Obamacare: More devils in the details

Clarice Feldman
Tom Maguire notes some flaws in the monstrosity known as ObamaCare and Rasmussen reveals that 63% of the voters want it repealed.
As they study the law, employers are discovering another provision that got much less attention. If a company offers coverage but requires any full-time employees to pay premiums that amount to more than 9.5 percent of their household income, the coverage is deemed unaffordable, and the employer may have to pay a penalty.

A goal of the law, pushed through Congress by President Obama and Democratic leaders with no Republican support, is to give all Americans access to affordable insurance.

The Mercer survey found that one-third of employers had some workers for whom coverage might be "unaffordable," meaning that the workers' share of premiums - in the absence of federal assistance - would consume more than 9.5 percent of their household income.

Since it is household income, if a spouse loses his job at a different firm, the employed spouse may subject her employer to penalties

Outside of the groves of academia, details matter and the President and his adoring press paid little heed to what Pelosi and Reid (and their staffs) conjured up. Now they all are paying the price for his inattention.


Clarice Feldman


Tom Maguire notes some flaws in the monstrosity known as ObamaCare and Rasmussen reveals that 63% of the voters want it repealed.

As they study the law, employers are discovering another provision that got much less attention. If a company offers coverage but requires any full-time employees to pay premiums that amount to more than 9.5 percent of their household income, the coverage is deemed unaffordable, and the employer may have to pay a penalty.

A goal of the law, pushed through Congress by President Obama and Democratic leaders with no Republican support, is to give all Americans access to affordable insurance.

The Mercer survey found that one-third of employers had some workers for whom coverage might be "unaffordable," meaning that the workers' share of premiums - in the absence of federal assistance - would consume more than 9.5 percent of their household income.

Since it is household income, if a spouse loses his job at a different firm, the employed spouse may subject her employer to penalties

Outside of the groves of academia, details matter and the President and his adoring press paid little heed to what Pelosi and Reid (and their staffs) conjured up. Now they all are paying the price for his inattention.


Clarice Feldman