Premium

Never Trust Rules Made For You but Not for Them

(AP Photo/Cliff Owen, File)

Back when Obamacare was first implemented, congress made itself exempt from having to take part in the exchange that they had foisted on the American people. It was the first true sign that this was a bad idea.

As the Washington Examiner reported, then-President Brack Obama knew that if he forced Congress to take part in the program, it likely wouldn’t pass and despite it being a clear violation of the law, allowed lawmakers a way out:

Contrary to assurances and in violation of federal law, the Obama administration shielded lawmakers from an effective pay cut of up to $12,000 each by granting Congress several types of special treatment unavailable to the public. It deemed Congress eligible to participate in D.C.’s small-business exchange, though both federal and D.C. law prohibit it. That form of special treatment gave rise to another: It made Congress the only large employer in the country that can make tax-free contributions toward its employees’ exchange-plan premiums. The act of issuing those payments conflicts with other federal laws, and bestows yet another form of special treatment on Congress: Members of Congress and their staff are the only group of federal workers who receive FEHBP premium contributions for non-FEHBP coverage.

Obama took these steps because he knew Congress would have quickly revamped or even repealed Obamacare if lawmakers had to live under its terms. President Trump seems to agree, and has threatened to end the exemptions and subsidies. “If a new HealthCare Bill is not approved quickly,” he tweeted recently, “BAILOUTS for Members of Congress will end very soon!”

Confirming everyone’s fears, Obamacare became as bad as predicted. Healthcare costs went up across the board, businesses limited the number of employees they’d hire to avoid having to take part in the program, and many found it cheaper to pay the fine than take part in the system.

Meanwhile, congress wagged its collective finger at anyone who didn’t take part in it.

When President Donald Trump came along and neutered Obamacare, a lot of Americans were able to get things back on track for the most part.

Fast-forward to the 2020 elections and the left was cheering on mail-in voting like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. In the age of COVID they heralded it as the safest and most secure way to hold an election. Anyone who disagreed with them was labeled as paranoid and possibly even guilty of attempting to defraud the election process.

It wasn’t just Democrat politicians. Media outlets were carrying the chorus, including the Washington Post, a hard-left rag owned by Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos.

In true fashion, however, what Bezos cheered on for you is not something he wanted taking place within his own little fiefdom. When it came to voting on unionization, Bezos rejected the idea that mail-in voting was a good one.

According to Paulina Enck at The Federalist, Amazon employees want to unionize in order to combat the horrendous working conditions at the company. With COVID-19 running rampant through Amazon centers, mail-in voting was proposed but Amazon is attempting to run interference in order to stop the mail-in vote from happening, saying this kind of voting has “serious and systemic flaws”:

Employees at a fulfillment center in Bessemer, Alabama — which recently became the state with the highest COVID-19 positivity rate — out of fear of catching or spreading coronavirus, intended to have their election by mail. After all, for the past six months, the corporate press inundated readers and viewers with decrees that in contrast to deadly in-person voting during the pandemic, vote-by-mail was a perfectly safe alternative.

Amazon petitioned the National Labor Relations Board to postpone Bessemer’s election in order to prevent voting by mail. An exclusively in-person union vote could easily harm voter turn out, which could work to Amazon’s favor, and the corporate giant knows this. Its petition claims that the group of 5,800 employees is prohibitively large to organize voting by mail, an election format that has “serious and systemic flaws.” Amazon likewise told CNN that “the best approach to a valid, fair and successful election is one that is conducted manually, in-person.”

Where was this concern from Bezos during the 2020 elections?

There wasn’t any because Bezos had everything to gain from Democrats taking over. Mail-in voting was the answer to our society’s problems then, but when Bezos’s bottom line is under threat, he wants something safe and secure.

In California, Gavin Newsom hardly obeyed his own lockdown rules and was caught enjoying the good life while telling everyone else to stay indoors. Now, as his job is under threat, he’s opening up California so everyone else can live just like he’s been.

There is definitely an effort in this country by the elite to put themselves at an advantage and put you below them. This means rules for you but not for them.

If you really want to know which of their decisions are going to screw you over, watch which ones they don’t want to obey themselves.