Google +LinkedInPinterestYouTubeInstagramTwitterFacebook

Will the Affordable Health Care Act have to be changed in order pass a federal spending bill?

 

View more polls

 

mikesepstein

October 3, 2013 - 3:49pm

While I do not agree with everything in the ACA, the actions of the House are essentially an attempt at blackmail, with the health of the nation at stake. This sets a very bad precedent. The proper procedure would be to inform the public and win the next election and then change the law. Blackmail is a bad precedent.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 4:24pm

I agree with you. Not only was ACA passed by both Houses and signed by The President of the United States, the Republican Supreme Court confirmed its Constitutionality. The Tea Party thinks it can over turn our Constitution. It's not going to happen! Cruz and Rubio are Cubans who think that they can do to the US what Castro did to Cuba. They are guaranteed to give the Dems the White House (Hilary)and both houses of Congress in the next elections which will also change the Supreme Court to Democrat. Bye bye Tea Party.

bobajabob

October 5, 2013 - 12:12pm

actually the proper legal term for this is Extortion-A Grand Jury should be convened and those guilty of promoting this attempted attack should be tried for their crimes by a jury of OUR peers.

JESSE T. COPE III

October 9, 2013 - 8:07am

The ACA endangers the viability and exceptionalism of US medicine. Although past rising costs are a persuasive argument for reform, I think that the ACA will guarantee the mediocrity of the medical care available to us all. Let's get rid of it any way we can and start over.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 4:11pm

When ACA (Obamacare ) was passed and became the law of the land the funding was passed as part of the Bill so it is already fully funded. After the house sends a clean resolution to the Senate it has no effect on Obamacare. If there are refinements to be resolved in the law then Congress can through normal procedures make changes in the law the same way they want to make changes in other laws.

The largest deficit spender in the budget is the Dept of Defense and therefore it has the greatest ability to change. If we stop the continuous wars then we can use this money for Veterans and for internal rebuilding of our country.

cegeyer

October 3, 2013 - 5:36pm

The ACA was passed by a Democratic House, Senate and President. It was the FIRST entitlement bill in the history of the United States passed without a single vote of the other party. This is not how our forefathers envisioned the democratic process to take place. In essence, the "King" and his court prevailed and completely disregarded any opposition. This one bill set the stage for partisanship that exists today. It is no wonder that the Republican controlled House (who, by law initiates budgets) is rebelling against this partisan bill in any way legally possible.

cegeyer

October 3, 2013 - 5:53pm

Actually, the largest deficit spender in is Medicare, followed by Social Security (check the internet please). Using your logic, the way to effectively reduce deficit spending is to reduce the number of elderly people in the United States.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 6:28pm

Actually your wrong because both Medicare and Social Security have revenue income from payroll. Defense only spends money and it' has no income.

airtech

October 3, 2013 - 9:28pm

So...what do you suggest? Should we euthanize all our senior citizens in order to reduce the deficit?

I worked and payed Social Security during all my forty two working years. And I expect to receive back for what I am vested (this is not an entitlement). If congress decided to earmark MY money to fund all type of pork, they better come up with MY money now one way or another, they owe it to me.

Back_Home_in_Indiana

October 6, 2013 - 11:08am

While I agree with your first paragraph, I disagree with the second. My Military career (20yrs)was during the Clinton downsizing, we had to do the same jobs with less. My body is NOW paying for those years.
The first Budget Cut things ANY Politician wants to do is cut back Police, Fire, and Teachers. Our Government is an Employer of People. Our Defense is made up of PEOPLE ! The 1st cuts are People benefits cuts. I still pay for my Own VA Benefits while Congress calls it double dipping if I don't.
If you want a Federal Department to trim fat, TRY CONGRESS. They make the Perks, Benefits, Retirement Packages to their own Good with so many Loop- Holes it looks like a Gordian Knot. Congress lives a Triple Standard above their Common Citizens.
Our Country needs a Better Health System, But NOT one run by the "For Profit" Insurance Companies. Before I married my current Wife, She HAD NO HEALTH Insurance, and made $150 too much for Medicare. She had Medical Bills that were "FULL PRICE NOT DISCOUNTED BY INSURANCE". And BRAND NAME Prescriptions that She Had to buy "By the Pill" for Hundreds of Dollars each Month. She is still being Sued for those Bills.
But back to the Military funding, We are not alone on this Planet. Do you want those who would do this Country harm to HARM US ON OUR SOIL? AGAIN?
Teddy Roosevelt once said; "Walk softly and carry a big Stick."
This Country has Agreement with others to allow staging of our Stick. I would rather keep a Ten-Foot-Pole than a Sword distance between myself and those who would want me to bleed.

ronmcgrath

October 3, 2013 - 4:26pm

The house of representative is the only body that represents the people. The senate is skewed, allowing some more "equality" than others, depending on the population of your state. Obama is not representative of the American people, the cover up by our Tokyo Roses, NBC, CBS and CNN, of the fact that he was not legally on the Indiana ballot and voter fraud in Ohio and Pennsylvania (which should have disqualified both states) make him a false president just as JFK was. So, kill Obamacare is what the majority of Americans are saying.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 4:34pm

Sending this to the Secret Srevice

tommyB

October 4, 2013 - 7:53am

you are nuts

tomruss

October 3, 2013 - 4:27pm

We'll just keep on spending and in the not to distant future this country will be bankrupt and then no one will be getting the free bees. Additinally, the individuals that worked and earned what the should get will also not get anything. What a sad state we are going into.

Steven Tapper

October 3, 2013 - 4:35pm

What do you call a controversial law that was not created by a bipartisan agreement in Congress, that is opposed by over 70% of Americans, that has been personally modified over 17 times by the President himself to exclude certain specific groups from having to participate until 2015, that forces Americans to purchase insurance or be fined and finally does not lower the cost of health care but causes it rise dramatically? This is the definition of Obamacare. Either everyone is excluded from being forced to participate in the personal mandate or everyone has to participate in the personal mandate with no exceptions. While some may call this confrontation "blackmail", that's exactly what happened to the American people when their representatives refused to read the bill before passing it along. This legislation was intentionally designed to fail anyway. The purpose of this exercise is to have the American people become so frustrated with the ineptitude of health care to beg the federal government to come in to save the day with, wait for it...a single payer healthcare system. Scrap it now!

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 4:42pm

Sorry, can't be undone. That's the irony of it all.

cegeyer

October 3, 2013 - 5:56pm

....unless it's not paid for.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 6:40pm

Read my previous comments. Obamacare was funded when it was passed into law. The tea party is trying to convince their you that it can be defund. By law it cannot. They can shut down government workers but they cannot defund ACA. It just happens to be the law.

DW27

January 23, 2014 - 9:30pm

Why the hell can't it be changed? Obama does it all the time.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 6:19pm

Hey Richard Powers, your Black Ivy League President is the duly elected President of the US . get over it you pin head!! He won over McCain and the tea Party bafoon ( what was name? Oh yea Mitten, ) both times by overwhelming per cent age. He won the majority votes of white women, black men and women, young generations, vote, the Asian vote, the college educated vote and oh yea the HISPANIC vote!! The only segment not won was the old white man vote so you old farts can sit around and complain to each other because no else is listening. You think that was a landslide then wait till next time! President Hilary!

antiTyranny

October 3, 2013 - 7:50pm

Your comments are racist, hateful and smack of ageism. You also show an ignorance of the Constitution.

"When ACA (Obamacare ) was passed and became the law of the land the funding was passed as part of the Bill so it is already fully funded."

Completely false. The ACA was enacted in 2010 but contained ZERO funding. The ACA requires new appropriations funding each year in accordance with Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution (“No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law.”) Congress has full discretion on whether or not to fund a particular program.

Before continuing with your rants, I suggest you find a copy of the Constitution and read it. It would also be useful if you could leave your hateful attitude at the door and post civil comments.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 7:59pm

I am sorry but you are completely devoid of the truth and it's obvious that you would rather call me names than listen to the facts. Go look it up. Obamacare IS funded and is operating. That is why it is NOT part of the shutdown.

antiTyranny

October 3, 2013 - 8:08pm

Please quote the section of the ACA which provides funding.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 8:14pm

That is why the Tea Party is calling for "defunding".

antiTyranny

October 3, 2013 - 8:19pm

You didn't answer the question. You are so big on facts so it would be nice if you actually presented one. Please provide evidence substantiating full funding of the ACA.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 8:22pm

The following is from the National Journal, a Republican Party think tank. "The CRS report was issued at the request of Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who has not been shy about his opposition to the shutdown strategy. “[A government shutdown] would be committing ritual suicide on an altar of bad strategy,” Coburn’s communications director, John Hart, told National Journal Daily. “The idea that we can fully defund Obamacare through the continuing resolution is a Washington gimmick to advance political funding goals.”

The report substantiates the argument that a shutdown would not be an effective tool to stop the law. This is because much of the law relies on mandatory funding and multiple-year and no-year discretionary funds, which are not beholden to annual budget debates."

antiTyranny

October 3, 2013 - 8:27pm

That's nice. You still haven't answered the question. Specifically tell me WHERE in the ACA full funding is provided.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 8:29pm

Page 1024

antiTyranny

October 3, 2013 - 8:37pm

Here is page 1024. Funding is not mentioned. Question still remains unanswered.

1 ‘‘(h) VACANCIES; QUORUM; SEAL; VICE CHAIRPERSON;
2 VOTING ON REPORTS.—
3 ‘‘(1) VACANCIES.—No vacancy on the Board
4 shall impair the right of the remaining members to
5 exercise all the powers of the Board.
6 ‘‘(2) QUORUM.—A majority of the appointed
7 members of the Board shall constitute a quorum for
8 the transaction of business, but a lesser number of
9 members may hold hearings.
10 ‘‘(3) SEAL.—The Board shall have an official
11 seal, of which judicial notice shall be taken.
12 ‘‘(4) VICE CHAIRPERSON.—The Board shall an13
nually elect a Vice Chairperson to act in the absence
14 or disability of the Chairperson or in case of a va15
cancy in the office of the Chairperson.
16 ‘‘(5) VOTING ON PROPOSALS.—Any proposal of
17 the Board must be approved by the majority of ap18
pointed members present.
19 ‘‘(i) POWERS OF THE BOARD.—
20 ‘‘(1) HEARINGS.—The Board may hold such
21 hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take
22 such testimony, and receive such evidence as the
23 Board considers advisable to carry out this section.
24 ‘‘(2) AUTHORITY TO INFORM RESEARCH PRIOR25
ITIES FOR DATA COLLECTION.—The Board may ad

DW27

January 23, 2014 - 9:34pm

Thank you sir. I'm with you 100%. But I wouldn't waste my time talking to this jerk. You'll get no where talking to a brick.

rgranado

October 3, 2013 - 8:00pm

The ACA is Federal Law. That is non-negotiable. It is a fact of life, so suck it up. The budget of the USA, the country you supposely love so much, should not be held hostage by the domestic terrorists in the Congress. The proper place to bring the spotlight on the ACA Law is in regular session. Republicans are playing a dangerous game when they violate the constitution.The driving force behind the efforts to defund the ACA is the color of the President's skin. The Republican image is stepping forward from the shadows and he is wrapped in a Confederate flag and wearing a cone hat. You must remember the oath you took while in the military that you swore allegiance to the US Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. The ACA is the law of the land.

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 8:05pm

Well said SIR!

RichardQ

October 3, 2013 - 8:16pm

Social Security is not a deficit program.
the Congress diverted the paycheck withdrawals into the General Funds during the Johnson administration, but the Treasury issued special bonds to the Social Security Administration since then, and those bonds are as good as if the SSA stashed dollar bills in boxes. The SSA has a huge surplus in its accounts which will cover its benefits for decades to come. President Reagan raised the income cap point so the SSA's annual income increased to extend its ability to cover future anticipated costs.
social Security will have no trouble covering its future benefit demands if the income cap is eliminated so that ALL paychecks, including millionaires, pay the same withdrawals throughout the year, just like the average blue-collar Joe.

stilts61

October 3, 2013 - 8:21pm

The Republicans are petrified that Obamacare will be implemented and become popular, when everyone realizes the lies they've been telling about it are just that. If they really believed it was a "problem" law, they would let it go into effect and then run against it in 2014 and 2016.
My daughter has Lupus, though not too many symptoms. She is a single contractor and has to buy her own insurance. She just checked the Obamacare exchange site, and her insurance will go from $17,000 a year to $5000, saving her $1000 a month - enough to pay her mortgage. She makes too much for a subsidy, so this is all because of the power of buying in a group (and not sticking people because they have pre-existing conditions - even if their medical costs are low).
Yay Obamacare!!!

stilts61

October 3, 2013 - 8:23pm

The Republicans are petrified that Obamacare will be implemented and become popular, when everyone realizes the lies they've been telling about it are just that. If they really believed it was a "problem" law, they would let it go into effect and then run against it in 2014 and 2016.
My daughter has Lupus, though not too many symptoms. She is a single contractor and has to buy her own insurance. She just checked the Obamacare exchange site, and her insurance will go from $17,000 a year to $5000, saving her $1000 a month - enough to pay her mortgage. She makes too much for a subsidy, so this is all because of the power of buying in a group (and not sticking people because they have pre-existing conditions - even if their medical costs are low).
Yay Obamacare!!!

robertegoss

October 3, 2013 - 8:42pm

That's a wonderful story. Congrats to your daughter! I am 68 and cannot retire as my wife has skin cancer and glaucoma and was not insurable without my employers group insurance. As soon as she can get Obamacare I can consider retiring! Also, my daughter who is 25 and does not have an employee insurance is now insured under my plan under Obama care. Thank you Mr. President. Don't give an inch!!

antiTyranny

October 3, 2013 - 9:48pm

There are several individuals here who are taking the position that the ACA is already fully funded. Repeated attempts to find proof of this allegation have resulted in avoidance and finally in an "answ2er" that turned out to be a bluff. I called the bluff and have yet to receive a reply.

There have also been implications that the House is trying to "defund" the ACA. The continuing resolution passed by the House provides funding. Defunding is a different process and has been used previously for certain cases where funding had already been approved. The partial defunding of the F-35 is a case in point.

The House has approved a resolution calling for full funding of all government programs and departments EXCEPT the ACA. This has been rejected by the Senate and Obama states he will veto the resolution even if it passes the Senate. Now, if the ACA truly is already fully funded, what is the issue in the Senate and with the president?

If the ACA is already fully funded, why is the Senate stalling? Just pass the House resolution as is and be done with it.

Dadbug

October 3, 2013 - 11:01pm

There are those among us that believe Obamacare (the term used by Republicns mostly) and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are two different programs. WRONG! They are one and the same. Republicans are trying to confuse citizens by using deceit and propaganda.

ACA guarantees everyone can get insurance regardless of their health or if they have pre-existing conditions. What is wrong with that?

ACA guarantees no insurer can limit lifetime benefits. What is wrong with that?

ACA guarantees that no insurer can cancel the insurance of a policy holder regardless of the number and amount of claims. What is wrong with that?

So don't kid yourselves. Republican are doing what they do best -- protect the profits of big business and private health insurande is big business.

So don't be stupid and not know that ACA and Obamacare are the same and insured under ACA will be protected better than they are today or would be if ACA was repealed.

VMAX Lives

October 4, 2013 - 3:55am

Give me a break guys. All the fancy talk in the world is going to fix nothing! You have forgotten what the whole system is about. You vote the people in that you think will do a good job of carrying out how you want things to be. Not what they think is best for you. If they don't YOU VOTE SOMEONE ELSE IN NEXT TIME!!! Fighting politicians is not how the game was meant to be played. Until you get off your lazy butt and vote out those who are not doing what is expected of them we are going to go down the toilet...Keep It Simple Stupid!!!!

tommyB

October 4, 2013 - 7:03am

Unfortunately the bill is funded and cannot be defunded.
The congress is not trying to defdund it only delay the individual mandate until next year the same as Obama did for big business. And to eliminate the subsidy for congress. The business delay is for political reasons. The fear is that they will begin dropping health care before the election
ACA page543
(A) IN GENERAL.—Out of any funds in the
2 Treasury not otherwise appropriated, there is
3 appropriated to carry out this section,
4 $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
5 (B) BUDGET AUTHORITY.—Sub paragraph
6 (A) constitutes budget authority in advance of
7 appropriations Act and represents the obligation
8 of the Federal Government to provide for the
9 payment of the amounts appropriated under that
10 subparagraph.
11 (2) 5-YEAR AVAILABILITY.—Funds appropriated
12 under paragraph (1) shall remain available for obligation through December 31, 2015

antiTyranny

October 4, 2013 - 11:39am

You conveniently omitted this:
14 (3) LIMITATION ON PAYMENTS.—In no case
15 may—
16 (A) the aggregate amount of payments made
17 by the Secretary to eligible States under this sec
18 tion exceed $75,000,000; or
19 (B) payments be provided by the Secretary
20 under this section after December 31, 2015.

That doesn't really matter, though, because page 543 is part of Section 2707, MEDICAID EMERGENCY PSYCHIATRIC DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

The question remains unanswered. Where is the money appropriated for full funding of the ACA?

MacMurray

October 4, 2013 - 1:49pm

The Affordable Care TAX is just that, a tax, at least according to the Supreme Court. They said if it wasn't a tax, it was unconstitutional. It will raise a lot of money (power) for politicians to control, but will not improve healthcare in America. As each part of it is implemented, it makes it more difficult to go back to the fine healthcare system we had in place.

I also feel bad for our Canadian neighbors. Once ACT is implemented they won't have anywhere to go for good healthcare.

robertegoss

October 4, 2013 - 7:17pm

US Healthcare system is rated by the World Health Organization as 37th in the world. Canada is rated much better. Although rated as 37 the best our healthcare is ranked as the highest cost in the world. ACA will improve this hapless problem.

bobajabob

October 5, 2013 - 12:00pm

do you seriously think what we had before was working? hundreds of thousands of families being driven into bankruptcy by medical bills, insurance corporations taking tens of thousands of consumer's dollars for premiums and then canceling policies after they get sick? Either you are willfully blind to facts or you watch too much Fox News. This plan is the Heritage Foundation plan, written by Republicans who only refused to vote for it or support it because it was passed by this President. As we now know they had vowed on the first day to block absolutely everything during his tenure in office. If you don't understand this then you must live on John stewart's legendary Bullshot Mountain!

pbbonaco

October 4, 2013 - 2:34pm

One of the worst features of the ACA deals with Section 1311. That section collects everyone's personal information in one data base. And it is managed by people hired off the street without a background check. These people are called Reviewers, and they are supposed to help new insurance buyers select their mandated health care insurance. Yet all of our personal information is held in one database that the reviewers will have access. I am not inspired with someone like this to have access to any of my personal information. That includes all of my health history, social security number, address, etc. Way too much information in one place and monitored by a person that has not had even a background check.

robertegoss

October 4, 2013 - 7:30pm

With the revelations of the NSA (in addition to what I experienced in the military )everyone should now know that there is no "personal information." We are a country of open information as almost everything you have done, applied for, had medical treatment, or paid for is known in many information bases. Anyone who thinks they have personal information Is not in touch with our cyber world. Look up right now as you are most likely being recorded!

debjb1589

October 5, 2013 - 1:43am

I think it's to time get with the mad hatter and have a tea party of your own and let the rest of us go on with our lives. Yes Tea Partiers, there is a wonderland and it is not in Wash. D.C.

bobajabob

October 5, 2013 - 11:53am

this question is based on a false premise-there IS NO BUDGET CRISIS except the one the Republican extremists have created. There should be no concessions on this or the debt ceiling either one-it is ALWAYS a mistake to negotiate with terrorists and extortionists. I can't be the only one to notice the deficit only goes down when Democrats are in control of our government as our current condition proves once again. This self-inflicted "budget crisis" is adding an extra $Billion per week to our deficit-you tell me who's the Party of Fiscal Sense.

antiTyranny

October 5, 2013 - 4:21pm

Deficits/Surpluses From 1940 Until 2013 (in billions)(*fiscal years)

1* - Presidential control
2* - Senate control
3* - House control

D = Democrat R = Republican

Year Dollars Inflation Adj 1* 2* 3*
1940 $2.9 Deficit $48.33 Deficit D D D
1941 $4.9 Deficit $77.78 Deficit D D D
1942 $20.5 Deficit $292.86 Deficit D D D
1943 $54.6 Deficit $737.84 Deficit D D D
1944 $47.6 Deficit $634.67 Deficit D D D
1945 $47.6 Deficit $618.18 Deficit D D D
1946 $15.9 Deficit $191.57 Deficit D D D
1947 $4 Surplus $42.11 Surplus D R R
1948 $11.8 Surplus $114.56 Surplus D R R
1949 $0.6 Surplus $5.88 Surplus D D D
1950 $3.1 Deficit $30.1 Deficit D D D
1951 $6.1 Surplus $54.95 Surplus D D D
1952 $1.5 Deficit $13.27 Deficit D D D
1953 $6.5 Deficit $57.02 Deficit R R D
1954 $1.2 Deficit $10.43 Deficit R R D
1955 $3 Deficit $26.09 Deficit R D D
1956 $3.9 Surplus $33.62 Surplus R D D
1957 $3.4 Surplus $28.33 Surplus R D D
1958 $2.8 Deficit $22.58 Deficit R D D
1959 $12.8 Deficit $103.23 Deficit R D D
1960 $0.3 Surplus $2.36 Surplus R D D
1961 $3.3 Deficit $25.78 Deficit D D D
1962 $7.1 Deficit $55.04 Deficit D D D
1963 $4.8 Deficit $36.64 Deficit D D D
1964 $5.9 Deficit $44.36 Deficit D D D
1965 $1.4 Deficit $10.37 Deficit D D D
1966 $3.7 Deficit $26.62 Deficit D D D
1967 $8.6 Deficit $60.14 Deficit D D D
1968 $25.2 Deficit $169.13 Deficit D D D
1969 $3.2 Surplus $20.38 Surplus R D D
1970 $2.8 Deficit $16.87 Deficit R D D
1971 $23 Deficit $132.95 Deficit R D D
1972 $23.4 Deficit $130.73 Deficit R D D
1973 $14.9 Deficit $78.42 Deficit R D D
1974 $6.1 Deficit $28.91 Deficit R D D
1975 $53.2 Deficit $231.3 Deficit R D D
1976 $73.7 Deficit $303.29 Deficit R D D
1977 $53.7 Deficit $207.34 Deficit D D D
1978 $59.2 Deficit $212.19 Deficit D D D
1979 $40.7 Deficit $130.87 Deficit D D D
1980 $73.8 Deficit $209.66 Deficit D D D
1981 $79 Deficit $203.08 Deficit R R D
1982 $128 Deficit $309.93 Deficit R R D
1983 $207.8 Deficit $487.79 Deficit R R D
1984 $185.4 Deficit $417.57 Deficit R R D
1985 $212.3 Deficit $461.52 Deficit R R D
1986 $221.2 Deficit $471.64 Deficit R R D
1987 $149.7 Deficit $308.02 Deficit R D D
1988 $155.2 Deficit $306.72 Deficit R D D
1989 $152.5 Deficit $287.74 Deficit R D D
1990 $221.2 Deficit $395.71 Deficit R D D
1991 $269.3 Deficit $461.92 Deficit R D D
1992 $290.4 Deficit $484 Deficit R D D
1993 $255.1 Deficit $412.78 Deficit D D D
1994 $203.2 Deficit $320.5 Deficit D D D
1995 $164 Deficit $251.53 Deficit D R R
1996 $107.5 Deficit $160.21 Deficit D R R
1997 $22 Deficit $32.07 Deficit D R R
1998 $69.2 Surplus $99.28 Surplus D R R
1999 $125.6 Surplus $176.16 Surplus D R R
2000 $236.4 Surplus $320.76 Surplus D R R
2001 $127.3 Surplus $168.16 Surplus R D R
2002 $157.8 Deficit $205.2 Deficit R D R
2003 $377.6 Deficit $479.8 Deficit R R R
2004 $413 Deficit $511.14 Deficit R R R
2005 $318 Deficit $380.84 Deficit R R R
2006 $248 Deficit $287.7 Deficit R R R
2007 $161 Deficit $181.51 Deficit R D D
2008 $459 Deficit $498.37 Deficit R D D
2009 $1413 Deficit $1539.22 Deficit D D D
2010 $1294 Deficit $1386.92 Deficit D D D
2011 $1299 Deficit $1350.31 Deficit D D R
2012 $1100 Deficit $1120.16 Deficit D D R
2013 $759 Deficit $759 Deficit D D R

Source: Whitehouse website

ACA counseling

November 25, 2013 - 12:47am

Global provides complex back office support services in Eligibility, Enrollment, Policy administration, Claims management & Provider Network Management. Thanks for sharing this wonderful post.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Tell us what you think