Heaven Forbid We Have Lawmakers Live Like the Rest of Us

Michael Schaus
|
Posted: Jun 17, 2013 12:01 AM

In a recent interview with Politico, Representative John Larson (D-CT) explained that the President’s signature piece of legislation is “unfair” and should immediately be challenged. Of course he has no problem with the Federal government strong arming states into Federal Healthcare Exchanges or punishing employers for hiring full time workers. . . He’s not even concerned about the infringement on religious liberties through the now infamous “birth-control mandate.” Instead, the Connecticut Democrat finds the piece of legislation known as Obamacare deeply unfair because it requires congressional staffers – and members of congress – to enroll in the Federally Subsidized Exchanges.

That’s right. Representative Larson finds it horrifically “unfair” that he and his staff will be relegated to the same system that is expected to be imposed on tens of millions of Americans. The Democrat, who was among the leadership in his party when healthcare reform was passed, said “this is simply not fair to these employees. They are federal employees.” Maybe they should get a better union?

According to Politico: The Affordable Care Act — signed into law in 2010 — contained a provision known as the Grassley Amendment, which said the government can only offer members of Congress and their staff plans that are “created” in the bill or “offered through an exchange” — unless the bill is amended.

There seems to be near unanimous support for the repeal or alteration to this particular mandate within the law. Of course some lawmakers and conservative groups are inclined to ask: why not toss out the entire law? Many people on the right will, no doubt, feel a sense of schadenfreude as legislators come to the dawning realization that, on occasion, they have to follow the very rules they wrote.

Many Democrats and Republicans have pointed out that the inferior insurance plans (Ya know. . . The ones that you and I will most likely be relegated to after our current insurance is priced out of existence) will have a negative impact on the retention of congressional staffers. Representative Jo Bonner (R-AL) said that the threat of losing their current insurance plans have already caused a number of staff members to leave the Hill.

What people like Representative Larson fail to recognize is that we, in the private sector, will be facing very similar challenges. . . As companies shorten hours, and relegate larger portion of their workforce to the ambiguous and arbitrary definition of “part time”, more Americans will find themselves at the mercy of a bureaucratic behemoth. As more insurance companies raise rates ahead of restrictive and punitive taxes, regulations and limitations, more Average citizens will find themselves unable to afford the coverage to which they have grown accustomed. And while Americans all across this great nation suddenly find themselves facing IRS fees for “inadequate insurance coverage” Lawmakers will be slightly inconvenienced by sharing in the experience.

Of course, their inconvenience demands immediate attention! (Did you sense the sarcasm in that last sentence?) They have even scheduled talks between Speaker of the House John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. This is the consequence of DC’s inherent elitism: Their inconvenience is an emergency of immediate consequence; but our inconvenience, as the governed, is apparently only worthy of some extra IRS scrutiny.

Only in the world of Washington DC is it considered a catastrophe when lawmakers and their aids are mandated to take part in the laws they shoved down the throats of the American People. If nothing is changed, there may very well be an exodus from DC while our governing class is relegated to the depths of the bureaucratic nightmare they inflicted upon the rest of us. . . Poetic justice.