Report: Corporations to Save Money Dropping Coverage for Employees Instead of Complying with Obamacare Mandate

According to a new report from the House Ways and Means Committee, 71 of the 100 companies in the Fortune 100 list of large corporations would save considerable amounts of money by dropping health care coverage for their employees instead of complying with the Affordable Healthcare insurance mandate.

“According to data provided by the 71 Fortune 100 companies that responded to the inquiry, they could save a total of $28.6 billion in 2014 alone if they stopped offering health insurance to their U.S. employees and instead paid the employer mandate penalty for not doing so,” the report said.

“In the highly competitive global market in which these Fortune 100 companies operate, it is unrealistic for them not to consider the more economical choice of dumping health coverage and telling their employees to purchase health insurance through the Exchanges.”

During the health care reform debate, President Obama promised that people would be able to keep whatever coverage they currently have if they so choose.

The report also states that a majority of large companies believe that the cost of providing health care to their employees will skyrocket.

“Alarmingly, 84 percent of responding employers expect their future health care costs will increase at rates that are greater than those they’ve experienced over the past five years,” the report said.

It also states:

“Not all employers have the financial resources to provide coverage to their employees, and not all employees seek jobs to obtain ESI [Employer-Sponsored Insurance]. As a result of the employer mandate, many businesses that cannot afford to provide health insurance coverage for their workers will face a massive increase in costs – which for many companies exceeds their profit margins. Even if companies are not forced to eliminate jobs, the law creates a financial incentive for employers to drop coverage, save labor costs, and send employees to the government-run exchanges where some will receive taxpayer-funded subsidies,”.

The report only dealt with the top 100 companies in America, leaving out the thousands of other employers covered by the mandate. Employers with more than 50 employees are mandated to provide government-approved health care plans.

Secret U.S. Program Releases High-Level Insurgents for Pledges of Peace

For several years now the US government has secretly been releasing high-level detainees from a military prison in Afghanistan as part of negotiations with insurgent groups.

While the Obama administration has, unsuccessfully, been pursuing a peace deal with the Taliban, the “strategic release” program serves as a means for officials to use prisoners as bargaining chips for pledges of peace.

U.S. officials warn the prisoners before they are released that if they are caught attacking American troops, they will be detained once again.

“Everyone agrees they are guilty of what they have done and should remain in detention. Everyone agrees that these are bad guys. But the benefits outweigh the risks,” said one U.S. official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Releasing prisoners from the Parwan detention center, the only American military prison in Afghanistan, does not require congressional approval like at Guantanamo.

U.S. officials would not say how many detainees have been released under the program, or exactly when it was established.

The process starts with talks between U.S. military officials and insurgent commanders or local elders. Promises of decreased violence are made if certain insurgents are released from Parwan. The value of the tradeoff and the sincerity of the guarantee is determined by senior military officials in Kabul, officials said.

“The Afghans have come to us with information that might strengthen the reconciliation process,” U.S. Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker said. “Many times we do act on it.”

The insurgents released through the secret program are the only detainees at Parwan who are able to circumvent the prison’s judicial review board. Their release is instead approved directly by the United States’ top commander and top military lawyer in Afghanistan, U.S. officials said. One official described the process as being “outside of our normal protocol.”

As opposed to the formal NATO-sponsored reintegration program, which forces militants to sever ties with the insurgency, the strategic release program does not require detainees to formally disavow their relationship to the Taliban, Hezb-i-Islami or other insurgent groups.