NYJetsFan.com Forums: White House Floats Health Care Fix For Congress - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets win 3-1. Beat dolphins so bad that philbin isnt allowed back from england.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:30 PM) It's ok for the offense to deliberately take a safety to prevent a TD and only give up 2 points an benefit themselves so yeah I think it is an old out of date rule that should be thrown out. If the d makes a great play they shouldn't have to give the offense the ball back because of a stupid rule
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:30 PM) So I'm glad it wasn't called
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:31 PM) Hope it's changed next year
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:31 PM) it's been called a ton of times, they showed a montage o ESPN last night of a bunch of times it's been called
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:33 PM) just because one player made a great play, doesn't mean you can excuse someone making a bonehead play
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:34 PM) chancellor made a great play (remember when i wanted the jets to draft him?) but the LBer should have not illegally batted it, he could have tried to recover it or body blocked det from recovering.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:34 PM) Not sure what ESPN you had on ESPN China? I left ESPN on for 2 hours after the game and I never seen this montage you say. I'm calling you out as bullshit. Show me a video of proof
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:38 PM) Even the old ESPN official couldn't remember an instance of it being called. It isn't the same as the offense backing out of the end zone with the ball or being sacked in the end zone for a safety. Completely different rule and situation. I've never seen it called and I watch at least 6 games at a time a week. None of the ESPN announcer players, Ray Lewis, Dilfer, or Young even knew the rule and that's over 20 years of NFL experience. Yet none of them knew or understood the rule until it was explained in detail
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:40 PM) I've never once seen the ball given back to to offense so I challenge you to show me this montage you claim was on. If I didn't see it for two hours I after the game I'm calling bullshit on your end
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:43 PM) Say whatever you want but show me proof or just leave it be because I won't believe you without a bunch of video proof. I have a hell of a memory and if it ever was called maybe once or twice in the past 30 years but no way there is some montage
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:48 PM) Nether coach knew the rule either and they would know more of the rules than the players and fans. If not for a retired official bringing it up it probably would've never even been brought up at all
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:58 PM) I highly questionable is on now and they are even saying no one knew the rule or complained until they were told the rule.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 04:05 PM) I have seen plenty of games where defenders did knock the ball out of the end zone like the situation last night to prevent any possible touchdown not disputing that because that has happened a good many times. My point is I've never seen a flag thrown for it and the ball given to the offense. It's definitely an obsolete rule that should be thrown out. The NFL has made the rules so offensive friendly these days it's hard to play defense with out calls anymore. That is just one more bullshit rule to help the offense. Take the Jets Dolphins game for instance. Those bullshit pi calls against our defense for clearly uncatchable balls. Pi never should've never been called giving up like 60 yards on two calls and a td that never would've happened. At most they should've been 5 yard holding calls. Never would've been mad if they just called them holding calls.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 04:06 PM) Anyway I'm tired of all these offense friendly rules these days screwing over the defenses. It's starting to get like non touch flag football for the defenses.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 04:11 PM) You know it too. Our team has been a defensive team for well over a decade and so many bullshit calls have been called against our defense because of the new offensive friendly rules. So I say screw Detroit. I'm glad it wasn't called and a defense gets a break
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 06:37 PM) call em a liar if you want, but I seen it man
santana Icon : (07 October 2015 - 12:52 AM) guess I should enable a character limit for the shoutbox
santana Icon : (07 October 2015 - 12:53 AM) getting a bit out of hand
Jetsman05 Icon : (07 October 2015 - 06:30 AM) Rob you're brutal
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:30 PM) Who should I start this week in fantasy football? Its a PPR league. I can start 3 of the WRs Edelman-/D-Thomas/Mike Evans/James Jones
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:30 PM) Edelman and Thomas are must start
MikeGangGree... Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:31 PM) So do I start Evans against Jax or James Jones vs STL
Jetsfan115 Icon : (07 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) jones. winston likes jackson more then evans
RetireChrebet Icon : (Yesterday, 01:47 PM) My two year old daughter is less manic and is able to maintain her composure much better than someone we know here ....
azjetfan Icon : (Yesterday, 03:07 PM) Dolphins have also fired their DC
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:24 PM) I am composed. 115 and I may see things differently but he has never pissed me off. He is just trying to make his point of view and I mine nothing more
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:25 PM) I just feel the rule is a very bad rule to give the offense the ball back for losing the ball in the endzone because of a batted ball and feel the NFL is far to offense firendly these days thats all
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:27 PM) I know many agree with that. I get that many changes have been made to limit things like brain damage and other injuries some season ending and career ending but defenses cant play hard like they used to and pathetic calls on defenses have ruinbed many games.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:29 PM) Thats why brought up the Jets Fish game. The balls were clearly uncatcahable and a light tug on the jersey shouldn't be a pi. Whatever happened to the uncatchable ball rule?"
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:33 PM) and as far as that montage I did have ESPN on for 2 hours after the game because I wanted to see all the reactions and get a clear understanding of this old rule and I never saw a bunch of clips where flags were thrown for the play in question. So I asked for proof. If it was on ESPN it wasn't on ESPN1 maybe ESPN 2 ,3 or news. Its not wrong or brutal to ask for proof when he stated he saw it on ESPN I had the channel on and didn't see what he claimed he saw and still haven't seen any video of proof of his claims
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 03:36 PM) But as I said not mad at all. 115 and I are cool and always have been Ive never been mad at him in anyway. This is a fan forum and we dispute. If we all agreed on everything there would be no point of the forum. Disputes on stats and calls make things interesting, and makes each of use see things from different points of view
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:56 PM) it was on whatever channel the game itself came on
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:56 PM) and for the record I don't have any issue with anything rob said. I just disagree with it
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:57 PM) I do think rules are too offense friendly, but I think in this case, when someone blatently breaks a rule ti should be punished
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:57 PM) but then again pacman got away with ripping off a players helmet and didn't get a penatly
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 03:57 PM) refs need to be more consistent
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:04 PM) Hell yeah! Pac 12 AZ State Jaelen Strong. Not a Texans fan but and dont watch a ton of college football but do watch the Pac 12 for football and basketball growing up in Phoenix and also a Suns fan and liking the Cardinals since they moved to AZ .Was a Jets fan though before Az got the cardinals . Strong was really good for AZ State.
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:05 PM) Havent studied up on strong for the Texans but will have to since the announcers said he hasnt played much. I want to know if he has been injured or not performing. He has good hands and size
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:08 PM) I actually was debating on starting the Colts witth Jets D on bye week glad I dropped them. Wasn't much to choose from. Some decent defenses but bad matchups. took a chance on the Jags this week hoping they can shut down Tampa
ROBJETS Icon : (Yesterday, 09:10 PM) Oh and thanks for that 115. people took it wrong. we were simply debating our opinions with passion for our love of football with no animosity and people took it wrong. Easy to misunderstand texts
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Today, 11:21 AM) yeah people don't realize it's ok to disagree on the internet without it being 2 people hating each other lol
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:30 PM) I think if the defense touches a live football in the end zone, period, it should be ruled a touchback.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:30 PM) Talking about fumbles, not passes, of course.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:31 PM) That's the simplest way to combat any confusion about the rule.
RetireChrebet Icon : (Today, 12:32 PM) If you don't like that rule, then don't fumble in the end zone your trying to score in.
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

White House Floats Health Care Fix For Congress

#1 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,169
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 08 August 2013 - 09:21 AM


WASHINGTON (AP) -- It started out a political "gotcha" an amendment to President Barack Obama's health care law requiring members of Congress and staffers to get the same coverage offered to uninsured Americans. Wednesday, the administration tossed it back in the lap of Congress.

Proposed rules issued when the halls of Congress are empty for summer recess say lawmakers' offices should individually decide whether staffers are subject to a health law provision that would require them to switch their insurance from the federal plan to new coverage coming next year under Obama's overhaul.

The potential impact of the provision, authored by Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, has been a huge source of anxiety for congressional staffers accustomed to getting their health insurance just like other feds, from the largest employer health care plan in the world.

The proposal does clarify that the government will continue to pay its standard share of premiums, resolving one of the biggest unknowns about the impact of Grassley's amendment. Many had been warning of a Capitol Hill "brain drain" if staffers were suddenly forced to foot the entire cost of their health insurance premiums.

But questions remain about such matters as retiree coverage and definitions of residency, so the prognosis for the fix is uncertain.

During the drawn-out debate over "Obamacare," Democrats kept insisting that their goal was merely to provide uninsured Americans with the same kinds of coverage and choices that members of Congress have. Grassley, in effect, dared his Democratic counterparts to swallow their rhetoric. A "no" vote on his provision would have undercut the argument that lawmakers supporting the law only wanted regular Americans to enjoy what they themselves had.

Under the amendment, lawmakers themselves and staffers in their personal, or "official," offices would have to exit the federal employee plan and get coverage through new health insurance marketplaces coming under the law. Also known as "exchanges," the marketplaces will offer subsidized private insurance to people who don't have access to a plan on the job.

But the amendment left many key details unclear including whether the government would keep paying its share of premiums, which works out to around 75 percent.

The Office of Personnel Management, which runs the federal employee health plan, said lawmakers themselves are best equipped to decide which staffers are part of their "official" office. The term was not defined in Grassley's amendment, and the OPM said it turns out that congressional staffers in personal offices often also do part of their work for committees or as leadership aides. Those two categories committee and leadership staffers are exempt from Grassley's provision.

A senior congressional staffer familiar with the proposed regulations said several significant issues remain unclear or unresolved. One whole set of questions has to do with residency requirements. Some staffers, for example, may claim residency in their home state while living in Washington, D.C. What if health insurance plans in their home state don't have Washington-area providers in their networks? Other issues could impact coverage for retirees and those nearing retirement.

A spokesman for the federal personnel office refused an interview request, instead supplying prepared questions and answers that detailed aspects of the proposal.

The new insurance markets start will start signing up people on Oct. 1 for coverage that's effective Jan. 1. OPM said lawmakers will have to decide the status of their employees before the end of the year.

That could mean the difference between a routine re-enrollment or venturing into uncharted territory. Staffers waiting to find out might want to be extra nice to the boss in the meantime.


Posted Image

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users