Senate's GOP tax reform bill seeks repeal of Obamacare individual mandate

CNBC
November 14, 2017

The proposed Republican tax reform bill will include repeal of Obamacare's individual mandate requiring most Americans to have some form of health insurance or pay a tax penalty, GOP leaders said Tuesday.

The decision means that Republicans, yet again in 2017, will attempt to gut a key element of the Affordable Care Act.

So far, such efforts have failed because not enough Republican senators have backed the idea of repealing the mandate, which would lead to an estimated 13 million more people lacking health insurance.

"We're optimistic that inserting individual mandate repeal would be helpful," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. on Tuesday afternoon after a lunch meeting with the Republican conference.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said, "I'm pleased the Senate Finance Committee has accepted my proposal to repeal the Obamacare individual mandate in the tax legislation."

"Repealing the mandate pays for more tax cuts for working families and protects them from being fined by the IRS for not being able to afford insurance that Obamacare made unaffordable in the first place," Cotton said. "I urge the House to include the mandate repeal in their tax legislation."

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Tex., said, "We're going to repeal the tax on poor Americans."

Cornyn said the majority of people who pay the individual mandate tax penalty for not having insurance have lower incomes.

Sen. John Thune, R-SD, told the Washington Post that there are 50 Republican senators willing to support the mandate-repealing tax reform bill. That would be enough to pass it, with a tie-breaking vote from Vice President Mike Pence.

Thune also said the deal agreed upon is to pass that bill alongside another bill, known as Alexander-Murray, which would restore key federal subsidy reimbursements to Obamacare insurers cut off last month by President Donald Trump.

Read the entire article

Health insurance premiums rising faster than wages

Washington Free Beacon
March 24, 2016

On Obamacare’s sixth anniversary, report finds premiums up 28 percent in five years

Health insurance premiums have increased faster than wages and inflation in recent years, rising an average of 28 percent from 2009 to 2014 despite the enactment of Obamacare, according to a report from Freedom Partners.

President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law on March 23, 2010, and Wednesday is the law’s sixth anniversary.

The Obama administration expressed concern in 2009 about skyrocketing health care premiums in a report entitled, “The Burden of Health Insurance Premium Increases on American Families.” They were concerned that premiums had increased by 5.5 percent from 2008 to 2009.

However, from 2010 to 2011 in the first year after Obamacare was enacted, premiums increased by 9.4 percent.

“In 2009, when the [Executive Office of the President] issued its report, states had seen premiums increase on average by 30 percent between 2004 and 2009,” states the Freedom Partners report. “But since 2009, health insurance premiums have continued to grow faster than wages in nearly every state, averaging a 28 percent increase from 2009 to 2014, resulting in a greater amount of disposable income being consumed by rising premiums.”

According to the report, while premiums increased by 28 percent from 2009 to 2014, wages increased by only 7.8 percent. From 2004 to 2009 when premiums increased by 30 percent, wages increased by only 12.2 percent.

Read the entire article

OBAMACARE LIKELY TO COST $300 BILLION MORE THAN THOUGHT – CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE

RT News
October 16, 2014

The real cost of Obamacare will be hundreds of billions of dollars more than expected, Republican members of the Senate Budget Committee now say, and will greatly increase the federal deficit during the next decade.

Contrary to claims made by the White House, United States President Barack Obama’s hallmark health care plan will actually have a tremendous toll on the government, GOP members of the SBC committee allege in a new report.

According to an analysis of data received by the Congressional Budget Office, Senate Republican say so-called Obamacare won’t reduce the federal budget deficit by $180 billion by 2019 as predicted, but will actually set the US back another $131 billion in the hole.

The CBO hasn’t officially investigated the cost of Obamacare since the summer of 2012, Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) says in the report, and complications in the two-plus years since have, according to his group’s analysis, caused costs to change tremendously.

“The most recent CBO estimate, released in July 2012, indicated the law was projected to reduce the deficit by $109 billion over the 10-year period from FY 2013–2022. Nevertheless, considerable changes have occurred since then: a botched rollout of the insurance exchanges; unilateral changes made by the Administration to exempt certain groups from complying with key aspects of the law; technical adjustments to CBO’s baseline projections for federal health spending; updated economic forecasts; a better understanding of the labor market effects of the legislation; and a new 10-year budget window,” the report reads in part. “Together these changes have significant implications for the sign of the deficit impact of the Democrats’ health law.”

“[I]f nothing had changed since 2012,” the report continues, “then the legislation would be projected to reduce the deficit by $180 billion” by 2024.

After reviewing new data, however, that number changes drastically. In all, GOP analysts say the difference between the 2012 prediction and the latest analyses amounts to $311 billion.

“Altogether, the SBC Republican staff analysis finds that after taking these significant changes since 2012 into account, the Democrats’ health care law will increase the budget deficit by $131 billion over the current 10-year budget window (FY 2015–2024),” the report finds. “This estimate is arrived at by taking the $180 billion in projected deficit reduction from the CBO 2012 extrapolation and then accounting for the lower net cost of the coverage provisions ($83 billion), the lower estimated federal health care savings under the plan ($132 billion), as well as the lower projected revenue levels when including the labor market effects of the legislation ($262 billion).”

Meanwhile, other figures concerning Pres. Obama’s Affordable Care Act could fluctuate in only the next coming days: although Americans were allowed to begin enrolling in the healthcare program last October 1, this time around they will have to wait until November 15 — 11 days after the upcoming mid-term elections.

“This is more than just a glitch,” Tim Phillips, president of free-market Americans for Prosperity, said in a statement last week. “The administration’s decision to withhold the costs of this law until after Election Day is just more proof that Obamacare is a bad deal for Americans.”

Last year’s scheduled launch of the ACA was ultimately marred by a number of incidents, including major problems with the program’s website and the inability for many people to retain old insurance providers. In July 2014, a survey conducted by the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation determined that 53 percent of respondents viewed the ACA unfavorably.

Gov't Healthcare Always Leads to More Gov't Control and Rationing

Liberty News Network
August 23, 2012

 In this weekly news update for August 6-12, 2012, JBS CEO Art Thompson discusses: how RomneyCare in Massachusetts is providing an excellent; example of how government healthcare always leads to more government control and rationing; how socializing our healthcare system is necessary for merging the United States with Mexico and Canada in a North American Union; how preliminary steps for a Communist crackdown are beginning in the BRICS nations of Brazil and South Africa; and how in spite of the War on Terror, al Qaeda is now active in Spain.

Will We Learn From The Past?

Will We Learn From The Past?

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
Mark Matheny

RePost

Editor's Note: Originally written on TUESDAY, JULY 19, 2011

While being stationed in Germany, I had the opportunity to visit the German Concentration Camp Dachau. This was in 1989, and I was only 20 yrs old at the time. Our Unit had a field trip that day to visit the site, and as we walked into the camp, I began to try and imagine the pain and suffering that took place behind the barb wired fences, and within the gas chambers that were built there.


Dachau was the first Nazi Concentration Camp opened in Germany, and the year was 1933. Heinrich Himmler, Chief of Police of Munich, officially described the camp as "the first concentration camp for political prisoners".[1] Of course, at the time of my visit I was young and not very knowledgeable as to the horrific events that took place, not only in this camp, but in others as well.

We were initially greeted as we entered the camp with the words "Arbeit Macht Frei" written upon the gate where thousands before entered. "Work Brings Freedom" was the deceptive promise of the gate, and I wondered how many of its occupants believed what it offered. It must have been horrifying to walk into this camp, not knowing what it truly was offering. Many would find out as time went on.

As we toured through the camp, we came upon a grave site area upon which a plaque was inscribed with the words "Tomb of the many  thousands unknown " or something close to those words. It slowly began to sink in to my heart, all the misery and pain, that was inflicted - from human to human - pain and terror that most of us in these times have probably never imagined, let alone seen.

History may never know how many people were interned there or died there, due to periods of disruption. One source gives a general estimate of over 200,000 prisoners from more than 30 countries for the Third Reich's years, of whom two-thirds were political prisoners and nearly one-third were Jews. 25,613 prisoners are believed to have died in the camp and almost another 10,000 in its subcamps,[6] primarily from disease, malnutrition and suicide. In early 1945, there was a typhus epidemic in the camp due to influx from other camps causing overcrowding, followed by an evacuation, in which large numbers of the weaker prisoners died. Toward the end of the war death marches to and from the camp caused the expiration of large but unknown numbers of prisoners. Even after liberation, prisoners weakened beyond recovery continued to expire. [2]

All of the housing units had been torn down due to the disease and unsanitary conditions within the buildings. There was only one still remaining, and that particular one was a rebuilt replica. I walked through that dingy place and could almost hear the crying and dispair that dwelt there more than 40 yrs before. It was  hard to hold back tears, and by the end of the tour I don't think there was a dry eye in the group. It didn't matter whether we were Jewish or not. It was the thought of the brutality that could be inflicted upon one group of people by another that really disturbed me.

Over its twelve years as a concentration camp, the Dachau administration recorded the intake of 206,206 prisoners and 31,951 deaths. Crematoria were constructed to dispose of the deceased. These numbers do not tell the entire story, however. Although there is no evidence of mass murder within the camp itself by other methods than poor sanitation, deprivation of medical care, withholding of nutrients, medical experiments, and beatings and shootings for infractions of the rules or at random, beginning in 1942 more than 3166 prisoners in weakened condition were transported to Hartheim Castle near Linz and there were executed by poison gas for reason of their unfitness. In 1941 and 1942 an unknown number of prisoners of war from the Soviet Union were executed by shooting at the camp's surrounding firing ranges, some for target practice and for sport. [3]

When I walked away from that place, I walked away with the feeling that the world is not the world I'd imagined before coming there. Before this experience, I always felt that people were basically good, and that governments and nations were humanitarian. But after learning of the length of time that these camps existed, and how many of the Allied countries, including the great United States, knew of their existance as the war progressed, the more I began to see that there certainly was evil in the world, and that governments were in most cases responsible for most of it.

This program paved the way for the Holocaust in several important ways. First, it had the effect of legitimizing government-sponsored killing. In keeping with the Nazi emphasis on racial purity, eugenics and national health, euthanasia was presented as a necessary program for eliminating those who carried defective genetic materials which might endanger the quality of the "Aryan" stock.



Second, it was the beginning stage in the corruption of the German medical profession. Robert J. Lifton [Nazi Doctors] asks the question: How did a profession committed to healing, the protection of human life and the relief of human suffering become part of the Nazi killing machine? The apparent answer to this question is that it was a gradual process, a "slippery slope" which began with the Euthanasia Programme of "mercy killing" and resulted in the full scale involvement of some members of the medical profession in the mass extermination of Jews and others in the Nazi death camps.


Third, the T-4 program was crucial in developing the technology which would later be applied to mass murder. [4]

With the turmoil developing in all countries around the globe, I wonder how long it will take for the conditions to be ripe once again for these atrocities to be resurrected? Here in the U.S. we seem to be on the road to a possible form of National Socialism that Hitler dreamed of as he went forth conquering. Our president has promised to turn us from the devastating effects of a Republican induced economic crisis, (these were his words in a recent speech) and to bring national healthcare to all in the U.S., whether a citizen or not. This healthcare bill however, seems to me, to be the launching pad for another "T-4" type of program that ultimately caused the death of thousands of innocents in Nazi Germany.

The T4 Euthanasia Program was a Nazi German effort --framed as a euthanasia program-- to kill incurably ill, physically or mentally disabled, emotionally distraught, and elderly people. Adolf Hitler initiated this program in 1939, and, while it was officially discontinued in 1941, killings continued covertly until the military defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945.




In October 1939, Adolf Hitler empowered his personal physician and the chief of the Chancellery of the Führer to kill people considered unsuited to live. He backdated his order to September 1, 1939, the day World War II began, to give it the appearance of a wartime measure. In this directive, Dr. Karl Brandt and Chancellery chief Philipp Bouhler were "charged with responsibility for expanding the authority of physicians…so that patients considered incurable, according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, can be granted a mercy killing."

Within a few months, the T4 Program --named for the Chancellery offices that directed it from the Berlin address Tiergartenstrasse 4-- involved virtually the entire German psychiatric community. A new bureaucracy, headed by physicians, was established with a mandate to kill anyone deemed to have a "life unworthy of living." Some physicians active in the study of eugenics, who saw Nazism as "applied biology," enthusiastically endorsed this program. However, the criteria for inclusion in this program were not exclusively genetic, nor were they necessarily based on infirmity. An important criterion was economic. Nazi officials assigned people to this program largely based on their economic productivity. The Nazis referred to the program's victims as "burdensome lives" and "useless eaters." [5]

I know that the comparison might seem a bit outlandish, but I'm sure those living in Nazi Germany also initially felt as if there was nothing wrong with the reforms Adolf Hitler was instituting in the Fatherland in order to bring about a New World Order[6]for the Aryan people. Could our physicians be turned into the monsters that commited such atrocities in Nazi Germany?

The transformation of physicians into killers took time and required the appearance of scientific justification. Soon after the Nazis came to power, the Bavarian minister of health proposed that psychopaths, the mentally retarded, and other "inferior" people be isolated and killed. "This policy has already been initiated at our concentration camps," he noted. A year later, authorities instructed mental institutions throughout the Reich to "neglect" their patients by withholding food and medical treatment.



Pseudoscientific rationalizations for the killing of the "unworthy" were bolstered by economic considerations. According to bureaucratic calculations, the state could put funds that went to the care of criminals and the insane to better use&emdash;for example, in loans to newly married couples. Proponents for the program saw incurably sick children as a burden on the healthy body of the Volk, the German people. "Wartime is the best time for the elimination of the incurably ill," Hitler said. [7]

Our unemployment rate is slowly increasing, as well as the fact that more and more Americans are becoming economically dependant upon the government to sustain them. We have currently 40.2 million Americans on Food stamps. There is talk of war starting in Iran and ultimately spreading globally sometime possibly before 2012,according to Lindsey Williams, and global economic collapse according to Trends Forcaster Gerald Celente, Bob Chapman, Peter shiff, Ron Paul, and other economists who are not bought and paid for through the CFR. 


And of course, let's not forget that currently accross America, Internment Camps are being built. Will these be for political prisoners when the final stages are implemented in bringing about the long awaited dream of a New World Order?


The bible says " There is nothing new under the sun". I only hope in this case we who understand the coming events will stand up without fear to warn others of this very real possibility. Winston Churchhill once said “Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it.” We have the history behind us, and we see the trends that are developing toward a similar scenario if we fail to learn and avert it.

Sources: 1.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp
2.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp
3.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp
4.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp
5. http://isurvived.org/t4-program.html
6. http://www.amerikanexpose.com/quotes1.html"National Socialism will use its own revolution for establishing of a new world order." 

Adolf Hitler during World War II 
7. http://isurvived.org/t4-program.html
 
Mark Matheny is Administrator and editor of SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!. He is a Veteran and has worked as an Operation Manager in Private security covering both private and government contracts. He is proficient in several forms of martial arts, including Aikido, Karate and Kungfu. He currently works in management for a major super retail company. He is married with 6 children and 1 nephew, and enjoys reading the Bible and studying biblical prophecy.

Mark Levin Eviscerates the Obamacare Ruling

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
Mark Matheny
June 29, 2012


On the Mark Levin Show, June 28, 2012, Mark Levin referred to the Obamacare ruling as "lawless".

"This decision I would go as far to say is lawless. Absolutely lawless!"



To hear the entire program, click here

TSA Ratchets Up Surveillance

Liberty News Network
April 30, 2012

In this "second analysis" video news update for April 23-29, 2012, JBS CEO Art Thompson discusses how the Norwegian mass murderer gave the communist salute in his news photo; how Argentina is "seizing" its oil industry; how Ford is building its fifth car factory in China, which is in a long tradition of the U.S. government and industries building up industry in communist countries; how the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is ratcheting up surveillance of American travellers; how ObamaCare will cost much more than we were told at the time of passage; and how the state of Illinois is using threats to cut healthcare benefits to scare taxpayers into accepting higher taxes.

VIDEO: Continuing the Fight Against Obamacare on Capitol Hill

Heritage.org

October 7, 2011

On Wednesday, Ken Hoagland, chairman of Restore America’s Voice Foundation, delivered the petitions of 1.6 million Americans demanding the repeal of Obamacare to legislators on Capitol Hill.

After the press conference, several members stayed to talk with Heritage about the problems with the current law, the progress of the repeal effort, and the sorts of conservative solutions they would like to see introduced.

To learn more about conservative healthcare solutions, read our plan for America — Saving the American Dream

Obama Must Obey the Court on Obamacare

Newsmax.com

Tuesday, 08 Mar 2011

By Betsy McCaughey

 

Judge Roger Vinson took the president to the woodshed last week for a lesson on which branch of government has the final word on the Constitution.

Twenty six states brought a lawsuit to a Florida district court challenging the constitutionality of the Obama healthcare reform law. On January 31, Vinson ruled the mandatory insurance provision unconstitutional and, going further, declared the entire law void. The White House brushed off Vinson’s ruling as “extreme” and an “outlier” and told the nation “implementation would proceed apace.”

Vinson clarified his ruling on March 3, warning the president’s lawyers that it was “not just a bit of friendly advice.” The administration suggests “that a single federal judge” cannot halt an entire regulatory scheme. Wrong, said Vinson. A court’s judgment is binding.

President Obama’s conduct is reminiscent of President Richard Nixon’s defiance of a district court order on the grounds that he interpreted the Constitution differently. In 1974, a federal district court had ordered Nixon to surrender recordings of conversations about the Watergate break-in. The president refused.

Chief Justice Warren Burger held firm, ordering the president to surrender the tapes, and repeating the words set down by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison (1803): "it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is," including meaning of the Constitution. Burger explained that although "each branch of government must initially interpret the Constitution" to perform its duties, the Court has the final say in any legal controversy.

Nixon waited eight hours, then announced he would comply. Obama waited two and a half weeks before even requesting a clarification.

The delay may have been calculated, Vinson said. "It could be argued that the executive branch seeks to continue the implementation, in part, for the very reason that the implemented provisions will be hard to undo once they are fully in place."

Obamacare’s provisions — tax credits to businesses, grants to states, rule changes for insurers — will be hard to undo. For that reason, some state lawmakers have tried to block implementation of the law while it is in legal limbo. “If we wait,” explained Idaho state representative Vito Barbieri, ”the tentacles of federal money, federal rules, federal agencies will be impossible to eradicate.”

Last week ,Vinson side stepped a confrontation with the president by issuing a “stay” to delay the practical effects of overturning the healthcare law. He allowed seven days for the administration to request an expedited appeal. “The sooner this issue is finally decided by the Supreme Court, the better off the entire nation will be,” he said, repeating what Marshall had said two centuries ago: The court is the final interpreter of the law, and Congress and the president must obey.

Presidents often wrestle with conflicting views of the Constitution and let their own views guide them, unless they are litigants subject to the court’s ruling. That is the difference between legitimate disagreement and improper defiance.

President Andrew Jackson disagreed with the Supreme Court’s 1819 ruling that Congress had the authority to create a Bank of the United States, and when Congress tried to recharter the bank in 1832, Jackson vetoed it on constitutional grounds.

With anguish, President Abraham Lincoln acquiesced in the court’s decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) . In his first inaugural address (1861), Lincoln lamented that he could not defy the court’s ruling and free Scott. But the evil effect of the ruling applied only to the parties in court. He urged the public and Congress to dismantle slavery in the territories by political means.

Last week, President Obama said that he believes the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, and it may be within his prerogative to act accordingly. But when a president’s administration is hauled into court and loses, as the Obama administration did on January 31, it must obey the court.


© Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Obama Must Obey the Court on Obamacare
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Full repeal of health care law fails in Senate

JENNIFER HABERKORN
Politico
February 2, 2011
Efforts to repeal President Barack Obama’s health care law died a quick death in the Senate Wednesday, but the GOP got a consolation prize — a bipartisan fix to a tax-reporting requirement in the law that was widely panned by businesses.

A Democratic amendment to repeal the law’s new tax-reporting requirements passed, 81-17, with broad bipartisan support. A Republican amendment to repeal the entire health reform law, meanwhile, fell along party lines, 47-51, in a procedural vote.
Senate Republicans pledge that their first crack at repealing the health care overhaul won’t be their last.
Read entire article

Obama Administration Has Given Obamacare Waivers to 28 Food Workers Union Locals--Union’s PAC Spent $673,309 to Get Obama Elected

President Barack Obama. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

Monday, January 31, 2011
By Fred Lucas

(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration has granted one-year waivers to 28 separate local chapters of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW), exempting them from a requirement under the new health care law that bans annual limits on what insurance plans will pay for medical coverage.
The UFCW’s political action committee spent $673,309 in independent expenditures promoting the election of Barack Obama in 2008.

Read the entire article

27 of 50 States Now Challenging Constitutionality of Obamacare in Court

CNSNews.com
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
By Fred Lucas

(CNSNews.com) - More than half of the states—27 out of 50—are now challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare in federal court.

Atty. Gen. William Schneider of Maine announced that his state has joined a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Obamacare. (AP Photo/Pat Wellenbach)

Six additional states--Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Ohio, Wisconsin and Wyoming--petitioned in federal court on Tuesday to join Florida’s law suit challenging the constitutionality of the health care law President Barack Obama signed last March.

 Nineteen states had previously joined with Florida in this suit, making the total number of states that are now a party to the suit 26.

Virginia, which has filed its own lawsuit against Obamacare, is the 27th state challenging the constitutionality of the health-care law in federal court. (A complete list of all 27 states appears at the bottom of this story.)

Florida’s suit challenges the constitutionality of Obamacare on two grounds, arguing that the law’s mandate that individuals must buy health insurance exceeds the legitimate power granted to the federal government to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution and also that the mandates the law imposes on state governments to expand their Medicaid programs violates the 10th Amendment, which limits the federal government to the powers delegated to it by the Constitution.


Read the entire article

Unfortunately, Obamacare Is Not Going To Be Repealed In 2010, It Is Not Going To Be Repealed In 2011 And There Is A Good Chance That It May Never Be Repealed

Published on 01-09-2011

Source: The American Dream

Right now the mainstream media is paying a lot of attention to the effort by Republicans in the House of Representatives to repeal the health care reform law that Barack Obama and the Democrats crammed down the throats of the American people during the last session of Congress.  House Republicans are calling their legislation the “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act”, and the House of Representatives is expected to pass the legislation on January 12th.  However, there are two huge problems.  One is that Democrats control the U.S. Senate and they have declared that there is not a chance in the world that a repeal of the health care reform law will get through them.  Secondly, even if a repeal of the health care law did somehow magically get to Barack Obama’s desk, he has sworn that he would veto it.  So unfortunately, Obamacare is not going to be repealed any time soon.

We are all going to have to just learn to put up with the negative effects of the new health care law.  We are all going to be paying much higher taxesbecause of this new law.  We are all going to be paying much, much higher health insurance premiums.  Job growth is going to be killed because employers will not want to pay for extremely expensive health care plans for new employees.  Soon all companies with more than 50 workers will be fined if they do not offer “adequate health coverage” to their employees.  So obviously this provides a tremendous incentive to small businesses not to hire more than 50 workers.

In addition, the new health care law gives the U.S. government unprecedented control over the medical industry and over how health care is practiced in this country.  The U.S. government will now be telling doctors what medicines to prescribe and what medical procedures are “cost effective”.  Doctors across America will now have less freedom to practice medicine than they ever have before.

So can’t we just opt out of this health care nightmare?  No, the truth is that the new health care law makes participation in the system mandatory for virtually all Americans.  In fact, if you do not buy health insurance you will soon face fines of up to 2.5 percent of your income by 2016.

So you better run out and pad the profits of the greedy health insurance industry by signing up for a big, fat, juicy health insurance policy.

The health care reform law was one of the worst pieces of legislation that the U.S. Congress has ever passed.  It is easy to see why the Republicans want to repeal it.

But as long as the Democrats have control of the Senate and as long as Barack Obama is in the White House, that is simply not going to happen.

The Democrats are married to the health care reform law and they are absolutely obsessed with protecting it.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is vowing to block any attempt to repeal Obamacare.  According to Reid, the Republicans must “understand that the health care bill is not going to be repealed” and that they “should get a new lease on life and talk about something else.”

Read the entire article

Gangster Government Stifles Criticism of Obamacare

Michael Barone

Townhall.com

"There will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases."


That sounds like a stern headmistress dressing down some sophomores who have been misbehaving. But it's actually from a letter sent Thursday from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans -- the chief lobbyist for private health insurance companies.

Sebelius objects to claims by health insurers that they are raising premiums because of increased costs imposed by the Obamacare law passed by Congress last March.

She acknowledges that many of the law's "key protections" take effect later this month and does not deny that these impose additional costs on insurers. But she says that "according to our analysis and those of some industry and academic experts, any potential premium impact ... will be minimal."

Well, that's reassuring. Er, except that if that's the conclusion of "some" industry and academic experts, it's presumably not the conclusion of all industry and academic experts, or the secretary would have said so.

Sebelius also argues that "any premium increases will be moderated by out-of-pocket savings resulting from the law." But she's pretty vague about the numbers -- "up to $1 billion in 2013." Anyone who watches TV ads knows that "up to" can mean zero.

Read the entire story

Gibbs Evades Question of Whether Obama Agrees With His Medicare Director That Health-Care System Must Redistribute Wealth

CNSNews
Thursday, July 08, 2010

By Fred Lucas, Staff Writer

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs (AP Photo)(CNSNews.com) – White House spokesman Robert Gibbs has evaded answering the question of whether President Barack Obama agrees with Dr. Donald Berwick, his newly appointed administrator of Medicare and Medicaid, who has insisted that health-care systems must redistribute wealth.

“Excellent health care is by definition redistributional,” Berwick said in a speech delivered on July 1, 2008.

When asked directly at the July 7 White House press briefing whether Obama agreed with this, Gibbs would not answer the question. Instead, he parried it with jocular statements about the provenance of the quote.

Read the entire story

CBO Says Obamacare May Exceed $1 Trillion

NewsMax.com
Wednesday, 12 May 2010 07:28 AM


President Obama's new health-care law could potentially add at least $115 billion more to government health care spending over the next 10 years, if Congress approves all the additional spending called for in the legislation, congressional budget referees said Tuesday.

That would push the 10-year cost of the overhaul above $1 trillion -- an unofficial limit the Obama administration set early on.

Read the entire article

Why Obama Can't Move the Health-Care Numbers

For every voter who strongly favors the plan, two are strongly opposed.

By SCOTT RASMUSSEN AND DOUG SCHOEN
MARCH 9, 2010, 10:07 P.M. ET 


One of the more amazing aspects of the health-care debate is how steady public opinion has remained. Despite repeated and intense sales efforts by the president and his allies in Congress, most Americans consistently oppose the plan that has become the centerpiece of this legislative season.

In 15 consecutive Rasmussen Reports polls conducted over the past four months, the percentage of Americans that oppose the plan has stayed between 52% and 58%. The number in favor has held steady between 38% and 44%.

The dynamics of the numbers have remained constant as well. Democratic voters strongly support the plan while Republicans and unaffiliated voters oppose it. Senior citizens—the people who use the health-care system more than anybody else and who vote more than anybody else in midterm elections—are more opposed to the plan than younger voters. For every person who strongly favors it, two are strongly opposed.

Read the entire story

Flashback: Both House and Senate Health Bills Require Microchipping

Silver and Gold outlook

April 6, 2010



Required RFID implanted chip

Sec. 2521, Pg. 1000 – The government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. What does a National Medical Device Registry mean?



National Medical Device Registry from H.R. 3200 [Healthcare Bill], pages 1001-1008:



(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘(B)and is— ‘‘(i) a class III device; or ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”



Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1,



section B:

‘‘(B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to information respecting a device described in paragraph (1), including claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary”

Read the entire story

Obama Tongue-Tied Over Agenda

FOX News
April 6, 2010

President rambles for 17 minutes trying to justify tax hikes

Indiana Attorney General Joins Health Care Fray

SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS!!!
April 4, 2010
 FOX News.com

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller says it's his job to defend his state's rights against federal government.