item for federal office in North Carolina, shall present to a local election official at a voting place before voting there one of the following:
> > (1) A current and valid photo identification.
> > (2) A copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.
> > (b) Voting Mail-In Absentee. ?????" An individual who has registered to vote by mail on or after January 1, 2003, and has not previously voted in an election that includes a ballot item for federal office in North Carolina, in order to cast a mail-in absentee vote, shall submit with the mailed-in absentee ballot one of the following:
> > (1) A copy of a current and valid photo identification.
> > (2) A copy of one of the following documents that shows the name and address of the voter: a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document.
> >
> > From: "zimowski@"
> > To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 11:27 AM
> > Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life
> >
> > ????
> > There are some that disagree with you. They quote from H589. Are they wrong?
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's an extract from the article:
> >
> > From the text of the H589:
> >
> > PART 2. PHOTO IDENTIFICATION
> >
> > SECTION 2.1. Article 14A of Chapter 163 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new section to read:
> >
> > "???¡ì 163?????`166.13. Photo identification requirement for voting in person.
> >
> > (a) Every qualified voter voting in person in accordance with this Article, G.S. 163?????`227.2, or G.S. 163?????`182.1A shall present photo identification bearing any reasonable resemblance to that voter to a local election official at the voting place before voting, except as follows: [bold emphasis added by me above]
> >
> > The requirement to show an ID to vote is limited to those voting in person, with an allowance made for curbside voting outside a precinct where a poll worker comes to the car (this is considered in person). If you request an absentee ballot you do have to provide some identifying information in written form; options include providing a NC DL number, the last 4 digits of a Social Security number, etc [see ???¡ì 163?????`230.2. (4)].
> >
> > --- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:
> > >
> > > In NC the voter ID is required for absentee too.
> > > ???€?????
> > >
> > > From: "zimowski@"
> > > To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 12:22 AM
> > > Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life
> > >
> > > ???€?????
> > > My, my, my.... you do like to twist what others say. Not a winning argument if you're really trying to convince that I'm mistaken and should change my mind about the need for voter ids. You and I both know that I believe very strongly in everyone's right to vote. I also believe that legal immigrants should obtain their citizenship as quickly as possible so they can participate.
> > >
> > > There are clear disadvantages to living in rural areas. If you get sick, the health care you need may not be readily available. You'll probably not be able to watch the latest movies when they're first released. You may or may not have good internet support or reliable cell phone service, etc.. And you may not be able to obtain a voter id as easily as you might like. But, if you get sick, you go to where the proper healthcare is available. Likewise, if voting is important to you and you need a voter id , then you do what it takes to get one. But having said that, it's my understanding that a voter id is not required to vote by absentee ballot. So is having to have a voter id a real problem for anyone? Why can't they just vote by absentee ballot? Their signature will be on file from when they originally registered to vote. Which reminds me, we are not talking about registering to vote, which is what you last post is all about. We're just talking about
> > the
> > > requirement for the voter id.
> > >
> > > --- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, edward_berkline wrote:
> > > >
> > > > So your argument is that it is ok to make it inconvenient and difficult to register to vote and disenfranchise voters so long as those votes wouldn't make a difference in the outcome of the election? Something that can't be known with 100% certainty in advance!
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't the policy be that no citizen, no matter what party, should not be disenfranchised and should be allowed to register to vote with no unnecessary roadblocks?
> > > >
> > > > Oh, I know, next you'll argue that the massive degree of voter fraud makes this necessary. But the truth is, the actual level of voter fraud is far, far below the level of being significant.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, "zimowski@" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It is possible to convince me that my view on something may be incorrect. Arguments that teach me something new and that support the point being made will have the best chance of success.
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as Texas is concerned, I stand by the statement I made. Most rural Texans are Republican. If, in fact, a few rural Texans were unable to vote in the 2012 presidential election due to burdensome voter id laws, then I seriously doubt that these uncast votes if cast for Obama would have made any difference at all. From the wikipedia web site:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Mitt Romney won the state of Texas with 57.17%, over Barack Obama's 41.38%. As in past elections, President Obama and the Democrats won in major metropolitan areas such as Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston, but Republicans were able to overwhelm the urban vote by sweeping the vast rural areas and suburbs of Texas by large margins."
> > > > >
> > > > > Take a look at the pictorial county by county results and draw your own conclusions:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ????
> >
>


Re: The Inequality President

Sheila Beaudry
 

Very happy, especially since my husband had a heart attack, and triple bypass this year.? Bill would have been over $217,000 if didn't have insurance.

From: "zimowski@..."
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Saturday, August 3, 2013 1:44 AM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: The Inequality President
?
I really didn't expect a reply to this one. After I sent it, I realized I forgot to include :-)
Am hoping I am as happy as you are with medicare when my time arrives.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:
>
> No, just replying to??"Let's all share how government has fixed your most recent social problem!"
>
>
> From: "zimowski@..."
> To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 1:01 PM
> Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: The Inequality President
>
> ??
> Are you now suggesting that Medicare is also one of Obama's accomplishments?
>
> --- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:
> >
> > Medicare has greatly lowered our medical insurance costs.???? Previously even with $7000 IBM subsidy, had to pay over $15000 a year and it was taking the majority of the pension.
> >
> >
> > From: weinerisnospitzer
> > To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 12:55 PM
> > Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: The Inequality President
> >
> > ????
> > HA!????????
> > Let's all share how government has fixed your most recent social problem!
> >
> > The politics of Washington Monthly are left of center. Founder Charles Peters refers to himself as a New Deal Democrat and advocates the effective use of government to address social problems.????
> >
> > ref:????
> >
> > Publisher Diane Straus Tucker worked with wacko Howard Dean???? at the DNC.???????????????????? <<<===(Watch last 4 seconds)
> >
> > --- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:
> > >
> > > Lots of hope and change for me.
> > >
> >
>


Re: The Inequality President

 

I really didn't expect a reply to this one. After I sent it, I realized I forgot to include :-)
Am hoping I am as happy as you are with medicare when my time arrives.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@...> wrote:

No, just replying to??"Let's all share how government has fixed your most recent social problem!"


From: "zimowski@..." <zimowski@...>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 1:01 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: The Inequality President

??
Are you now suggesting that Medicare is also one of Obama's accomplishments?

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

Medicare has greatly lowered our medical insurance costs.???? Previously even with $7000 IBM subsidy, had to pay over $15000 a year and it was taking the majority of the pension.


From: weinerisnospitzer <mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2013 12:55 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: The Inequality President

????
HA!????????
Let's all share how government has fixed your most recent social problem!

The politics of Washington Monthly are left of center. Founder Charles Peters refers to himself as a New Deal Democrat and advocates the effective use of government to address social problems.????

ref:????

Publisher Diane Straus Tucker worked with wacko Howard Dean???? at the DNC.???????????????????? <<<===(Watch last 4 seconds)

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry wrote:

Lots of hope and change for me.