Health coverage deadline extended for companies

The Obama administration is giving another delay to business groups concerned about the health care law’s requirement that larger firms cover their workers.
Associated Press
Feb 11, 2014

The Treasury Department announced Monday that companies with 50 to 99 employees have an additional year to comply with the coverage mandate, until January 1, 2016.

For businesses with 100 or more employees the requirement will still take effect in 2015. But other newly announced provisions may help some of those firms.

Under the law, companies with fewer than 50 employees don’t have to offer coverage.



What is this, the 27th change to the wholly partisan Obama☭are program that the Executive branch is making without consulting Congress?

So Pres. Obama changes the date of the employer mandate AGAIN, but keeps the individual mandate unchanged?

Tell me that this isn't being done for political reasons and the fear of a Dem political bloodbath in Nov.


Once again, Barry is giving a break to corporations by rewriting the law to what ever he feels is good to him.

0-bamacare is easy to defeat, dont sign up.

The Big Dog's back

You ought to be happy he is giving the "job creators" more time.


Barry is the biggest job killer.


But Brutus Obie The Clueless says his health care fiasco is in and of itself a job creator. Why is he delaying it if it's so good for America?


Who would have ever thought that BD would remind me of Pollyanna. In a disquieting partisan hack kind of way...
And I second the motion to question why these people should be happy.
I know that many more smaller company owners than not, agonize about making sure they compensate their employees as best as they can because they are decent moral ( trying to do the best they can) people and because they know good employees are their businesses life blood and this narcissistic, power grabbing, influence peddling abomination called The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is anything but!
So tell us Big Dog why should they be happy? Do you think they haven't been spending the last 3 years figuring out how to get through what they knew at the time was going to be a big Effin' train wreck?
And don't waste your time trying to convince me it is anything but a train wreck. One that is doing more harm than good for more people than it was suppose to help.

The Big Dog's back

Woooooosh! That was the sound of the toilet flushing after I puked in it from reading your post about "decent, moral people".


Did the nausea come with the realization that you truly are a trollish partisan hack?


hey, c'mon guys! be nice! now apologize to bob.


Silly comment. Obamacare only barely resembles the original version that Democrats wanted. Many compromises were made in order to get it passed by a bipartisan Congress.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

You aren't implying that what was shot through Congress at the midnight hour around Christmas via parliamentary tricks including it as a "budget item" so they didn't need 60 votes with even one Republican in favor of it, are you?

You don't imply that this major issue that literally affects the lives and finances over every one of three hundred and ten million plus citizen of the U.S. wasn't a relic/ghost from 30 years ago that favors subsidizing guaranteed profits for corporations via our tax dollars, right?

I'm sure you are aware that much like how a virus reproduces, in order to pass it as a budget item instead of normal procedure for a law, our "pass it to know what's in it" then-speaker sent a host bill to the senate which gutted it, inserted the ~3k page monstrosity, and shoved it through.

Along strict party lines. The only thing "bipartisan" about this is the fact Republicans were in the same room as they watched the Democrats vote into existence something they knew nothing about, didn't read, and now struggle to finance/explain/execute.

I really wish that those who support a better health care system would stop making excuses for this corporatist piece of trash that is getting piecemealed in enforcement and understanding and demand better, ESPECIALLY from their own party if they are of that persuasion. Are there some good things in the ACA? Yes. But not enough to keep this going or at least not enough that can't be carved out and maintained while scrapping the rest of this selectively-enforced law.


Re: "Obamacare only barely resembles the original version that Democrats wanted."

WRONG. It looks not unlike Hillarycare.

Why all the Executive orders to change the timing of the mandates?


coasterfan says : " Many compromises were made in order to get it passed by a bipartisan Congress "

Bipartisan congress you say tell me exactly how many Republicans did vote for Obamacare. He had to lie to get some of the Democrats to vote for it.


Silly comment. Obamacare only barely resembles the original version that Democrats wanted. Many compromises were made in order to get it passed by a bipartisan Congress.


LOL! Blame is all you have but everyone knows the truth after 3 years of you and the Dems pumping it up. Its yours, Own it.


Exactly how do you even come up with "passed by a bipartisan Congress"?

This entire fiasco is owned lock stock & barrel by Reid, Pelosi, and Obama.


Re: "passed by a bipartisan Congress."

Name the Repubs who voted for it.


In December 2009, the U.S. Senate voted 60 to 39 for Obamacare. The Washington Post reported “The Senate bill passed without a single GOP vote.”

In March 2010, the U.S. House voted 219 to 212 for Obamacare. 34 House Democrats and all of the House Republicans voted against Obamacare. The NO votes were the only bipartisan votes.

President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) on March 23, 2010.

You are right coaster the Democrats that voted no made it a bipartisan vote as it was bipartisan against the bill

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

What's worse is that the useless "opposition party" sits at their desks with their heads down like whipped betas and just grumbles passive-aggressively about it. Why do we even have a Congress? Just give the president-king all the law making and enforcing ability and let it be over with. What's ironic is that this is making the populist party increasingly obsolete because they are giving up THEIR RESPONSIBILITY AND POWER to someone else. Why even vote for them?

Everyone in D.C. is standing in a circle smelling each others' extended index fingers and chuckling at unspoken words.


Here, Big Dog, this is for YOU:

How many Obama voters does it take to change a light bulb?

None. They prefer to remain in the dark.

Darwin's choice

The failure in chief....




So, Obamacare is "the Law of the Land", "blessed" by the Senate and Congress. How does the President make the unilateral decision to just change the law at his own discretion?

What's next, the Constitution . . . . oh yeah, that's right, the Constitution is irrelevant to this administration . . . . just the Charmin to a bear's butt.


Silly comment #2. It is a fact that Obama has used Executive Order less than any other president over the past 30 years, while working with the most obstinate Congress in history.

Yeah, I's an inconvenient truth that puts to rest the silly stories from the Right. So what else is new...


It is not the number of executive orders that matter at this point, It is the type. Ignoring the laws, Changing the laws making the laws. It is all illegal for him to do so. No matter how you spin it he is wrong.

The Big Dog's back

Oh, so now it's not the number since that lie was blown out of the water, it's the type. Gotcha right wingnuts.


It would not matter one way or the other with you Dog. You trust the guy after he lies to your face, Not a strong showing for intelligence. Maybe someday you'll see the error of your stupidity but i bet that only happens when a republican is in office doing the exact same thing, but then again you hypocrites can do no wrong. He is breaking the system and you morons are cheering it on.

The Hero Zone's picture
The Hero Zone

The quantity of times used != what it was used to do. If that were the case you must be more impressed with the man who goes to the bank ten times a day to deposit ten dollars at a time instead of the man who visits once to deposit ten thousand, yes?

As long as he doesn't issue any more in quantity than anyone else it doesn't matter what he does with them then, eh? That was a silly as in another comment you said "8% is a bigger number than 1.8%" without providing ANY base number of which they are percentage.

I don't understand how you as a proud member of a party can let any of this slide. Lawlessness is lawlessness no matter who is in power. If you turn critical suddenly when a Republican is in power you may as well not vote at all because it contributes nothing to holding any of them responsible.

Mien Gott in Himmel, what I wouldn't give for one person who identifies Democrat to actually call out these antics because it isn't right for EVERYONE and not just favors a minority of the population.

Anyone? Any Ds out there that can do this and would earn my immediate respect and desire to converse? Any Ds out there who hold their party to a higher standard and not make excuses like a chronically-beaten spouse? Any non-beta donkeys want what's best for everyone instead of their party?

That's why I "blather" (as Pter puts it) on and on because I want better for all, not to just pick on one party that is NO BETTER AT ALL than the other major one.

Steve P

The imperial president, he wanted this health care bill, got it on his terms, passed by his party, now he picks and chooses how its implemented for pure political purposes. Why do we even need the constitution with the all knowing and powerful King Obama?


If Barry likes his health care law, why won't Barry keep it? They change the rules every other week.