- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

Another delay in health law’s employer requirement

Published: Mon, February 10, 2014 @ 8:06 p.m.

Another delay in health law’s employer requirement

WASHINGTON (AP) — Angling to avoid political peril, the Obama administration today granted employers another delay in a heavily criticized requirement that medium-to-larger firms cover their workers or face fines. In one of several concessions in a complex Treasury Department regulation of more than 200 pages, the administration said companies with 50 to 99 employees will have an additional year to comply with the coverage requirement, until January 1, 2016.


1AtownAugie(891 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Richard Milhous Obama rides again.

Suggest removal:

2walter_sobchak(2718 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

I thought that ACHA was a law enacted by Congress, signed by Barry, that took effect on January 1, 2014? How is it that, under our Constitution, the chief executive can change or decide not to enforce a law? Is this not treasonous behavior? Maybe Americans should stop paying taxes if the laws of our nation are flexible.

Suggest removal:

3redeye1(5664 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

He did this because the liberals are worried about the elections in November. He should be brought up on charges immediately. But the GOP has become a spineless, ball less party. they are so worried about making blacks mad

Suggest removal:

4YtownParent(1069 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Does that mean the individual mandate is delayed for employees of those companies? Logically it should be. And if it is delayed for those employees the Equal Protection clause should delay it for everyone then.

It's foul but not treason. "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court." Article 3.3 US Constitution. Obama could be sued in court by Congress to make him enforce it. That would make the ACA a true political circus.

Suggest removal:

5Ytownnative(1121 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Its all about getting past the midterm elections. you MUST re-elect your democrat to see what's really going to happen with ACA.

Suggest removal:

6YtownParent(1069 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Ha-Ha! Good One Ytownnative.

Suggest removal:

7Dagwood(505 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Bill O'Reilly bullied him so bad on national tv that he had to do something or Bill would take his lunch money.

Suggest removal:

8walter_sobchak(2718 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

OK, his actions may not be treason by the Constitutional definition ( although the States could argue that he has an adherence to their enemies), he is violation Article II, Section 3 where it states "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed".

Fast forward to Jan. 20, 2017 and President Scott Walker, after delivering his inaugural speech, issues an executive order to totally relieve all of the country, business and citizens, from the law of the AHCA. What is the difference in the actions of the two? Banana republic, indeed!

Suggest removal:

9YtownParent(1069 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

I think you are being entirely too unfair, derogatory, inflammatory and downright prejudicial to bananas. Bananas do a fine job of governing their growth. They don't deserve to be so mistreated as comparing them to our current leaders.

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2016 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes