I Have Totally Fixed This Healthcare Debacle!

Posted on Comments

by Smitty (via Insty)

The New Ledger points out that this odious legislation says that staff are exempt:

(II) CONGRESSIONAL STAFF- The term `congressional staff’ means all full-time and part-time employees employed by the official office of a Member of Congress, whether in Washington, DC or outside of Washington, DC.

So, all of us become part-time Congressional staff for GOP Congressman.
Rules? What did Alcee Hastings say about them?
For simplicity, maybe we all work for Paul Ryan.
Problem solved!

21 comments

  8. Smitty: You, sir, are a friggin’ genius!

    I can see it now: Bob Belvedere, Assistant to the Assistant of the Third Deputy Assistant for the Head Bottlewasher of the House Sub-Committee for the Regulation of Things That Wobble, the Honorable Paul Ryan, Chairman.

  9. Smitty: You, sir, are a friggin’ genius!

    I can see it now: Bob Belvedere, Assistant to the Assistant of the Third Deputy Assistant for the Head Bottlewasher of the House Sub-Committee for the Regulation of Things That Wobble, the Honorable Paul Ryan, Chairman.

  10. “God damn it, Gump Smitty,
    you’re a goddamn genius.
    That’s the most outstanding answer
    I’ve ever heard.
    You must have a goddamn I.Q. of ___.
    You are goddamn gifted, Private Smitty.
    If it wasn’t a waste of a fine enlisted man,I’d recommend you for O.C.S.,Private Smitty.You’re going to be a general someday!

  11. “God damn it, Gump Smitty,
    you’re a goddamn genius.
    That’s the most outstanding answer
    I’ve ever heard.
    You must have a goddamn I.Q. of ___.
    You are goddamn gifted, Private Smitty.
    If it wasn’t a waste of a fine enlisted man,I’d recommend you for O.C.S.,Private Smitty.You’re going to be a general someday!

  17. I like the sentiment, but based on the link I think you have this backwards. The language restricts what health plans can be offered to the staff of individual members of Congress – so it can be argued they are worse off than the public in this regard (I’ll believe that when I see it in practice). But the concern the article expresses is that many senior Congressional staff may not be subject to this restriction because they are not employed by an “individual member” but rather by an “office” or “committee” such as the Speaker’s office.

  18. I like the sentiment, but based on the link I think you have this backwards. The language restricts what health plans can be offered to the staff of individual members of Congress – so it can be argued they are worse off than the public in this regard (I’ll believe that when I see it in practice). But the concern the article expresses is that many senior Congressional staff may not be subject to this restriction because they are not employed by an “individual member” but rather by an “office” or “committee” such as the Speaker’s office.

Comments are closed.