Getty Images
We learned this week that Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) takes advantage of the Affordable Care Act to bring health care coverage to his own adult daughters. The problem, of course, is that Brown has also voted to kill the entirety of the law, and fully intends to keep trying until "Obamacare" and its benefits have been eliminated.
The Republican senator wants the law to help his kids, but he also wants to destroy the law, no matter what it does to everyone else's kids.
Pressed on this, Brown changed his story. After initially saying he insurers his daughters through his congressional insurance plan, the Massachusetts senator changed his mind and said he's actually taking advantage of state measures, which he'd voted for, not the Democrats' reform law.
As Igor Volsky explained, this version doesn't appear to be true.
Brown may have taken advantage of Massachusetts reform while serving in the Bay State, but as a senator, he's benefiting from the ACA's most popular provision.
According to the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) website, Brown's congressional health care plan (the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan) is regulated by federal law, not state legislation -- "The FEHB Program is a Federal program and preempts state law requirements," the site says -- and the program allows dependents to stay on their parents' insurance plans until age 26 as a result of Obamacare. [...]
An official at OPM confirmed to ThinkProgress that "As long as the parent has a self-and-family enrollment, dependent children are covered under that enrollment until they reach age 26, as a result of passage of the ACA. Before the ACA, the dependent age was by FEHB law up to age 22."
So, Scott Brown enjoys a benefit he wants to deny to everyone else, and then he fibbed to try to get out of it?
That's not a good combination.
It's also worth emphasizing that from Brown's perspective, the larger issue just isn't worth worrying about. What happens if he succeeds and the law is eliminated? Brown and his wife made over a half-million dollars last year, so they're in a position to help their adult kids pay for insurance and medical expenses.
Since 99% of American households make far less than the senator and his wife, the question becomes what happens to 18-to-25 year olds who don't come from wealthy families. As Brown sees it, states might consider passing measures similar to "Obamacare" if the law is destroyed, which he thinks would solve the problem. But if your state is dominated by Republican policymakers and chooses not to take this step? Well, apparently you're out of luck. Maybe you should have picked a better state (or wealthier parents).
Remember, this is what passes for GOP moderation on health care policy -- a confused senator who hates the Affordable Care Act, despite not knowing why, who wants to benefit from the law he thinks he finds offensive, while taking those benefits away from everyone else, and then fudging the truth when questions arise.
Leave a Comment:
Yet another example of Scott Brown's personal propriety being but dust in the wind!
I would hope the voters of the Great State of Massachusetts would Vote the Rascal Out in November, and rid us of his shenanigans! -Kevo
And the big suprise about Scott Brown's dishonesty is?????????????????????????
Steve, my man. The word you are looking for is not "fibbed." The word you are looking for is "lied." Until we call things by their proper name, we won't be able to understand them. It may make sense, because both words start with "M," to talk about Mitt's Mendacity, but the real word is "lie" or "dishonesty." The same thing here. Scott Brown lied. It's that simple and has the quality of being direct and to the point.
Thank you! I came to the comments page to say that very thing.
The media needs to stop dancing around the issue trying to be diplomatic. If the media would use the appropriate term "lie" when discussing politics, the politicians will stop making outrageous statements that contain outright lies. The politicians will still fudge the truth, but at least, the blatant lies will stop. If Mitt's lies were called that on CBS, NBC and ABC network evening news, Mitt will stop telling the lies.
The point we all have to understand is how fast political strategies change and that this is the new one. Do you remember flip-flopping? We don't even use the phrase any more. Remember swift-boating? This is similar and yet, not. This is a whole new thing: Just say anything and if someone calls you out for lieing, just deny you ever said it.
Parts of this lies with the media. They (and we) are so hungry for any comment they have chosen not to antagonize the players. If they do, the politicians claim that the media is wrong or took their comments out of context or are a dupe for the other side. Honest people take that seriously, so they back off.
But the politicians have learned that, for the most part, our attention spans are so short they can change stories from morning to night and get away with it.
This is taking "instant gratification" to the "nth" degree.
This should be in a Presidential campaign commercial in 3.. 2.. Never?? Come on DNC, you've got to be good for something!?
It should be an Elizabeth Warren commercial. I'm pretty sure her campaign has taken note of it and will provide some response.
Yes, but she has to get over the "Indian" thing first. That was stupid.
This is yet another example of GOP hypocrisy on the issue! While they don't seem to mind if "they" benefit from whatever is happening, they oppose the same for "everyone else" - not on policy, but just because they can.
Why am I not surprised.
So... what about the other members of congress, house and senate alike? How many are doing as Scott Brown is doing? Inquiring minds want to know.
Let's be straight on one thing Scott Brown didn't "fib" he lied. Why does the media cover for these people. A lie is a lie no matter how you mask it.
"Fibbed" is a polite, understated synonym for lying. Benen's style is to understate factual situations for effect. You'll just have to get used to it.
I've come to believe that in order to run for public office as a Republican, a person has to pass a test in which they are required to lie through their teeth and keep a straight face at the same time. If they can't do that, they don't get their party's endorsement on the ballot. The kind of ignorance and disingenuousness shown by Scott Brown in this instance is reprehensible. For all his "moderate" credentials, this kind of thing suggests he needs to "man up" and tell his evil Republican overlords, "Screw yourselves. I'm going to stop being your toady and start living in a way in which I know my conscience will be clear. And if that means I lose an election, so be it. At least I'll know I lost it doing the right thing."
You're assuming republicans know the difference between 'right' and 'wrong'. They translate those ideals more closely to 'how I benefit' and 'who gives a @!$%# about other people cause I'm not benefiting'
I can respect honest disagreement on the issues. But hypocrisy makes me sick. Yet another example of a politician saying "do as I say, not as I do." Shame on you, Scott Brown!
I'm fine if the guy takes advantage of a program he doesn't agree with. After all, I disagree with the Bush tax cuts, but I still pay the tax rate they tell me to pay. But the lying and trying to cover it up? Unacceptable. I hope Elizabeth Warren really wipes the floor with him in November.
elizabethwarren.com...
Awesome reporting, Steve Bennen and Rachel Maddow, thank you.
Of course these Republicans are going to be hypocrites. They know the ACA law makes perfect sense. But they can't be proper Republican politicians by publicly acknowledging that.
In order to be a proper Republican, you're supposed to pretend that the ACA law calls for death panels, and global warming isn't happening, and the sky isn't blue, the earth isn't round...convince uneducated people of your lies (and collect campaign money from special interests) and then rely on people who believe those lies to vote for you.
That's the Grand Ol' Party!
Why don't we just give up on the 2 party race. Instead we could have a referendum on who lies the least and make him the Fearless leader. Torally non-partisian.
You must remember the republican mantra of "defeat Barack Obama"....which includes never agreeing with him, never voting for anything that the President (or the Democrats) support. All republicans do this no matter what they personally believe or feel or more importantly, what is in the best interest of the people that they represent. Brown is an example of a republican getting caught benefiting from something that the President supported. The same goes for poor Mitt Romney.....I fear he no longer knows what he personally believes in when it comes to his own presidential platform. He first must be told from those that hold the republican "puppet strings" before he makes a comment.
Except that another Republican talking point is forcing a national market for health insurance. All States would have to accept plans approved by any other State. In the case of Massachusetts, all it would take would be one State (let's say Mississippi) approving a plan that doesn't support adult children, doesn't cover contraception, allows recission, bars coverage for pre-existing conditions, etc. and employers in Massachusetts would be free to use it instead of more enlightened ones.
Republicans have a monoploly on hypocrisy. Sacrifices are always welcomed, as long as OTHERS are doing the sacrificing. Voters will remember in November!
If I still lived in Massachusetts I would vote for ELIZABETH WARREN. SHE ISN'T JUST A PRETTY FACE, LIKE THIS GUY. SHE IS SOOOOOO MUCH SMARTER THAN HIM. Please vote for smarts, instead for Pretty Boy!