The following statement can be attributed to Laura W. Murphy, director of the American Civil Liberties Union Washington Legislative Office:

"The media's purpose is to keep the public informed and it should be free to do so without the threat of unwarranted surveillance. The Attorney General must explain the Justice Department's actions to the public so that we can make sure this kind of press intimidation does not happen again."

The following statement can be attributed to Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project:

"Obtaining a broad range of telephone records in order to ferret out a government leaker is an unacceptable abuse of power. Freedom of the press is a pillar of our democracy, and that freedom often depends on confidential communications between reporters and their sources."

“It is known to the president of the United States that this is the policy,” Bernstein said. “To say there was no knowledge in, quote, specifically about this in the White House is nonsense. This is a policy matter and this does go to the president.”

Bernstein also echoed a common Republican complaint — while the administration prosecutes leakers, some of its top officials also leak classified information.

“Very high officials every day are doing this for their own reasons,” Bernstein said. “So this is selective. There’s no reason for it beyond that which is nefarious. It’s simple as that. And it’s dangerous and it shouldn’t be excused.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/c ... z2TH5IOzG4

Werthless wrote:

Many groups have come out with reports forecasting what will happen to premiums, on average, next year. But just what folks will pay for insurance on the individual market depends on a variety of factors. They include the enrollee's income, age, gender, current coverage level and state of residence.

"The average isn't very relevant to any particular person," said Jim O'Connor, principal at consulting firm Milliman, who authored a report on how "Obamacare" will affect premiums.

...

At this point, everyone -- including the insurers -- is just guessing at what premiums should be. That makes next year a giant experiment. Will younger, healthier people purchase coverage, or will they skip it and simply pay the fine? Next year, the fine starts at $95 per adult -- a rate likely to be cheaper than any individual plan available on the state exchanges.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:almost makes you wish we just had universal healthcare

pacino wrote:sure would be nice


Anyway, i'm now seeing hte issue with the DOJ thing. It's that, unless they answer this and explain why they brought in so many lines, it's a very broad brush for what seems to amount to phishing for info, not necessarily a narrow investigation.

Holder's pretty terrible in every respect, but the only things people in DC seem to care about are partisan things. if this is what takes him down, fine. let's get someone who will actually prosecute some people in that role.

CalvinBall wrote:fighting joe sestak plans to run for senate against toomey in 2016

CalvinBall wrote:fighting joe sestak plans to run for senate against toomey in 2016

pacino wrote:Holder's pretty terrible in every respect, but the only things people in DC seem to care about are partisan things. if this is what takes him down, fine. let's get someone who will actually prosecute some people in that role.

Werthless wrote:

td11 wrote:^from this CNN Money piece in case anyone else was curious.

Many groups have come out with reports forecasting what will happen to premiums, on average, next year. But just what folks will pay for insurance on the individual market depends on a variety of factors. They include the enrollee's income, age, gender, current coverage level and state of residence.

"The average isn't very relevant to any particular person," said Jim O'Connor, principal at consulting firm Milliman, who authored a report on how "Obamacare" will affect premiums.

...

At this point, everyone -- including the insurers -- is just guessing at what premiums should be. That makes next year a giant experiment. Will younger, healthier people purchase coverage, or will they skip it and simply pay the fine? Next year, the fine starts at $95 per adult -- a rate likely to be cheaper than any individual plan available on the state exchanges.

sounds like no one has any idea!

Obamacare limits the amount insurers can charge older enrollees to three times the amount charged for younger participants. It's now common to see older folks charged five times that of their younger peers.
"Younger people will have to offset costs of those who are older," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, a lobbying group for insurers.
...
Currently insurers can charge premiums based on gender. Men usually pay less than women, since they typically visit the doctor less frequently. The Affordable Care Act, however, doesn't allow insurers to charge different rates to men and women.
Taken together, men ages 25 to 36 could see rate increases greater than 50%, according to Milliman's O'Connor, but women of the same age will only see their premiums creep up 4%. Meanwhile, men age 60 to 64 could see their premiums drop by 12%.
...

jerseyhoya wrote:Just another instance of the federal government screwing over younger generations to boost old folks. I hate old people.