Skip to main content

Those Protesting Harvard Professors Have a Point [Slate.com]

150104_$BOX_HealthCosts.jpg.CROP.promo-mediumlarge

 

It’s hard to see the Harvard University faculty’s fury over their health insurance as anything but comic. The school began the new year by requiring its employees to pick up a great percentage of their health care bill—a change the school partially attributed to the very Affordable Care Act many of its professors once argued for. Now those academics are pushing back, but for those of us living in the real world, the amount in dispute sounds ridiculous. From no deductible to $250 per person? This is worthy of a protest movement? When the New York Times reported on the dispute earlier this week, the Internet laughed. I did. You probably did too.

We were wrong. L’affaire Harvard is a perfect demonstration of why continuing unhappiness with the Affordable Care Act almost certainly resides not just in Republican stonewalling and endless yammering about fictional death panels, but in our pocketbooks, too.

 

[For more of this story, written by Helaine Olen, go to http://www.slate.com/articles/...ll_still_paying.html]

Attachments

Images (1)
  • 150104_$BOX_HealthCosts.jpg.CROP.promo-mediumlarge

Add Comment

Comments (1)

Newest · Oldest · Popular

Under the former National Health Planning and Resources Development Act of 1974, "Consumer Majorities" were mandated for all Health Planning & Resource Development boards and committees. The Act specified that you could not be a "Consumer Representative" if more than 10% of your income came from a health related source, or if you were married to a "Provider", or if you were an "Indirect Provider" (EMT-Paramedic, Dental Hygienist, etc.). Since the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the Affordable Care Act is a "Tax", why shouldn't we have "Representation"?

Post
Copyright © 2023, PACEsConnection. All rights reserved.
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×