- Ted Cruz Wants You To Believe He’s Legally Required To Sign Up For Obamacare. He’s Not. | ThinkProgress (PDF)
- Listen to the Video…http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/24/politics/ted-cruz-obamacare/
The newly announced Republican presidential candidate told CNN’s Dana Bash on Tuesday that he will sign up for health care coverage through the Affordable Care Act — a law he has been on a crusade to kill.
“We’ll be getting new health insurance and we’ll presumably do it through my job with the Senate, and so we’ll be on the federal exchange with millions of others on the federal exchange,” Cruz said.
Asked whether he would accept the government contribution available to lawmakers and congressional staffers for their health care coverage through the ACA, Cruz said he will “follow the text of the law.”
“I strongly oppose the exemption that President Obama illegally put in place for members of Congress because (Senate Minority Leader) Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats didn’t want to be under the same rules as the American people,” Cruz said, before repeating: “I believe we should follow the text of the law.”
Under the Affordable Care Act, members of Congress and some designated congressional staffers are required to obtain health care coverage through the D.C. Health Link Small Business Market. The Office of Personnel Management’s guidelines state that lawmakers and their staff receive a “government contribution” if they get health care coverage through the ACA.
But some lawmakers have declined to accept the contribution, saying they do not want to get special treatment. After the interview, a Cruz spokesperson clarified that he wouldn’t take the contribution.
Cruz’s admission comes one day after CNN first reported that the senator would no longer have access to health benefits through his wife’s employer, Goldman Sachs. Heidi Cruz, a managing director at the firm’s Houston office, has gone on unpaid leave for the duration of the senator’s presidential campaign and will not have access to the company’s benefits during that time.
Cruz’s campaign appeared caught by surprise Monday by questions about the senator’s health care. Asked how Cruz’s family would be covered after his wife lost her Goldman Sachs benefits, Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler repeatedly answered that he didn’t know.
It’s a deeply ironic development for the Texas conservative firebrand, who vaulted to fame during his few years in the Senate in large part by denouncing President Barack Obama’s landmark health care law. He led an effort to defund the law that contributed to the 2013 government shutdown.
Cruz denied that there was anything ironic about him going on Obamacare, saying he was simply following the law.
“I believe we should follow the text of every law, even laws I disagree with,” Cruz told CNN. “It’s one of the real differences — if you look at President Obama and the lawlessness, if he disagrees with a law he simply refuses to follow it or claims the authority to unilaterally change.”
After the publication of this story, Cruz advisers said there was nothing unusual about the senator signing up for insurance coverage through his employer. They argued that Obamacare has wiped out the individual market, leaving Cruz with few options.
Cruz said he will continue advocating for repealing the law.
“What is problematic about Obamacare is that it is killing millions of jobs in this country and has killed millions of jobs,” Cruz said. “It has forced millions of people into part time work. It has caused millions of people to lose their insurance, to lose their doctors and to face skyrocketing insurance premiums. That is unacceptable.”
- Bike Snob NYC: BSNYC Friday No Quiz Just Tedious Editorializing! (PDF)
- Volvo Gives Away %22LifePaint%22 To Protect Those Outside Its Vehicles | Co.Create | creativity + culture + commerce (PDF)
Evidently in New York City they call the thing you wear on your head when riding a bicycle a ‘helment‘ as opposed to a ‘helmet‘. Just saying. One of you hard core Socialists ought to let him know.
Cyclists are often their own worst enemies. I think this is the result of not enough understanding of the nature of Capitalism and an admixture of stubbornness that not even Ted Cruz shares.
For some rather idiotic reason we seem to think that having laws erected that support our safety is somehow evidence of a conspiracy to make us the Slaves of the State. That is in simpler terms our version of saying ‘we are Sovereign Citizens‘.
Like our Tea Party cousins we can be as off-the-wall as anybody else. And evidently even more so than Ted Cruz. His wife is leaving her very lucrative job in the private sector and so she is joining him in purchasing Obamacare. Admittedly the version he gets has all the perks afforded Congress but it is Obamacare nevertheless.
Understand this man needs the perks as much as he needs a hole-in-the-head. His wife was a high flying member of a very prestigious Wall Street firm and neither really needs to accept the largesse of the Federal Government.
But Ted is smart enough not to ‘turn down free money‘. Like any good Capitalist he understands when to hold ’em and when to fold ’em and never counting his money while he sits at the table. Good for him!
Urban Cyclists Are Patently Stupid
So you get to consider the notion of mandatory helmet wear while riding a bicycle and mandatory use of reflective clothing while riding a bicycle at night on highways out west. Mandatory in this instance means that these actions are ‘required by law‘. So what is a lunatic fringe Sovereign Citizen to do?
Well if you are a bicyclists you sit down and press that tiny little brain of yours into service to come up with some BS logic about why accepting these restrictions will result in the violation of your momma and the end of manhood as we know it.
Never mind that it helps to have helmets to prevent injury when riding off the end of a revetment on the Chicago Lakefront Trail or suffering traumatic brain injury when you manage to ride into a hole in the street because you have no lights on your bike and are as ‘drunk as a skunk‘. Nope, despite all your protestations about being all for ‘safety‘ these helmets have nothing to do with safety if it means giving up your God-given right to suffer Traumatic Brain Injury.
And meanwhile you objections to bright clothing worn at night or late evening seem a bit silly in view of the fact that no other sport is as well known for garish clothing colors as professional cycling. But rather than submit to shopping at the Adventure Cycling Apparel Store you launch another effort to do what you would ordinarily want to do all because you are so very much like the Militia Movement or the Tea Party that you can barely stand yourself.
Here Is Why You Should Embrace These Laws
Think about the Obamacare Effect on the Health Industry. If your stock portfolio is not currently being helped by the growth in the health industry I would be surprised. Why has made all the difference is the mandatory nature of the law itself.
Now you would think that Urban Cyclists would hate such a law, but they don’t. Their tiny lizard brains must have discovered that Obamacare is a Liberal Cause so despite its presence violating their reasoning behind fighting against a mandatory helmet and clothing law, they are somehow ‘stupid‘ enough not to see the similarity.
But here is the worst of it. Entrepreneurs in the Cycling Industry would simply love to know that accessories that they sell in their shops were required by law. Why? Are they some sort of Conservative Collective forced into compliance by the Koch Brothers or the Automobile Industry? Heck no!
This is how it works, dear readers. People like the owners of Arkel need to have a reasonable assurance that buying more sewing machines and hiring more workers can be done with a reasonable expectation of success. Otherwise they overextend themselves and ‘go under‘.
Bike shops would love it if there were a law requiring not only bike licensing and registry but also requiring that on an annualized basis your bike passed some sort of mechanical inspection, especially one which would be rendered by a shop.
That would mean a consistent stream of revenue for tiny shops. They could always count on selling a helmet and some bright clothing to would be bike purchasers. That would also probably means that lights would be required and if there is any chance that two on the rear could be sold, they would leap at it. I mention this because the Paris-Brest-Paris ride requires two rear lights. This is the kind of redundancy that could save your life.
The people who make bike clothing could decide to ramp up production of reflective clothing and suddenly everybody in the industry could start to count on certain kinds of sales. That is a good thing! That is how Capitalism works!
Were I king for a day I would mandate cyclometers, front lights, turn signals and just about anything else I could think of to make certain that bike shops got a chance to stick around and provide jobs to young people. That is how Capitalism works!
We Are Far Too Stuck In The Mud To Understand
Instead of making lemonade out of lemons we are finding any and every excuse to sabotage what is a golden opportunity to bring capital into the business that supports bicycling. Why after all should the Bikes-n-Roses shop go wanting when the guy who makes pretty green paint and PVC bollards is able to send his kids to Stanford?
We need to wise up a bit. The oldsters in this so-called Movement have their heads so far up their anal cavities that they can no longer remember what fresh air and sunshine feel like. They are old, Socialists from a bygone era who have never gotten over the fact that the nerds in their schools went on to make millions in Silicon Valley and the rich kids stayed rich and in fact got richer.
They are long on ‘transportation equity‘ and short funding groups like the Southside Velodrome Committee and Bikes-n-Roses. Well that really is not quite accurate. They have the funds, but they prefer to spend it on weed and booze. So the only thing they really lack is a financial commitment to The Cause. Nothing strikes fear into the hearts of Socialists like these are the Capitalists like the Koch Brothers. Those two guys have what it takes to ‘put their money where their mouths are‘. And for some strange reason they are faulted for doing what Socialists should be doing for their causes.
In fact that is the basic problem. Socialists see a social need and decide that the solution is to ask for more money from the coffers of government. But the coffers of government are not some abstract reality floating out in the ether. They are our ‘pockets‘.
While a Socialist thinks it unfair to have to submit to a mandatory law, he sees nothing whatsoever unfair about having his pet project funded by the whole society. Why?
Because he has convinced himself that what he wants is good for the greatest number of people.
That by the way is the same was that every religious group that considers itself thinks a pipeline to the Almighty. But in the case of Socialists they are following a god that is more of a social agenda than a person, so they pride themselves in being free thinkers, when in fact they are as rigid and moralistic as anyone in any religious cult could ever be.
Read what the NYC Bike Snob has written to understand my point.
So at the end of the day we are still holding out our hands and begging for monies that we cannot afford to invest in a transportation method that is used by less than 1% of the population. And we are going to hold our collective breath until we get it.
Good luck with that!