Kathleen Sebelius fumbles for ObamaCare excuses

WASHINGTON —

Embattled Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius fumbled for an excuse Wednesday to get out of enrolling in ObamaCare herself — falsely declaring that it would be “illegal.”


Pressed to voluntarily sign up by Republican lawmakers at a confrontational congressional hearing, Sebelius offered up the excuse that it was against the law for her to give up her employer-sponsored federal insurance plan.

“It’s illegal,” insisted Sebelius, who is President Obama’s point person on implementing the national health-care law and answering for the defective ObamaCare Web site.

Legal experts contradict Sebelius’ claim, which she made under oath. “She could legally do so,” Tim Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University in Virginia, told The Post. “Anyone who is a resident of a state, lawfully present in the US and not incarcerated can purchase insurance through an exchange.”


http://nypost.com/2013/10/30/house-committee-grills-kathleen-sebelius-over-obamacare/

One North Carolina congresswoman explained the biology of birth to the Health and Human Services secretary Wednesday during a humorous moment at a hearing on the botched Obamacare rollout.

Republican Rep. Renee Ellmers raised the issue of Obamacare’s mandated coverage of health care services that many might not even need — like pregnancy coverage.

She said, Breitbart.com reported: “As far as [Obamacare’s] essential health benefits, correct me if I’m wrong — do men not have to buy maternity care?”

Ms. Sebelius: “Policies will cover maternity coverage. For the young and healthy, under 30-year-olds will have a choice also of a catastrophic plan that has no maternity coverage.”

Ms. Ellmers: “But men are required to purchase maternity coverage.”

Ms. Sebelius: “Well, an insurance policy has a series of benefits whether you use them or not.”

Ms. Ellmers: “And that is why health care premiums are increasing, because we are forcing them to buy things that they will never need. Thank you.”

Ms. Sebelius: “The individual policies cover families. Men often do need maternity care for their spouses and for their families, yes.”

Ms. Ellmers: “A single male, aged 32, does not need maternity coverage. To be the best of your knowledge, has a man ever delivered a baby?”



Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/31/kathleen-sebelius-men-often-do-need-maternity-care/#ixzz2jJ0HSfBS
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

This is nothing new though. NH has mandated maternity coverage since the late 80s or early 90s. Even if your group had no women or no women who could get pregnant, it was mandatory. As I have said before, when all these things started getting mandated and you were no longer allowed to choose what you wanted for you group, was when the prices started going sky high and companies started leaving the state, especially in our area, so there wasn't much competition to keep prices down. However, even though it is nothing new to NH, I don't think it is right. I think you should be able to choose the coverage you want. The problem comes in when someone doesn't choose a coverage and then needs it but doesn't have the money to pay for it. Who ends up paying for it then? People don't want to be responsible for themselves anymore. And then there are those who can't afford even the littlest policy so we will have to pay for all of their health coverage. So the whole thing is a big mess.