NEW ORLEANS–Critics were silenced today after President Barack Obama's fifth visit to the Gulf Coast vastly improved the devastated region. While at the site of the worst oil spill in U.S. history, the president walked on a beach, looked at oil-soaked terns, and displayed the right amount of anger toward BP executives, all of which, sources said, should pretty much clear up the massive environmental disaster in a matter of days. "I really didn't think the president did enough in his first four visits," Louisiana fisherman Kevin Latrobe said. "Everyone knows you have to visit five times to make a difference. And sure enough, look! The pelicans already seem a little cleaner!" Some opponents still blasted the president for his trip, saying that they wanted something more substantial than political grandstanding, like a sixth or a ninth visit to the region. — The Onion
We are facing the brutal reality of what the 111th Congress has forced down our throats:
* Abortion coverage Americans don't want * Exorbitant costs Americans don't want * Mandatory participation Americans don't want * New federal bureaucracies Americans don't want * A vast expansion of IRS power Americans don't want
Our Constitution is being subverted right before our eyes.
Never before has the will of the people been so completely ignored and marginalized. Obamacare is unconstitutional! If Congress has the power to FORCE each person to have health insurance, then individual liberty is totally meaningless....
The bill that passed the House of Representatives on Sunday night is unconstitutional because:
1) Congress has NO authority to force every American to carry insurance coverage, and, 2) Congress has NO authority to fine employers whose policies do not have the mandated coverage.
There are some things Congress does not the authority to do!!! And the threat to our liberty posed by ObamaCare goes FAR beyond healthcare. If Congress can get away with this expansive power grab, then individual liberty and state sovereignty will soon vanish.
to join Liberty Actions statement of support - click here
"As a concerned citizen, I am signing this official statement to demonstrate my support of litigation challenging the Constitutionality of ObamaCare as passed by the 111th Congress. Specifically, I believe that government-mandated requirements for individuals to obtain health insurance are unconstitutional. Congress is not granted the power to force Americans to comply with such a mandate. Likewise, I believe requirements that employers provide such insurance coverage are also unconstitutional.
If Congress had the power to force Americans to have health insurance, then individual liberty would be overpowered and thus become meaningless. No matter what certain elected officials may desire, there are some things Congress simply cannot do under our Constitution. I do not want the federal government or any group of bureaucrats policing my private medical decisions. The legislation that passed Congress on March 21, 2010, popularly known as the ObamaCare healthcare reform bill, contains such a “mandate,” and is therefore a threat to individual liberty and the sovereignty of the States. I therefore support legal action to stop ObamaCare."
The American People Will Not Allow a Corrupt Machine to Dictate Their Future
On the floor Sunday night, Congressman John Boehner aptly summarized the consequences of voting for this bill:
"If we pass this bill, there will be no turning back. It will be the last straw for the American people. And in a democracy, you can only ignore the will of the people for so long and get away with it. And if we defy the will of our fellow citizens and pass this bill, we are going to be held to account by those who have placed us in their trust."
2010 and 2012 will be among the most important elections in American history.
These elections will allow us to save America from a leftwing machine of unparalleled corruption, arrogance, and cynicism.
The American people will not allow a corrupt machine to dictate their future.
Together we will pledge to repeal this bill and start over on meaningful, effective, healthcare reform.
Benjamin Franklin stated, “People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”
We are about to see that happen with this socialistic take over of our health care.
This link was just sent to me... (spinpoliticol.com) thought I share it.
1. You are young and don’t want health insurance? You are starting up a small business and need to minimize expenses, and one way to do that is to forego health insurance? Tough. You have to pay $750 annually for the “privilege.” (Section 1501)
2. You are young and healthy and want to pay for insurance that reflects that status? Tough. You’ll have to pay for premiums that cover not only you, but also the guy who smokes three packs a day, drink a gallon of whiskey and eats chicken fat off the floor. That’s because insurance companies will no longer be able to underwrite on the basis of a person’s health status. (Section 2701).
3. You would like to pay less in premiums by buying insurance with lifetime or annual limits on coverage? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer such policies, even if that is what customers prefer. (Section 2711).
4. Think you’d like a policy that is cheaper because it doesn’t cover preventive care or requires cost-sharing for such care? Tough. Health insurers will no longer be able to offer policies that do not cover preventive services or offer them with cost-sharing, even if that’s what the customer wants. (Section 2712).
5. You are an employer and you would like to offer coverage that doesn’t allow your employers’ slacker children to stay on the policy until age 26? Tough. (Section 2714).
6. You must buy a policy that covers ambulatory patient services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and newborn care, mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services; chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.
You’re a single guy without children? Tough, your policy must cover pediatric services. You’re a woman who can’t have children? Tough, your policy must cover maternity services. You’re a teetotaler? Tough, your policy must cover substance abuse treatment. (Add your own violation of personal freedom here.) (Section 1302).
7. Do you want a plan with lots of cost-sharing and low premiums? Well, the best you can do is a “Bronze plan,” which has benefits that provide benefits that are actuarially equivalent to 60% of the full actuarial value of the benefits provided under the plan. Anything lower than that, tough. (Section 1302 (d) (1) (A))
8. You are an employer in the small-group insurance market and you’d like to offer policies with deductibles higher than $2,000 for individuals and $4,000 for families? Tough. (Section 1302 (c) (2) (A).
9. If you are a large employer (defined as at least 101 employees) and you do not want to provide health insurance to your employee, then you will pay a $750 fine per employee (It could be $2,000 to $3,000 under the reconciliation changes). Think you know how to better spend that money? Tough. (Section 1513).
10. You are an employer who offers health flexible spending arrangements and your employees want to deduct more than $2,500 from their salaries for it? Sorry, can’t do that. (Section 9005 (i)).
11. If you are a physician and you don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Tough. The Secretary of Health and Human Services is authorized to use your claims data to issue you reports that measure the resources you use, provide information on the quality of care you provide, and compare the resources you use to those used by other physicians. Of course, this will all be just for informational purposes. It’s not like the government will ever use it to intervene in your practice and patients’ care. Of course not. (Section 3003 (i))
12. If you are a physician and you want to own your own hospital, you must be an owner and have a “Medicare provider agreement” by Feb. 1, 2010. (Dec. 31, 2010 in the reconciliation changes.) If you didn’t have those by then, you are out of luck. (Section 6001 (i) (1) (A))
13. If you are a physician owner and you want to expand your hospital? Well, you can’t (Section 6001 (i) (1) (B). Unless, it is located in a country where, over the last five years, population growth has been 150% of what it has been in the state (Section 6601 (i) (3) ( E)). And then you cannot increase your capacity by more than 200% (Section 6001 (i) (3) (C)).
14. You are a health insurer and you want to raise premiums to meet costs? Well, if that increase is deemed “unreasonable” by the Secretary of Health and Human Services it will be subject to review and can be denied. (Section 1003)
15. The government will extract a fee of $2.3 billion annually from the pharmaceutical industry. If you are a pharmaceutical company what you will pay depends on the ratio of the number of brand-name drugs you sell to the total number of brand-name drugs sold in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the brand-name drugs in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2.3 billion, or $230,000,000. (Under reconciliation, it starts at $2.55 billion, jumps to $3 billion in 2012, then to $3.5 billion in 2017 and $4.2 billion in 2018, before settling at $2.8 billion in 2019 (Section 1404)). Think you, as a pharmaceutical executive, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 9008 (b)).
16. The government will extract a fee of $2 billion annually from medical device makers. If you are a medical device maker what you will pay depends on your share of medical device sales in the U.S. So, if you sell 10% of the medical devices in the U.S., what you pay will be 10% multiplied by $2 billion, or $200,000,000. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for R&D? Tough. (Section 9009 (b)).
The reconciliation package turns that into a 2.9% excise tax for medical device makers. Think you, as a medical device maker, know how to better use that money, say for research and development? Tough. (Section 1405).
17. The government will extract a fee of $6.7 billion annually from insurance companies. If you are an insurer, what you will pay depends on your share of net premiums plus 200% of your administrative costs. So, if your net premiums and administrative costs are equal to 10% of the total, you will pay 10% of $6.7 billion, or $670,000,000. In the reconciliation bill, the fee will start at $8 billion in 2014, $11.3 billion in 2015, $1.9 billion in 2017, and $14.3 billion in 2018 (Section 1406).Think you, as an insurance executive, know how to better spend that money? Tough.(Section 9010 (b) (1) (A and B).)
18. If an insurance company board or its stockholders think the CEO is worth more than $500,000 in deferred compensation? Tough.(Section 9014).
19. You will have to pay an additional 0.5% payroll tax on any dollar you make over $250,000 if you file a joint return and $200,000 if you file an individual return. What? You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9015). That amount will rise to a 3.8% tax if reconciliation passes. It will also apply to investment income, estates, and trusts. You think you know how to spend the money you earned better than the government? Like you need to ask. (Section 1402).
20. If you go for cosmetic surgery, you will pay an additional 5% tax on the cost of the procedure. Think you know how to spend that money you earned better than the government? Tough. (Section 9017).
We've called our Representatives and Senators -- over and over ...
We've e-mailed ...
We've attended webcasts ...
We've sent faxes ...
We've spread the word to family and friends ...
We've spoken out at town hall meetings ...
We've written letters to Members of Congress ...
We've signed petitions ...
We've visited Congressional offices ...
We've posted updates on Facebook and Twitter ...
We've attended marches and rallies ...
We've submitted letters to the editor of our local newspapers ...
We prayed....
BUT, We were betrayed by those whom we elected.
Never has Congress passed a piece of legislation that grows government to this extent. Our freedoms are hanging on by a thread!!
ObamaCare (H.R. 3590) imposes $500 billion of new taxes, cuts Medicare by $500 billion, and expands Medicaid by 33% in the middle of a deep recession. IRS agents will now ensure that you buy Washington-approved health insurance - and we don't even know what that will look like.
219 Democrats voted to impose mandates, higher taxes and insurance premiums and protect President Obama's political legacy over jobs and the economy. Without a single Republican vote, there was nothing bi-partisan about this bill.
I had hopes that there was such a thing as a Pro-life Democrat. But Bart Stupak and Ben Nelson promises were lies.
My representative (Brian Baird) was one of those to strip away our freedoms and I am so disgusted with him and the others. He is not running again (Good Riddance to him for betraying us and giving away our freedoms). We must vote them all out of office. (See how your Senator and Representative voted.)
There is no provision in the United States Constitution giving the central government the authority to nationalize health care, but liberals have never let the Constitution stand in the way of their incremental efforts to socialize the U.S. economy.Our current President seems intent on destroying, not preserving, the Constitution, and as quickly as possible.
Many people of faith are disappointed and discouraged.
Defeat is often only the prelude to an even greater victory. Our country has overcome tyranny before and we must do it again.
Over the next 7 months, we will be preparing for the November elections.
Any politician who supported this bill must pay a price. And that price is ultimately paid at the ballot box.
The backers of this health care bill never gave up. They fought for nearly a year against public opinion, and wore down their opponents until they got what they wanted.
We must resolve to do the same.
Remember what happened last night.
Remember how you feel right now.
November will be here before you know it.
We must fight for our freedoms in the ballot box this November!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If your congressmen voted AYE (yes), let them know that you are upset with how they voted and that they will pay for it in Novemeber - when we vote them out!! Here's A letter below I sent to my congressman this morning:
March 22, 2010
To Rep. Brian Baird:
Last year, you voted against the Democrats’ trillion dollar government-run health care experiment, because it would raise premiums, increase costs and slash Medicare.
The senate version also raises our premiums and increases cost and slashes Medicare!!!
According to the CBO, by 2016, the cheapest family health care plan that Americans will be required to buy under the law will cost $12,000 per year. The average family plan will cost $15,200. A family of four making $88,201 per year—or more than 400 percent of the poverty level—will not receive any federal subsidy to purchase such a plan. They will pay taxes, however, to subsidize the health care purchases of people earning less than 400 percent of poverty.
Based on the CBO findings, trillion dollar government-run healthcare bills are bad for our economy. They are bad for our healthcare system. And they are morally wrong in that the leading versions force pro-life citizens to fund and support abortion. The Executive Order fix is a band-aid solution that fails to solve the fundamental problems in this bill, and can be repealed at any time, for any reason, by the president or future presidents.
WHY DID YOU VOTE FOR THIS?
This is the first time in the history of the country that the federal government has ever ordered American citizens to buy any good or service. If the federal government can constitutionally force individuals to buy health insurance, then there isn’t anything the federal government can not force individuals to do. Where in the Constitution does it authorize the federal government to force people to buy health insurance? Our freedoms are being stripped away by the very representatives we have chosen who are suppose to fight for us. You have betrayed us.
We needed true reform not socialized, abortion funded “health” care? We needed to start over with a plan that’s based on the Constitution, considerate of moral concerns and with far less government intrusion. This new law will accelerate Washington's intrusion into our most personal and private decisions. The government is now the paymaster of, has full sweeping regulatory authority over, the U.S. health care industry which represents one-sixth of the U.S. economy. And how has the government done in the past with running Medicare? Medicaid, is also an unpopular and overextended welfare program that already rations care. According to the Treasury Department the Medicare system faces about $37 trillion in unfunded liabilities. This bill will also be a fiscal disaster.
I am deeply disgusted by the majority party’s insistence on pushing it against the clear will of the American people. Large majorities of Americans oppose this legislation because it offends the historic American dedication to the principle of self-government The will of the people was spat upon last night as government takeover of healthcare was shoved and rammed down our throats. This terrible bill is not about health care. It is a massive and mandatory new welfare program that will ensnare middle-class and middle-aged Americans in dependency on the federal government for a vital element of their lives.
I guess now that you are not running for re-election, and have voted for this terrible bill; you have decided that YOU have stopped fighting for Washington State and YOU will be forever remembered as the Congressman who sold-out his constituents in the ninth-inning for Team Obama.
I am so disgusted with you. You have given away our freedom.
President Obama asserted that he and Democratic leaders in the Senate were "on the precipice" of achieving the government takeover of health care that would mandate taxpayer funding of abortions and provide the failing abortion industry with a massive bailout.
PRECIPICE: [pres-uh-pis] noun.
1. An overhanging or extremely steep mass of rock, such as a crag or the face of a cliff.
2. The brink of a dangerous or disastrous situation: on the precipice of defeat.
(Source: American Heritage Dictionary)
An appropriate word choice. Today -- even as a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll revealed that now only 32% of Americans support the abortion-laden health care takeover -- it is clear that our nation is indeed "on the brink of a dangerous or disastrous situation."
While campaigning for President, Obama promised that "we'll have negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents."
Yet Brian Lamb, CEO of C-SPAN, is now bitterly complaining that his service has been denied ANY access to the crucial meetings taking place to determine ObamaCare's final form.
The BIG Lies
"We will have a public, uh, process for forming this plan. It'll be televised on C-SPAN.... It will be transparent and accountable to the American people." --Barack Obama, November 2007
"That's what I will do in bringing all parties together, not negotiating behind closed doors, but bringing all parties together, and broadcasting those negotiations on C-SPAN so that the American people can see what the choices are, because part of what we have to do is enlist the American people in this process." --Barack Obama, January 2008
"[T]hese negotiations will be on C-SPAN..." --Barack Obama, January 2008
"We're gonna do all these negotiations on C-SPAN so the American people will be able to watch these negotiations." --Barack Obama, March 2008
"All this will be done on C-SPAN in front of the public." --Barack Obama, April 2008
"I want the negotiations to be taking place on C-SPAN." --Barack Obama, May 2008
"[W]e'll have the negotiations televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who is, who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies." --Barack Obama, August 2008
"We will work on this process publicly. It'll be on C-SPAN. It will be streaming over the Net." --Barack Obama, November 2008
After much bribery and arm-twisting, the Senate managed just before Christmas to pass its version of ObamaCare by a 60-39 vote (amazingly, without a single GOP "aye"). Now, the bill heads for conference deliberation televised by C-SPAN, just as the cable channel offered and Barack Obama promised numerous times.
Or not.
Democrats let slip this week that there would be no typical conference committee on the competing House and Senate versions of the health bill, as "leaders" opted instead for private negotiations with "key" congressmen and senators, none of whom is Republican. Once an agreement is reached, each legislative chamber will vote again and send the unified bill to the president.
Without a conference committee, a rule requiring public access to the conference report for at least 48 hours before a vote would conveniently not apply. That means even more liberty-stealing treachery can be slipped into the bill with little notice. Funny how the "public option" doesn't mean that the public gets to know what's in the bill.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) nevertheless had the gall to declare, "There has never been a more open process for any legislation in anyone who's served here's experience." In response, Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto mocked, "Has a more false or awkwardly worded statement ever come out of anyone who has served as speaker of the House's mouth?"
In spite of Democrats' best efforts at "transparency," there are many extra-special things that we actually do know about the bill. For example, on page 1,020, the Senate bill states: "It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection." In other words, the bill creates an eternal law by prohibiting future elected Congresses from making changes to this subsection.
What's in the subsection in question? The infamous "death panel" -- the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB), whose objective will be to "reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending" (read: to ration health care).
Meanwhile, the bill contains what amounts to a marriage penalty worth $2,000 or more in insurance premiums each year. The Wall Street Journal explains, "The disparity comes about in part because subsidies for purchasing health insurance under the plan from congressional Democrats are pegged to federal poverty guidelines. That has the effect of limiting subsidies for married couples with a combined income, compared to if the individuals are single."
Finally, Obama signaled this week that he's willing to break another campaign promise: The "no tax increases on the middle class" pledge. He threw his support behind the Senate's tax on higher end "Cadillac" insurance plans, something unions and House Democrats oppose.
The more the public learns about this continuing saga, the more vigorously opposed they become to "reform." No wonder Democrats want the process to remain secret.--The Patriot Post
"Democratic leaders reportedly plan to forge a final reform bill behind closed doors. They should not be able to get away with hiding public policy from the public it will adversely affect. Both the House and Senate must pass identical bills before the president can sign the legislation into law. When differences pop up, as with separate health care bills, the legislation traditionally goes to a conference committee where lawmakers iron them out. The committees are made up of members from both chambers and often from both parties. The committee meetings have typically been conducted in public, as they should be. They can be moved out of public view only when a majority of conferees, in a vote in an open session, agree to hold closed meetings. House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, has called the Democrats' plan to bypass a conference committee a 'shady backroom deal.' An overstatement? Hardly. One House Democratic aide told a blogger that 'this process cuts out the Republicans.' The Democrats fear that if they follow the traditional route, the GOP could use the Senate filibuster rule to shut down the process of organizing the committee. Bypassing a conference committee also cuts out a public that will suffer losses from whatever monstrosity is produced by the cover of darkness. Americans stand to lose their power of choice over health care decisions and be stripped of a significant portion of their earnings to pay for a plan most don't want. They deserve to see in an open forum what is being done to them. Instead, they're likely to get whatever the Democrats want to force on them." --Investor's Business Daily
Harry Reid's 383-page amendment and its 2,074-page underlying bill (H.R. 3590) are unconstitutional because:
1) Congress has NO authority to force every American to carry insurance coverage, and, 2) Congress has NO authority to fine employers whose policies do not have the mandated coverage.
Where in the Constitution is the authority to mandate that Americans buy health insurance?
ummmm....
"Well, I just think the Constitution charges Congress with the health and well-being of the people." --Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
...When asked where the authority to mandate that Americans buy health insurance -- that they be forced under penalty of fine or imprisonment to engage in a particular commercial enterprise -- is located in the Constitution, Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) answered, "Well, I would assume it would be in the Commerce clause of the Constitution. That's how Congress legislates all kinds of various programs."
Congress too often uses this clause to do whatever it wants to do (the legislative target might, just might, some day engage in interstate commerce, don't you know,) but this incorrect interpretation certainly doesn't make this legislation constitutional.-- The Patriot Post
"America's founders intended the federal government to have limited powers and that the states have an independent sovereign place in our system of government. The Obama/Reid/Pelosi legislation to take control of the American health-care system is the most sweeping and intrusive federal program ever devised. If the federal government can do this, then it can do anything, and the limits on government power that our liberty requires will be more myth than reality." --Wall Street Journal op-ed by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT).
$518 billion in tax increases (Joint Committee on Taxation and the Congressional Budget Office)
$466 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid (CBO)
Many costs of the legislation won't begin until 2014, but taxes will be imposed immediately (CBO)
Federal outlays for health care would increase by about $200 billion between 2010-2019 (CBO)
$26 billion of unfunded mandates to states over the next 10 years that will likely result in higher taxes (CBO)
Would increase non-group premiums by $300 per individual and $2,100 per family (CBO)
Up to 10 million people will lose their current health insurance coverage under the bill (CBO)
Adds a 10% tax on indoor tanning services (Section 10907)
Reid is handing out cash for cloture votes like Santa Claus handing out candy canes during the Macy’s Day Parade.
Reid’s is using bribes, extortion, threats, and secrecy to ram through Obama’s socialized medicine plan – at a time when most Americans are thinking about the celebration of Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem.
Reid has handed out $300 million to Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) for her vote; $100 million in Medicaid assistance for Senator Ben Nelson’s (D-NE); a sweetheart insurance deal for Nebraska and Michigan insurance companies to benefit Nelson and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI); Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) gets $100 million for a hospital; Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) gets money for ACORN; Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) gets $10 billion for community health centers; Sen. Ben Nelson (D-FL) gets a special deal in Florida for Medicare Advantage Recipients; Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) gets extra Medicare benefits for Montana residents; Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) wins Medicare funding for Iowa hospitals; Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) gets higher Medicare payments for rural hospitals.
How many more bribes will he offer to get nationalized health care? He’s clearly willing to do anything to get it done.
Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) claimed he was not going to vote for the Reid bill unless there were prohibitions against the use of federal dollars to kill unborn children. Nelson sold us out and voted for cloture last week, which gave Reid the 60 votes needed to push for a vote on Christmas Eve. --Traditional Values Coalition
There may not have been any smoke-filled rooms, but there were plenty of shady deals.
The most egregious were those for Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. He was the final holdout. Without his support, the bill would have been stopped. But Ben buckled under the pressure.
He was particularly pliable on his demands that no federal funding go to cover abortions. Instead he accepted a watered down compromise that allows individual states to prohibit plans that cover abortion services—a compromise that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and numerous pro-life groups denounced as paving the way for federally funded abortions.
But when Harry Reid needed his vote, Sen. Nelson took the money and ran -- $100 million to be exact. Nebraska will be the only state in the country where the full costs of Medicaid expansion will be covered by the federal government. Specialty hospitals in Nebraska will be exempted from new regulations. The state's largest insurers will be shielded from new regulations. Here are the details of the Nebraska Exemption:
Federal government fully finances Medicaid expansion for two years and then increases its matching funds (known as FMAP) thereafter to 100% -- in perpetuity (Section 10201), totaling about $100 million
Reid bill specifically identifies Nebraska for higher federal matching funds, fully funding its expansion for an additional year
Carve outs for physician-owned hospitals in Nebraska
Physician self-referral exemptions within Nebraska
Nelson's abortion compromise: a state may elect to prohibit abortion coverage in qualified health plans offered through an exchange if the state enacts a law to prohibit it
Shields two Nebraska insurers from taxes that other plans will pay: Mutual of Omaha and Blue Cross/Blue Shield (language crafted so it only affects these two in Nebraska)
But Sen. Nelson wasn't the only senator to be bought off by Majority Leader Reid. More than a dozen other states received special goodies, including:
Louisiana $300 million in additional Medicaid funding
Vermont 2.2% FMAP increase for 6 years for Vermont Medicaid program $600 million in additional Medicaid funding (CBO)
Massachusetts 0.5% FMAP increase for 3 years for their entire program $500 million in additional Medicaid funding (CBO)
Hawaii Restores DSH funding eliminated in the past to expand Medicaid eligibility
Michigan Adjusts payments to hospitals according to local wage levels, which when adjusted aids Michigan Exemption for non-profit insurers in the state from large excise tax
Connecticut $100 million earmark for construction of a University of Connecticut hospital
Montana Medicare coverage for individuals exposed to environmental health hazards in or around the geographic area of Libby, Mont., subject to an emergency declaration as of 6/17/09
South Dakota , North Dakota, Wyoming, and Montana Adds 1% hospital wage index Adds 1% practice index for physicians to cover geographic cost difference --Newt Gingrich
THIS BILL STILL FUNDS ABORTION
The abortion coverage is still in the bill. It’s just hidden, and has no "conscience clause" for those who object to abortion coverage! The National Right to Life Committee and many other pro-life groups immediately condemned Reid's bill.
The fact is, NO ONE wants this bill! Conservatives hate the bill. Progressives and liberals hate it, too, although for different reasons. And every credible poll shows that the general public strongly opposes this destructive and dangerous bill.
ObamaCare is facing more unlikely opponents every day, including former DNC chief Howard Dean, a medical doctor. "You're going to be forced to buy health insurance from a company that is going to take an average of 27 percent of your money," Dean said, "and there is no choice about that. If you don't buy that insurance you are going to get a fine."
And Dean wasn't done. "This bill I think is more likely to make the crisis worse than it is better because it's so expensive," he said. And as a result, he concluded, "[H]onestly the best thing to do right now is kill the Senate bill." He even penned an op-ed in The Washington Post expounding on his opposition.
Granted, Dean wants something even more leftist than what the Senate is grinding out, but sometimes the enemy of your enemy is your friend. -- The Patriot Post
"DISSENT IS THE HIGHEST FORM OF PATRIOTI... No, wait, that bumper sticker expired January 20th. Under the stimulus bill, there's a new $1.3 trillion bills-for-bumpers program whereby, if you peel off old slogans now recognized as environmentally harmful ('QUESTION AUTHORITY'), you can trade them in for a new 'CELEBRATE CONFORMITY' sticker, complete with a holographic image of President Obama that never takes his eyes off you." --columnist Mark Steyn
“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate, and you disagree with this administration, somehow you’re not patriotic and we should stand up and say, ‘We are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree – with any administration!’” - Hillary Clinton.....
but of course that statement expired on January 20th as well...
"These [town hall meeting] disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views -- but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades." --House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer in a USA Today op-ed, projecting their own faults on the protestors
Not long ago, Nancy Pelosi and the left called dissent the highest form of patriotism. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, they don't see it that way.
"I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter..." --President Obama, who, as we noted last week, was caught on tape more than once advocating single-payer health care:
and of course the media:
Liberal Media Screams Hysterically About Depiction of President as The Joker, Oh & By the way, this is President Bush. The picture was published in Vanity Fair:
here's just a few more reasons why not to support ObamaCare:
Jane asks the President if her 100 year old mother (now 105) would have gotten a pacemaker under his plan. Well now that's a tough one ... that costs a lot and maybe we will have to say, just take a pill.
President Obama states doctors will amputate feet because they are reimbursed more for surgery than for maintaining a diabetic patient.
President Obama accusing Physicians of making Medical decisions based on reimbursement schedules
President Barack Obama reassured Americans gathered at a town-hall style gathering in New Hampshire on Tuesday that a public-option in health care would not lead to the death of private insurance and rationing by telling them that private mail carriers, like UPS and Fed-Ex, have done just fine against the US Post Office. But comparing the government plan to a bankrupt postal service may not help a President who just slipped today under 50 percent approval in one poll.
"If you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having problems," Obama told a questioner, who expressed concern that the public option would run private insurers out of business. Obama said that the public option would have to pay for itself and not through tax-increases leveled on the middle-class.
However, the US Post Office is having serious problems lately and that analogy could raise alarms about the future of government run health-care. The Post Office, which does not raise revenue through taxes, faces a $7 billion loss for this fiscal year, and is slated to close approximately 700 or more offices across the country.
Government-Run Health Care = Mandated taxpayer-funded abortion.
White House unveiled its new Reality Check webpage Monday morning, attempting to realign facts in its favor about the proposed nationalized health care plan.
.....noticeably missing was any mention of the A-word, even though the topic has taken center stage in the national debate....
But there was a time when Obama was quite clear about his intention to include abortion in taxpayer financed health care as well as force private insurance coverage.
On July 17, 2007, Obama was speaking to Planned Parenthood supporters, and Bryan Howard, CEO of Planned Parenthood AZ, asked a question on health care (abortionspeak translation: "reproductive healthcare" means "abortion"):
Could you talk - give us some specifics about how reproductive health care ... is going to fit into and be a part of primary care for women in your health care reform plans and how Planned Parenthood ... will continue to be a part of the health care safety net for women and families across the country?
Obama responded quite clearly he planned for abortion not only to be part of taxpayer-funded health care but also forcibly covered by private insurers. He added he thought it "important" for the United States' largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, to be part of his plan.
.....The reason Obama's new Reality Check website did not attempt to dispute that abortion is a part of Obama's health care plan is because it really is "at the center and at the heart of the plan," as he honestly stated only two years ago.
A cornerstone of the Freedom of Choice Act will be a direct mandate under the new healthcare plan, forcing Americans to subsidize abortions.
Under the healthcare plan, virtually every American will eventually be in a plan that includes abortion by requiring individuals to buy health insurance that meets minimum benefits standards determined by unelected government bureaucrats.
If the law does not clearly state that abortion is excluded, abortion automatically becomes a minimum required benefit.
It is extremely unfortunate that at a time when American taxpayers are trying to stretch their dollar as far as possible as their jobs are lost, homes are foreclosed, food prices rise and the economy continues to decline, President Obama and abortion industry allies in Congress would mandate taxpayer funding of abortion.
President Obama and liberals in Congress say they want health care reform, but they are using health reform as a way to ram through taxpayer funded abortion. Pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood and NARAL have admitted they hope to mandate "access" to abortion for "all women" through national health care reform legislation.
Abortion is not healthcare, as the pro-abortion organizations would like Americans to believe, and it should not be mandated under any health insurance plan, especially one that Americans will be forced to subsidize.
Specific language must be written into the healthcare bill that excludes taxpayer funds from paying for abortions.
MYTH #1: The abortion mandate is an email rumor; the word “abortion” does not appear in any of the major health care bills currently pending in the House and Senate. FACT: The abortion mandate is very real. The absence of the word abortion is very reason why the proposed legislation will mandate abortion on virtually every American health care plan. For example, look no further than the federal Medicaid statute which does not mention the word abortion, yet Medicaid funded as many as 300,000 abortions per year prior to enactment of the Hyde amendment.
MYTH #2: The Obama administration doesn’t want to change the status quo with regard to abortion. They will not allow an abortion mandate. FACT: The President himself said that reproductive care is at the heart of his health care plan.1 And Hilary Clinton has confirmed that the administration considers abortion to be part of reproductive health. More recently Office of Budget and Management Chief Peter Orszag told "FOX News Sunday" on July 19, 2009 that it is not "prepared to rule [taxpayer funded abortion] out" of the healthcare legislation.2
MYTH #3: The courts can’t mandate abortion coverage if abortion isn’t even written into the health bill. FACT: In the mid-1990s the Hyde amendment was adjusted to no longer ban Medicaid abortion funding in cases of rape and incest abortion. Even though the Medicaid statute didn’t refer directly to abortion, they reverted to the assumed mandate that abortion would be covered. States that tried to refuse to pay for rape and incest abortions, were overruled by courts that said because abortion falls under broad categories of care in the Medicaid statute, states must fund abortion even if it violates their individual state law.
MYTH #4: The so-called "Hyde Amendment" restricts federal funds from paying for abortions through Medicaid and applies in the healthcare bill. FACT: Actually the health care overhaul bypasses the Hyde amendment. But even if it didn’t, we cannot be fooled by this pro-abortion “two-step.” If the Hyde amendment did apply it would still be subject to annual re-approval. Significant portions of the proposed legislation are not subject to the Hyde amendment.
MYTH #5: Proposed legislation maintains the status quo, but pro-life amendments go further than current law. FACT: Permanent abortion funding bans are contained in other health care laws including Department of Defense health care coverage and the Children’s Health Insurance Plan. If Representatives and Senators oppose taxpayer funding for abortion or plans that cover abortion, it only follows that such an explicit provision must be contained in the healthcare bill.
President Obama stated: "For all the scare tactics out there, what is truly scary is if we do nothing. ... Where we disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that don't bear any resemblance to anything that's actually being proposed."
There is no place for outlandish rumor or outrageous rhetoric in the debate for the affordable and accessible health care reform we all want.
Below are some facts that will help you counter the dishonest rhetoric Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and liberal special interest groups are disseminating in their attempt to silence dissent:
Rhetoric:President Obama Promises Americans Can Keep Their Current Health Care Coverage. "You know, the interesting thing is we've actually been very clear on what we want. I've said I want to make sure if you have health care you are going to keep it..." (PBS's "The Newshour With Jim Lehrer," 7/20/09)
FACT:Analysis Shows Over 88 Million People To Lose Current Insurance Under Government Health Care Takeover. "Under current law, there will be about 158.1 million people who are covered under an employer plan as workers, dependents or early retirees in 2011. If the act were fully implemented in that year, about 88.1 million workers would shift from private employer insurance to the public plan." (John Shelis, Vice President, Lewin Group, "Analysis Of The July 15 Draft Of The American Affordable Health Choices Act Of 2009," 7/17/09)
Rhetoric:President Obama Pledges Americans Can Keep Their Doctor. "If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing. You keep your plan. You keep your doctor...We're not going to mess with it." (President Barack Obama, Remarks At White House Press Conference, The White House, 6/23/09)
FACT:Mayo Clinic Says Government-Run Health Care Will Force Doctors To Drop Patients. '[L]awmakers are on track to approve across-the-board federal payment reductions of $155 billion over 10 years for hospitals ... Mayo and similar health systems object to the sweeping cuts. 'Across-the-board cuts will be harmful to everyone and we think it is particularly bad to penalize the high-value organizations,' said Jeff Korsmo, executive director of the Mayo Clinic Health Policy Center. 'We will have to violate our values in order to stay in business and reduce our access to government patients.'" (Phil Galewitz, "'Model' Health Systems Press Case For Medicare Fix In Reform," Kaiser Health News, 7/20/09)
Rhetoric:President Obama Promises No Additional Taxes On Middle Class. "What I've said is, and I have stuck to this point, I don't want to see additional tax burdens on people making $250,000 a year or less." (NBC's "Today Show," 7/21/09)
FACT:Democrats' Plan Imposes 2.5% Tax On Uninsured Individuals. "The penalty assessed on people who would be subject to the mandate but did not obtain insurance would equal 2.5 percent of the difference between their adjusted gross income (modified to include tax-exempt interest and certain other sources of income) and the tax filing threshold ..." (Douglas W. Elmendorf, "Preliminary Analysis Of The Insurance Coverage Specifications Provided By The House Tri-Committee Group," Letter To Chairman Rangel, 7/17/09)
The Republicans want an honest and open debate about how to reform health care, but it is the Democrats who do not want to have a legitimate discussion on the issues. Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and their liberal special interest cronies are resorting to calling concerned citizens who have questions about their health care schemes "astroturf," "un-American," and even "political terrorists."
One White House aide went so far to say "if you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard" when coaching Senate Democrats on the ways of "Chicago land politics."
It's time for the President to practice what he preached on the campaign trail and respect all voices in the health care debate.
"Democrats, bloodied over their attempt to force health care 'reform' on Americans, are looking more unreasonable and hysterical by the day. This isn't healthy for the republic. Their increasing anxiety and fear of failure are typified in the words of the leader of their party, who wants Republicans to keep their mouths shut while he 'fixes' health care. 'I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking,' the president said Thursday at a political rally in Virginia. 'I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess.' So much for the promises of bipartisan lawmaking. So much for open discussion. So much for understanding who really caused the 'mess' in the first place. Like Al Gore claiming the debate about global warming is over, the White House simply wants to shut down dialogue over who controls more than one-seventh of the economy. ... Truth is, there's nothing more American than revolting against heavy-handed authority, be it a long train of abuses from a king or the lawmaking of elected officials with strong authoritarian urges. This is a nation founded on independence, and there is a large portion of it that wants to retain that priceless heritage. This seems to confuse some lawmakers. ... Voters' deep anger is justifiable. They have every right to disrupt and shout down public figures who, as the protesters can be heard chanting, work for them. At dispute is not a mere difference of opinion that can and should be discussed in a civil manner, but a fundamental question of who is in charge of peoples' lives. We are not advocating violence, though coercive government is at its core violent as the state is required to resort to force to ensure that its directives aren't violated. But we do support our fellow citizens' right to express their rage at an injustice, particularly if it makes lawmakers uncomfortable. Shouldn't Americans bristle when their independence is threatened, when a federal official, in this case White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, says party leaders 'will punch back twice as hard' when voters merely show their displeasure? The freedom the protesters are defending can sometimes be messy and imperfect. A lack of freedom, however, is eternally oppressive. It is an unrelenting prison that poisons the human spirit, even when cloaked in allegedly humane programs such as government-run health care." --Investors' Business Daily
I started this blog a few weeks before the 2008 election. I started it as a way to share articles, thoughts, quotes, pictures, videos, etc. with my family and friends that stand for truth, freedom, and conservative values . Yes, I do believe if we don't defend these conservative values, we will lose our freedoms. I invite all to read and to study the issues and find the facts. I am a Christian - (Latter Day Saint), so I will also post views from my church as well as views from the Catholic, Protestant Christians, and other Judeo-Christian Churches on political issues. John Adams' stated: "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people." "Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone. " I believe this statement to be true. Mitt Romney states:"Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history -but it is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter - on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people." I fully agree with him. We must all work together for the greater good. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust.
Posts
