If we're using the loose definition of "thug," I'd say the U.S. government has been a bunch of thugs ever since it stopped being isolationist and the Cold War began. 

B-but the crime rate in Washington has dropped 46% in the last ten years... Oh, wait, you're talking politics.

...

But seriously, I'm sick of this topic now (US healthcare), I got sick of it ages ago. I can rarely be bothered to debate it any more.

However, I can clearly see why the government wants AT&T to give a testimony. AT&T have made a very bold claim, it's not to be sniffed at lightly, the government have the right to be sceptical. It even says in the document you linked to in the OP...

"The new law is designed to expand coverage and bring down costs, so your assertions are a matter of concern. They also appear to conflict with independent analyses. The Congressional Budget Office has reported that companies that insure more than 50 employees would see a decrease of up to 3% in average premium costs per person by 2016."

If AT&T can prove that it will cost huge amounts of money for companies their size, then the government will see that the bill is having the adverse effect than they intended. Who knows, this case may even allow them to reach some form of a consensus.

I suspect that governments get worse the bigger they get and the more power you assign to them. The more centralized and the further removed a government is from their revenue sources the more wasteful that money is spent. My suspicion is that many western countries could stand for a reboot of their government systems.

They did?   I wonder why I didnt see anything in a newsletter about that?

They have requested testimony. They are not prosecuting AT&T or even demanding their presence.

Read the letter and see how many times they say 'request'.

You and your silly "reading", what a nerd. We all know yelling is much easier than reading.

Afraid not Sir, I get my political news from NPR. And my main point is I'm tired of seeing thread after thread on this subject.

"The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations will hold a hearing on April 21, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 2123 of the Rayburn House Office Building to examine the impact ofthe new law on AT&T and other large employers."

Regardless of if the CEO shows up or not, they are being investigated. When you get those letters from Congress, they are not just requests.

I don't think you get it (big surprise).

The government is not questioning that AT&T will have to pay a find of 1 billion dollars. No one is. A high school kid can figure that out. What AT&T said is that doing so will cause then to have to restructure how they do things.

Congress didn't like that answer, so they are asking to look at there internal organization to see if that's true. I say "fuck you" government. AT&T does not answer to you. You are not the end all be all of the US. You work for us, not the other way around.

Where does the US Government get off telling a company that's breaking no laws, that they have to prove to them that cutting benefits is the best course of action for AT&T?

It's insane. What have we become? We are only the US by name. The country I was born in is dead, and we killed ourselves. Fuck I am upset.

I really think it depends what this investigation ends up doing. If they do ANYTHING to try and force the companies to not cut anything... then they are acting like thugs.

If they're just going to ramble on and try and convince the CEOs of stuff with their projections... I don't care much.

Although their projections are already off due very specifically to what AT&T is doing... which is why they're really nervous. They're pretty much not going to be budget neutral because the tax base isn't going to be there.