RUSH: I have to talk about this McDonald's business and the waiver on the health law. From Bloomberg Business News: "Nearly a million workers won't get a consumer protection in the U.S. health reform law meant to cap insurance costs because the government exempted their employers." Won't get a consumer protection? If they didn't get this waiver they woulda lost their insurance! What the heck here? "Nearly a million workers won't get a consumer protection in the U.S. health reform law meant to cap insurance costs because the government exempted their employers." Consumer protection? They're asking for a waiver from the health law. That alone, what does that tell you? We've got a new health care law. The headline in the Bloomberg story calls it health care coverage. Forget that. We have a health care law. It has been touted by its proponents as the greatest thing ever for the people of this country. Remember Pelosi was very happy after it was signed. She had her press conference there, "Affordable health care for all Americans." And they were rolling on and on and on but what a great thing this was, premiums were going to be reduced $2500, access to coverage greater than ever, access to care, better than ever. You get to keep your doctor. And yet here are 30 companies who, in order essentially to provide their employees health care, need a waiver from the new law? What does that tell us?
This a pull quote: "Chief executive officer of consulting company Health Policy and Strategy Associates, 'The big political issue here is the president promised no one would lose the coverage they've got. Here we are a month before the election, and these companies represent 1 million people who would lose the coverage they've got.'" You get to keep your doctor. You don't lose your coverage. Thirty companies need a waiver from the law. For those of you in Rio Linda, what this means is the law will not apply to them. It will be as though the law does not exist for them. The waiver is only for one year, an election year. "Thirty companies and organizations, including McDonald's and Jack in the Box, won't be required to raise the minimum annual benefit included in low-cost health plans, which are often used to cover part-time or low-wage employees." They won't be required. Welcome to Obamaville. They won't be required for only one year.
"The Department of Health and Human Services, which provided a list of exemptions, said it granted waivers in late September so workers with such plans wouldn't lose coverage from employers who might choose instead to drop health insurance altogether." Finally, ladies and gentlemen, we're getting to the problem. This decision was driven by the November elections. This has diffused one of many Election Day bombshell issues. So here you have the new health care reform law, which is the best thing since sliced bread. It's going to fix what was an unjust and unfair and totally rip-off health care system. And now, 30 companies need to be exempted from it in order to provide health insurance for their employees, low wage employees. The primary beneficiaries, we were told, people who were poor, people who couldn't afford it on their own, they were the primary beneficiaries, the law was really focused as all supposed Democrat policies are, on the little guy. And the little guy, in order to have his continued health insurance, his company has to be exempted from the law. But then after this year, next year he'll lose it 'cause there's not an election next year.
Now 30 American firms, in order to provide health insurance and thus coverage, care for their employees, need a waiver. They need to be not held accountable to the law. They need, in effect, a pardon. These 30 companies need a pardon. They need to be allowed to break the law. This is how we must look at this. They're getting a one-year pardon, they break the law with permission from the government in order to provide health insurance and care for their employees. They're not gonna lose their doctors, not gonna lose their coverage, and their premiums were going to go down. I can't emphasize this enough. They come up with this brand-new law that's supposed to fix everything that's wrong and 30 companies, 'cause it's an election year, are allowed to break the law, get a pardon, otherwise disaster would happen. Holy… I mean I don't know what.
RUSH: One more thing on this waiver story. "The single biggest waiver, for 351,000 people, was for the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, a New York union providing coverage for city teachers… The waivers are effective for a year and were granted to insurance plans and companies who showed that employee premiums would rise or that workers would lose coverage without them[.]" I mean, there it is. So in order for people to continue to have health care insurance and health care, you have to be exempted from Obamacare. And the "single biggest waiver, for 351,000 people, was for the United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund, a New York union providing coverage for city teachers" -- that's a lot of votes in a state that could see key Democrats thumped in November. And look. The honesty with which Reuters reports this -- make sure it's Reuters here -- Bloomberg, sorry. The honesty with which Bloomberg reports this -- "The waivers are effective for a year and were granted to insurance plans and companies who showed that employee premiums would rise or that workers would lose coverage without" the waivers -- cannot emphasize this enough as to what this means.
RUSH: Starting in my adopted hometown of Sacramento. Jeff, great to have you, sir, on the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hey, Rush, how you doing today?
RUSH: Very well. Thank you.
CALLER: Yeah, I've been listening to you since you've been in Sacramento. That's over 20 years. I'm 41 now, and that was back when I was 16 years old.
RUSH: Wow, that was 1984 so we're talking 26 years!
CALLER: Exactly, yep, yep.
RUSH: That's a generation.
CALLER: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And I've learned a lot from you.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: You've helped me through the years, let me tell you.
RUSH: Thank you very much, sir.
CALLER: And also, real quick, we have the same anniversary date. I got married on the same day as you. I want to give a shout-out to Stacey. I love you, babe. Anyway, and congratulations to you on your wedding, Rush.
RUSH: You bet, thank you.
CALLER: What I called for is you confused me this morning when you were talking about the health care because we were told specifically that companies such as McDonald's and Burger King, we needed to pass this because those companies were greedy and didn't have health care for their part-time employees.
CALLER: And now we're being told that they need an exemption to, I guess, continue doing what they were accused of not doing all along.
RUSH: That's a brilliant point. This is evidence of what can happen to your brain with steady exposure to this program. You are right on the money. During this whole health care debate, have we not heard what a bunch of rotten SOBs McDonald's are and Jack in the Box, and Arby's and all the rest. These flipper jobs, they don't even provide health coverage and health insurance for employees. And now we learn that in order for them to continue to provide health coverage, which we were told they weren't providing, they need an exemption. They need a pardon. They need to be allowed to break and violate Obamacare. Great point, Jeff.
RUSH: This McDonald's health bill waiver, I still can't get over this, especially because when we first heard about it, remember, the White House put out a story that McDonald's was lying, remember that? The White House puts out a story that the McDonald's internal memo to employees, you might lose your health coverage here if we have to be held accountable to the law, man, they jumped right on it. The White House said that's a lie, that's not true. It turned out to be true. In fact, the waivers were already underway when the White House was denying that there were going to be waivers.
RUSH: Mark in Vienna, Virginia, great to have you on the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. How are you?
RUSH: Very well, sir. Thank you.
CALLER: Quick question for you. Maybe you're going to have to refer to one of your legal counsels like F. Lee Levin for this answer, but with regard to this waiver, this corporate waiver that McDonald's got and apparently dozens of other companies got, you know, at the very same time the government is defending itself in lawsuits by, you know, a whole bunch of state attorneys general, and their defense is this is simply a tax. Well, if this is simply a tax, how can you exempt corporations from a tax? Doesn't that violate the equal-protection clause?
RUSH: Well, you're right. I am going to have to consult a legal mind that -- rarely do I have to say this -- that is more specialized in this matter than mine. But I don't believe we're talking about the same thing. I don't think a waiver, these companies having insurance is the same thing as the government defending itself, because the commerce clause suit is about the government mandating individuals buy insurance, and if they don't, they can be fined and the IRS can fine 'em. This doesn't deal with individuals. This is a waiver for companies.
RUSH: But overall, your point is still well made. It's an excellent point, and that is, we've got a law. We've got a health insurance law that's supposed to improve health insurance, have coverage for everybody, especially the poor and those who make low wages. Now we come to find out that people who work at McDonald's and 29 other similar companies, in order to hold onto the health insurance we were told they didn't have because these companies are mean, now we're told that they have to be exempted from this new, wonderful law in order to keep their insurance coverage. I mean to me this is profound. Here we have this benevolent, typical Democrat piece of legislation, gonna help you against these rich people who want to take everything you've got away from you, we're gonna pass health care, make sure you have the same coverage they do, the same care that they do and then come to find out because of this law you will lose it, so you have to be exempted.
By the same token on this other side, here comes a law mandating that individuals buy health insurance if they don't have it. What would have happened if these waivers hadn't been granted? Now, the provision to buy health insurance doesn't implement yet. That's another one of these things. This wasn't supposed to happen this soon, either. The only reason the waivers happened is because this is an election year, and the waivers are for only one year. So if this were next year there wouldn't be any waivers. So if there were no waivers what would happen? These employees would lose their health insurance. Then the question is would they be fined for not buying their own? Would they be fined? Would the IRS track 'em down, find these people who lost their insurance 'cause their employers couldn't afford it, would they employers be fined? Would the employees be fined? Now, remember, we're asking questions here about a law that's designed, we were told, to streamline, make more efficient, make more affordable, and broaden coverage and care for everybody. We're asking these kinds of questions. That's how bad this is. That's what a mistake this whole thing has been. That's what an absolute disaster it is.
RUSH: I got a note from F. Lee Levin who confirms I was right in my answer to the legal question. Now, we also talk about equal protection, right? McDonald's, Jack in the Box, and that teachers fund bunch in New York, they get waivers. But we didn't. Where's the equal protection? How come these people get waivers? They got waivers because it's an election year. That's the only reason they got waivers. Because Obama and the Democrats cannot stand for the piece of legislation they heralded be responsible for people losing health coverage in an election year. Next year, perfectly fine when you lose your health coverage because then you'll have to run to them to get it. That's the plan, very simply.