One of the recurring right-wing gripes about ObamaCare is that members of Congress and their staff were somehow granted an "exemption" from the law when it was passed in 2009. The complaint has become a standard part of the right's email-chain, talk-radio recitation about the evils of ObamaCare, with some Republicans insisting that this "exemption" be repealed as part of their price for funding the government.

Let's take a closer look at the claim, both in its own right and because it offers a marvelous case study into the many ways that the modern Republican Party has gone so seriously awry.

First, we should acknowledge that as a device for rousing the rabble, the claim of an ObamaCare exemption for Congress approaches perfection. It serve a dual purpose, undercutting the legitimacy of ObamaCare while also fanning populist anger at federal employees and at Washington elitists who think they're better than the rest of us. As the complaint is often framed, "If they think ObamaCare is so great, why did they make sure that it didn't apply to them?"

Yet there is no congressional "exemption" from ObamaCare.

Quite the contrary, the Affordable Care Act explicitly and directly strips congressional employees of their previous employer-provided health-insurance coverage and requires them to buy coverage through ObamaCare exchanges instead. Members of Congress and their staff are the only group in the entire country singled out for that requirement.

Here's what the law says, as passed and still in full effect:

".... the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and Congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are — (I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an Amendment made by this Act).”

In practical terms, that means that as of Jan. 1, members of Congress and their staff can no longer be covered by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the health-insurance system that covers most other civilian federal employees. Under FEHB, the federal government picks up 75 percent of the cost of employee health insurance, while the employees themselves pick up the remaining 25 percent. For congressional staff, the federal government's 75-percent share will instead be used to offset the cost of buying insurance through ObamaCare.

This has never been a secret, nor has its impact been in dispute until now. The provision was put into the bill back in 2009 at the request of Sen. Chuck Grassley, Republican of Iowa, at a time when Democrats were still hoping to win Republican support for ObamaCare. In fact, a press announcement released by Grassley's office four years ago today made it quite clear what the provision accomplished:

"Senator Chuck Grassley has won approval for his legislation to require that members of Congress and congressional staff access health insurance through the exchange that would be created by the health care reform legislation under consideration by the Finance Committee.

“The more that Congress experiences the laws we pass, the better the laws are likely to be,” Grassley said. .... “My interest in having Members of Congress participate in the exchange is consistent with my long-held view that Congress should live under the same laws it passes for the rest of the country.”

So now, four years later, that provision somehow becomes an "exemption" from ObamaCare? By any reasonable definition, it's nonsense. But in the hands of demagogues, the power of the claim to stir resentment and mind-muddling anger far outweighs any petty concerns about its accuracy.

In fact, Republicans have found the claimso powerful and tempting that they are now turning it on each other.  Self-styled "true conservatives" are demanding that congressional staff be forced onto the ObamaCare exchanges AND be forced to pay the entire costs themselves, with no contribution from their employer. In effect, that would amount to a unilateral pay cut of $10,000 or more for those staffers with family coverage.

That would be a big financial hit. Public perception to the contrary, the median pay for most congressional staffers ranges between $30,000 and $50,000 a year, and that's in a very expensive city. Some Republican lawmakers, including Grassley, understand that reality and argue that stripping employees of that benefit just to score political points back home would be deeply unfair. Grassley has said repeatedly that was never the intent of his provision.

However, he and others are getting drowned out within the party by those who -- either through cynicism or enthusiastic gullibility -- have bought into the exemption claim and want to wring maximum advantage from it.

One prime example is our own U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey, who has adopted the "no exemption for Congress" meme to help fuel his bid for the U.S. Senate. In a closed-door meeting with fellow Republicans earlier this month, Gingrey made it clear that the boost such a position might give his political ambitions was more important to him than the well-being of the little people in his office. 

As the National Review reported:

"The Georgia Republican, whose latest personal financial-disclosure forms show his net worth is at least $3 million, had little sympathy for lawmakers and even less for staff.

Capitol Hill aides, he said “may be 33 years old now and not making a lot of money. But in a few years they can just go to K Street,” the Washington, D.C., vernacular for becoming a lobbyist, “and make $500,000 a year. Meanwhile I’m stuck here making $172,000 a year.”

The comment incensed some of the GOP aides in the room, two of whom relayed Gingrey’s comments to me. One person noted that many lower-rung congressional aides make relatively low wages and have no real expectation of a future cash-out."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, facing a Tea Party primary challenge in Kentucky, has also endorsed the "exemption" claim. "I don’t think that members of Congress ought to be treated any differently in any way from anybody else in America," McConnell said recently. "We should not get any carveouts from Obamacare.”

Again, that is total nonsense. Targeting congressional staff as the only group in the country specifically forced to go onto the exchanges, and then stripping them of their employer contribution needed to buy that health insurance, is not "treating them like everybody else," and McConnell knows it. But he helped to create this fraud-feeding beast, and he lacks the courage and personal authority to stand up it.

From here, though, things get truly wacko. Now that more mainstream Republicans such as McConnell have been intimidated into joining the "exemption" chorus, self-styled "true true conservatives" have been forced to push still further right to distinguish themselves from the mere "true conservatives." That dynamic is leading to the self-destruction of the Republican Party, and this is a perfect example of it.

In this case, we now have Ted Cruz demanding that ALL federal civilian employees, not just congressional staff, be stripped of their employer contribution AND be forced to buy coverage on the exchanges, "just like everybody else", which in reality is nobody else. The implication is that any fellow Republican who doesn't agree with Cruz is, by definition, a RINO.

Which of course means that Rand Paul has to take things one more step beyond Cruz. Paul proposes -- and no, I am not kidding -- a constitutional amendment that would bar the federal government from subsidizing health coverage for its employees.

“My amendment says basically that everybody including Justice Roberts — who seems to be such a fan of Obamacare — gets it too,” Paul told TheDC by phone on Sunday from Mackinac Island in Michigan, where he won a straw poll of potential Republican candidates for president in 2016.

“See, right now, Justice Roberts is still continuing to have federal employee health insurance subsidized by the taxpayer,” Paul said. “And if he likes Obamacare so much, I’m going to give him an amendment that gives Obamacare to Justice Roberts.”

It's enough to make an American despair for his or her country. Whether it also makes Republicans despair for their party -- well, I'll leave that for them to decide.