Definition of 'Eat Your Own Dog Food'
A colloquialism that describes a company using its own products or services for its internal operations. The term is believed to have originated with Microsoft in the 1980s. While it was originally used in reference to software companies using their own internally-generated tools for software development, its usage has spread to other areas as well. Often shortened simply to "dog food."
A General Explanation 'Eat Your Own Dog Food'
The basic premise behind "eating your own dog food" is that if a firm expects paying customers to use its products or services, it should expect no less from its own employees. Not using its own products for internal operations may imply that a company does not believe its products are best-of-breed despite its public proclamation of the fact, and that it has more confidence in a rival's offerings. This could not only have a negative impact on employee morale, but can also potentially turn into a public-relations debacle.
ObamaCare's 'Eat own dog food' - From PL 111-148 - Mar23, 2010 page 65 Sec. 1312. Consumer Choice.
"(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE. -
(i) Requirement ....the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress or Congressional Staff shall be health plans that are -
(I) created under this act (or an amendment to this act)
(II) offered through an Exchange established under this act (or an amendment made by this act)"
What does this mean?
Members of Congress and Staff previously could obtain health coverage thru Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan, which was restricted to federal employees and retirees. Under this section of the law they can only obtain health benefits from an Exchange and have the same coverage and benefits as the 'common man' in his dealings thru the Exchange. It is strongly suspected that the bill drafters took the attitude 'You are going to get the same benefits as the common man, so fix what needs to fixed in this bill in the future'. This is a good example of "Eat your own dog food"
Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan
Federal employees (and retirees) under the Office of Personnel Management run Federal Employees Health Benefit plan are offered a large number of industry plans. The insurance plans cost does not depend on age, sex, etc. A insurance plan costs the same if you are 25 years old, or 75 years old. Similarly no difference of male vs female for single coverage, and all pre-conditions are covered. All pay the same price for the selected insurance just as under the Affordable Health Care Plan (aka ObamaCare). The plans have a mix of benefits with corresponding costs. The federal government via the Office of personnel management pays about 70% of the costs, with the user paying the rest. This plan was the only plan offered by the Federal Government, and included Members of Congress and Congressional Staffs which received the same costs benefit as federal employees. Republican congressional members never seemed to complain about the younger employee paying the same amount as the older employee as they are complain about the Affordable plan now! Or similarly about the lack of gender costs.
I always felt that the Congressional Republican effort against ObamaCare was partially related to Congress having to get coverage thru State Exchanges with no mention of getting a federal subsidy of the cost.
Notice the Law is 'silent' on the possibility of federal cost subsidy.
There seems to be plan afoot to pay probably 70% of the selected Affordable plan costs for members of Congress and Staffs as was done previously. The ObamaCare law is "silent" about a federal subsidy for Members of Congress. I will just point out this is roughly revenue neutral, and does not involve changing the Obamacare Law.
But expect all kinds of Yellow Journalism related! It seems to have already started.
I am waiting for ..
A Republican effort based on all their public comments about lack of age and sex cost discrimination to pass a well thought out revision to ObamaCare. But they never complained about the lack of these under the previous health plan they were under.