Monday, August 10, 2009
Obama Not Closing Door on Possible Health Tax
WASHINGTON -- With lawmakers trying to crunch the numbers on a $1 trillion health care overhaul, President Barack Obama is leaving the door open to a new tax on employer-provided health care benefits.
Senior senators said Wednesday the benefits tax could be essential for the complex plan to be fully financed.
"I don't want to prejudge what they're doing," Obama said, referring to proposals in the Senate to tax workers who get expensive insurance policies. Obama, who campaigned against the tax when he ran for president, drew a quick rebuff from organized labor.
For Obama, the health care debate got personal during an ABC News town hall at the White House on Wednesday. The prime-time program was the latest in a string of events designed to build public support for his plan to slow the rise in health care costs and expand coverage to the nearly 50 million uninsured.
Dr. Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist at the New York University Langone Medical Center, challenged Obama: What if the president's wife and daughters got sick? Would Obama promise that they would get only the services allowed under a new government insurance plan he's proposing?
Obama wouldn't bite.
If "it's my family member, if it's my wife, if it's my children, if it's my grandmother, I always want them to get the very best care," Obama said.
Earlier in the day, the administration and its allies pushed for a prominent display of progress in the Senate before Congress begins a weeklong vacation Friday.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., labored in a series of meetings to produce at least an outline of legislation that could command bipartisan support. Of the five House and Senate committees working on a health care overhaul, Finance is the only one that appears to have a chance at such an agreement.
Baucus appeared especially eager to show progress before the exodus from the Capitol begins.
Several officials said he was negotiating with representatives of the nation's hospitals, hoping to conclude an agreement that would build on an $80 billion weekend deal with the pharmaceutical industry.
Hospitals were being asked to accept a reduction of roughly $155 billion over the next decade in fees they are promised under government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, according to numerous officials.
Officials at the American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals said they could not comment on any discussions.
Baucus is seeking similar concessions from nursing homes, insurance companies, medical device makers and possibly others, noting that any legislation would create a huge new pool of customers for industry providers.
At its heart, any legislation is expected to require insurance companies to offer coverage to any applicant, without exclusions or higher premiums for pre-existing medical conditions.
Overall, Baucus has said he hopes to hold the size of any legislation to $1 trillion or less, and in private negotiations there were discussions about further scaling back eligibility for insurance subsidies from the government.
Additionally, Baucus was still searching for ways to cover the cost of his emerging legislation, and numerous officials said he appeared roughly $200 billion shy of achieving that goal. They added that a proposal to make it harder for taxpayers to itemize their medical expenses was drawing renewed interest among key senators as one way to raise revenue.
Current law allows those expenses to be itemized when they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The proposal under review would raise that to 10 percent, officials said.
At the White House, Obama sidestepped when asked if he was open to taxing health care benefits, a proposal he opposed vigorously in the campaign for the White House.
"I have identified the ways that I think we should finance this. I think Congress should adopt them. I'm going to wait and see what ideas ultimately they come up with," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America."
Organized labor weighed in quickly.
Gerald W. McEntee, president of the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said in an interview that union leaders believe Obama is "a person of his word." He was referring to Obama's opposition to taxing those benefits during last year's campaign.
"They're not going to tolerate that," McEntee said of workers' views of that proposal.
Senior senators said Wednesday the benefits tax could be essential for the complex plan to be fully financed.
"I don't want to prejudge what they're doing," Obama said, referring to proposals in the Senate to tax workers who get expensive insurance policies. Obama, who campaigned against the tax when he ran for president, drew a quick rebuff from organized labor.
For Obama, the health care debate got personal during an ABC News town hall at the White House on Wednesday. The prime-time program was the latest in a string of events designed to build public support for his plan to slow the rise in health care costs and expand coverage to the nearly 50 million uninsured.
Dr. Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist at the New York University Langone Medical Center, challenged Obama: What if the president's wife and daughters got sick? Would Obama promise that they would get only the services allowed under a new government insurance plan he's proposing?
Obama wouldn't bite.
If "it's my family member, if it's my wife, if it's my children, if it's my grandmother, I always want them to get the very best care," Obama said.
Earlier in the day, the administration and its allies pushed for a prominent display of progress in the Senate before Congress begins a weeklong vacation Friday.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., labored in a series of meetings to produce at least an outline of legislation that could command bipartisan support. Of the five House and Senate committees working on a health care overhaul, Finance is the only one that appears to have a chance at such an agreement.
Baucus appeared especially eager to show progress before the exodus from the Capitol begins.
Several officials said he was negotiating with representatives of the nation's hospitals, hoping to conclude an agreement that would build on an $80 billion weekend deal with the pharmaceutical industry.
Hospitals were being asked to accept a reduction of roughly $155 billion over the next decade in fees they are promised under government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, according to numerous officials.
Officials at the American Hospital Association and the Federation of American Hospitals said they could not comment on any discussions.
Baucus is seeking similar concessions from nursing homes, insurance companies, medical device makers and possibly others, noting that any legislation would create a huge new pool of customers for industry providers.
At its heart, any legislation is expected to require insurance companies to offer coverage to any applicant, without exclusions or higher premiums for pre-existing medical conditions.
Overall, Baucus has said he hopes to hold the size of any legislation to $1 trillion or less, and in private negotiations there were discussions about further scaling back eligibility for insurance subsidies from the government.
Additionally, Baucus was still searching for ways to cover the cost of his emerging legislation, and numerous officials said he appeared roughly $200 billion shy of achieving that goal. They added that a proposal to make it harder for taxpayers to itemize their medical expenses was drawing renewed interest among key senators as one way to raise revenue.
Current law allows those expenses to be itemized when they exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income. The proposal under review would raise that to 10 percent, officials said.
At the White House, Obama sidestepped when asked if he was open to taxing health care benefits, a proposal he opposed vigorously in the campaign for the White House.
"I have identified the ways that I think we should finance this. I think Congress should adopt them. I'm going to wait and see what ideas ultimately they come up with," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America."
Organized labor weighed in quickly.
Gerald W. McEntee, president of the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said in an interview that union leaders believe Obama is "a person of his word." He was referring to Obama's opposition to taxing those benefits during last year's campaign.
"They're not going to tolerate that," McEntee said of workers' views of that proposal.
Who are the uninsured? Health Care Reform
Who are the uninsured?
A closer look at the 46 million reasons for ObamaCare
By now, you have probably heard a lot about the sad army of the "uninsured" from President Obama and every other elected Democratic Party official in these United States. This is simply political fear-mongering designed to pass a national government-run health-care plan, which has been a union and liberal agenda item since the late 1940s. So the "solution" isn't new and neither is the "crisis."
Let's look at the facts. First of all, the uninsured do receive high-quality medical care. Virtually every state requires that hospitals treat people regardless of their ability to pay. Talk to any hospital executive, and he will tell you that treating people who either cannot or will not pay is actually quite costly -- forcing up medical bills for the rest of us. So the uninsured are treated, and the rest of us are treated to the bill.
This leads us to ask: Who are the uninsured? In 2006, the Census Bureau used a Department of Labor survey to estimate that there were 46.6 million uninsured people -- about 15.5 percent of the population.
Fourteen million of the 47 million are already eligible for government insurance, Medicaid, but have not signed up. (Pre-existing conditions do not exclude someone from joining Medicaid.) Those 14 million have not signed up because they do not want to pay the small monthly premium that Medicare charges. As a result, many who are eligible for Medicaid wait until they need care before they register. They are effectively insured at all times even when they are not formally enrolled in the program.
What about the uninsured who are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid? Most are not in dire financial straits. After all, 27 million of the uninsured have personal incomes of more than $50,000.
True, there is a group of people who are borderline poor but not eligible for Medicaid, but the group is relatively small and many (if not most) of those people are illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, government surveys never ask respondents if they are legally in the United States.
If you exclude those who are essentially covered by Medicaid, nearly 70 percent of the remaining uninsured lack insurance for less than four months. Many of those temporarily uninsured are simply switching jobs and waiting for human resources departments to process their paperwork. In addition, two-thirds of the uninsured are between 18 and 34; these folks, on average, have few health problems and are uninsured by choice.
The truly uninsured are, thus, largely young people who can afford insurance but who make the decision to temporarily go without it as they move between jobs. This tends to be for very short periods of time.
As the late, great senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, used to say: "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." The sensationalized plight of the uninsured is not a valid reason for enacting national health care
A closer look at the 46 million reasons for ObamaCare
By now, you have probably heard a lot about the sad army of the "uninsured" from President Obama and every other elected Democratic Party official in these United States. This is simply political fear-mongering designed to pass a national government-run health-care plan, which has been a union and liberal agenda item since the late 1940s. So the "solution" isn't new and neither is the "crisis."
Let's look at the facts. First of all, the uninsured do receive high-quality medical care. Virtually every state requires that hospitals treat people regardless of their ability to pay. Talk to any hospital executive, and he will tell you that treating people who either cannot or will not pay is actually quite costly -- forcing up medical bills for the rest of us. So the uninsured are treated, and the rest of us are treated to the bill.
This leads us to ask: Who are the uninsured? In 2006, the Census Bureau used a Department of Labor survey to estimate that there were 46.6 million uninsured people -- about 15.5 percent of the population.
Fourteen million of the 47 million are already eligible for government insurance, Medicaid, but have not signed up. (Pre-existing conditions do not exclude someone from joining Medicaid.) Those 14 million have not signed up because they do not want to pay the small monthly premium that Medicare charges. As a result, many who are eligible for Medicaid wait until they need care before they register. They are effectively insured at all times even when they are not formally enrolled in the program.
What about the uninsured who are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid? Most are not in dire financial straits. After all, 27 million of the uninsured have personal incomes of more than $50,000.
True, there is a group of people who are borderline poor but not eligible for Medicaid, but the group is relatively small and many (if not most) of those people are illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, government surveys never ask respondents if they are legally in the United States.
If you exclude those who are essentially covered by Medicaid, nearly 70 percent of the remaining uninsured lack insurance for less than four months. Many of those temporarily uninsured are simply switching jobs and waiting for human resources departments to process their paperwork. In addition, two-thirds of the uninsured are between 18 and 34; these folks, on average, have few health problems and are uninsured by choice.
The truly uninsured are, thus, largely young people who can afford insurance but who make the decision to temporarily go without it as they move between jobs. This tends to be for very short periods of time.
As the late, great senator from New York, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, used to say: "You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." The sensationalized plight of the uninsured is not a valid reason for enacting national health care
Unions’ Health Benefits May Avoid Tax Under Proposal
Unions’ Health Benefits May Avoid Tax Under Proposal
By Ryan J. Donmoyer and Holly Rosenkrantz
June 26 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate proposal to impose taxes for the first time on “gold-plated” health plans may bypass generous employee benefits negotiated by unions.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, the chief congressional advocate of taxing some employer-provided benefits to help pay for an overhaul of the U.S. health system, says any change should exempt perks secured in existing collective- bargaining agreements, which can be in place for as long as five years.
The exception, which could make the proposal more politically palatable to Democrats from heavily unionized states such as Michigan, is adding controversy to an already contentious debate. It would shield the 12.4 percent of American workers who belong to unions from being taxed while exposing some other middle-income workers to the levy.
“I can’t think of any other aspect of the individual income tax that treats benefits of different people differently because of who they work for,” said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, a Washington research group that often criticizes Democrats’ economic proposals. Edwards said the carve-out “smacks of political favoritism.”
Baucus, a Montana Democrat, is proposing to tax Americans whose health insurance is valued at a higher rate than what is offered to federal employees. About 40 percent of insured Americans have costlier benefits, and Baucus has said he is trying to set the level at which taxes would be imposed high enough so fewer people are affected.
‘Gold-Plated’ Plans
The policy is aimed at so-called “gold-plated” plans such as the $40,543 in health benefits paid to Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive of New York-based Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the fifth largest U.S. bank by assets.
It can also affect companies such as Henderson, Nevada- based Zappos.com, where workers’ $11 per hour pay is supplemented by employer-paid health insurance plans worth about $7,500. Federal workers’ health benefits are worth about $4,200 for individuals and $13,000 for families.
Lawmakers are crafting legislation aimed at meeting Obama’s goal of bringing down the cost of health care and expanding coverage to the 46 million Americans who lack insurance. Obama wants Democratic congressional leaders to seek Republican support, and to send him legislation by mid-October.
Baucus said yesterday the cost of health-care options his panel is considering can be cut to $1 trillion over 10 years and won’t add to the deficit, citing the Congressional Budget Office.
Cost Estimates
The non-partisan budget office last week delivered an informal cost estimate of $1.6 trillion for the legislation to overhaul the health-care system, sparking protests from both Republicans and Democrats and prompting Baucus to say his panel may delay consideration of a bill until next month.
“CBO now tells us we have options that would enable us to write a $1 trillion bill, fully paid for,” Baucus, who set that amount as his goal, told reporters at the Capitol.
The panel’s legislation must be joined with competing proposals from other Senate and House committees and forged into a single bill subject to negotiation and approval by both chambers before it can be sent to Obama.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat, said earlier this week that senators are coalescing around the idea of taxing some employer-provided benefits. Baucus said the details are still being negotiated, including how high to set the tax-free exclusion and when any changes would take effect, and whether to exempt union employees until their current contracts expire.
Cutting ‘Subsidy’
“It is hard for me to see how you can have a package that is paid for that does not reduce the subsidy” on employer-paid benefits, Conrad said.
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the top-ranking Republican in the chamber, said today he has “serious reservations about capping the exclusion, particularly if they have a carve-out for union members,” according to his communications director, Don Stewart. Stewart taped McConnell’s comments and provided excerpts to a reporter.
Stewart said McConnell, discussing the prospect of a tax on some employer-provided benefits, said “table-pounding opposition” would result “if it were to exclude union members.”
Gerald Shea, an AFL-CIO official lobbying for health-care reform, said grandfathering benefits negotiated in a collective bargaining agreement is a “common thing when there is a big change in federal law.”
‘Expectations Are Set’
“Once a collective bargaining agreement is set, employer’s budgets are set, workers expectations are set. It doesn’t make sense to go back in the middle of the contract and change it,” he said.
Union groups and workers said Congress shouldn’t target contractually negotiated benefits.
Anna Burger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union, said in an interview that workers have often traded salary increases for better benefits in agreements.
Taxes “shouldn’t be taken from the backs of workers who have bargained away wages and other things for their benefits over the years,” Burger said.
Sandra Carter, a retired Pacific Bell Telephone Co. technician from Stockton, California, said her health benefits, worth about $12,000 per year, were negotiated by the Communications Workers of America. She is unmarried with no children, meaning her individual coverage exceeds benefits paid to federal workers by about $7,800. If that amount were taxed at the 15 percent marginal rate, she would owe $1,170.
“I can’t afford the taxes I pay now,” said Carter, who said she suffers from diabetes. “Why should I get taxed on a benefit that keeps me a functioning person?”
Union Opposition
Other unions say they’re opposed to a tax on some employer- provided benefits, regardless of whether collective bargaining agreements are exempt.
“Either way, we are against a tax on health-care benefits in whatever form it takes,” said Jacob Hay, spokesman for the Laborers’ International Union of North America. The union represents 500,000 workers, largely in the construction industry.
To contact the reporters on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.netHolly Rosenkrantz in Washington at hrosenkrantz@bloomberg.net
By Ryan J. Donmoyer and Holly Rosenkrantz
June 26 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate proposal to impose taxes for the first time on “gold-plated” health plans may bypass generous employee benefits negotiated by unions.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, the chief congressional advocate of taxing some employer-provided benefits to help pay for an overhaul of the U.S. health system, says any change should exempt perks secured in existing collective- bargaining agreements, which can be in place for as long as five years.
The exception, which could make the proposal more politically palatable to Democrats from heavily unionized states such as Michigan, is adding controversy to an already contentious debate. It would shield the 12.4 percent of American workers who belong to unions from being taxed while exposing some other middle-income workers to the levy.
“I can’t think of any other aspect of the individual income tax that treats benefits of different people differently because of who they work for,” said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, a Washington research group that often criticizes Democrats’ economic proposals. Edwards said the carve-out “smacks of political favoritism.”
Baucus, a Montana Democrat, is proposing to tax Americans whose health insurance is valued at a higher rate than what is offered to federal employees. About 40 percent of insured Americans have costlier benefits, and Baucus has said he is trying to set the level at which taxes would be imposed high enough so fewer people are affected.
‘Gold-Plated’ Plans
The policy is aimed at so-called “gold-plated” plans such as the $40,543 in health benefits paid to Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive of New York-based Goldman Sachs Group Inc., the fifth largest U.S. bank by assets.
It can also affect companies such as Henderson, Nevada- based Zappos.com, where workers’ $11 per hour pay is supplemented by employer-paid health insurance plans worth about $7,500. Federal workers’ health benefits are worth about $4,200 for individuals and $13,000 for families.
Lawmakers are crafting legislation aimed at meeting Obama’s goal of bringing down the cost of health care and expanding coverage to the 46 million Americans who lack insurance. Obama wants Democratic congressional leaders to seek Republican support, and to send him legislation by mid-October.
Baucus said yesterday the cost of health-care options his panel is considering can be cut to $1 trillion over 10 years and won’t add to the deficit, citing the Congressional Budget Office.
Cost Estimates
The non-partisan budget office last week delivered an informal cost estimate of $1.6 trillion for the legislation to overhaul the health-care system, sparking protests from both Republicans and Democrats and prompting Baucus to say his panel may delay consideration of a bill until next month.
“CBO now tells us we have options that would enable us to write a $1 trillion bill, fully paid for,” Baucus, who set that amount as his goal, told reporters at the Capitol.
The panel’s legislation must be joined with competing proposals from other Senate and House committees and forged into a single bill subject to negotiation and approval by both chambers before it can be sent to Obama.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat, said earlier this week that senators are coalescing around the idea of taxing some employer-provided benefits. Baucus said the details are still being negotiated, including how high to set the tax-free exclusion and when any changes would take effect, and whether to exempt union employees until their current contracts expire.
Cutting ‘Subsidy’
“It is hard for me to see how you can have a package that is paid for that does not reduce the subsidy” on employer-paid benefits, Conrad said.
Kentucky Senator Mitch McConnell, the top-ranking Republican in the chamber, said today he has “serious reservations about capping the exclusion, particularly if they have a carve-out for union members,” according to his communications director, Don Stewart. Stewart taped McConnell’s comments and provided excerpts to a reporter.
Stewart said McConnell, discussing the prospect of a tax on some employer-provided benefits, said “table-pounding opposition” would result “if it were to exclude union members.”
Gerald Shea, an AFL-CIO official lobbying for health-care reform, said grandfathering benefits negotiated in a collective bargaining agreement is a “common thing when there is a big change in federal law.”
‘Expectations Are Set’
“Once a collective bargaining agreement is set, employer’s budgets are set, workers expectations are set. It doesn’t make sense to go back in the middle of the contract and change it,” he said.
Union groups and workers said Congress shouldn’t target contractually negotiated benefits.
Anna Burger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union, said in an interview that workers have often traded salary increases for better benefits in agreements.
Taxes “shouldn’t be taken from the backs of workers who have bargained away wages and other things for their benefits over the years,” Burger said.
Sandra Carter, a retired Pacific Bell Telephone Co. technician from Stockton, California, said her health benefits, worth about $12,000 per year, were negotiated by the Communications Workers of America. She is unmarried with no children, meaning her individual coverage exceeds benefits paid to federal workers by about $7,800. If that amount were taxed at the 15 percent marginal rate, she would owe $1,170.
“I can’t afford the taxes I pay now,” said Carter, who said she suffers from diabetes. “Why should I get taxed on a benefit that keeps me a functioning person?”
Union Opposition
Other unions say they’re opposed to a tax on some employer- provided benefits, regardless of whether collective bargaining agreements are exempt.
“Either way, we are against a tax on health-care benefits in whatever form it takes,” said Jacob Hay, spokesman for the Laborers’ International Union of North America. The union represents 500,000 workers, largely in the construction industry.
To contact the reporters on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.netHolly Rosenkrantz in Washington at hrosenkrantz@bloomberg.net
Kathy Castor - Healthcare Town Hall Meeting in Tampa - 8/6
This video was taken at the Tampa Town Hall Meeting on August 6th, 2009.
Kathy Castor's union thugs beat up a guy (in the green shirt - evidence 3:21) and shut the doors to prevent the opposing opinions from being heard. She then proceeded leave, not taking any questions, because "she couldn't hear." Translation: she doesn't have answers 'cause she hasn't read the House bill.
There are other videos of citizens who accidentally made it into the hall through the back door before the event because people thought they were union. Castor's constituents were basically banned from the event because they picked a small venue and stacked the audience beforehand.
Kathy Castor's union thugs beat up a guy (in the green shirt - evidence 3:21) and shut the doors to prevent the opposing opinions from being heard. She then proceeded leave, not taking any questions, because "she couldn't hear." Translation: she doesn't have answers 'cause she hasn't read the House bill.
There are other videos of citizens who accidentally made it into the hall through the back door before the event because people thought they were union. Castor's constituents were basically banned from the event because they picked a small venue and stacked the audience beforehand.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Obama Care protest in California
Over 125 concerned local citizens present concerns with the Obama Socialist Health Care Plan, and demand their representative, Rep. Jerry McNerney, vote NO on any plan which negatively impacts availability, quality, or cost of our health care.
St. Louis protests against ObamaCare
Claire McCaskill's office locked their doors, pulled the blinds and called the cops on local Tea Party Protesters today in St. Louis. The protesters were rallying against Obamacare at the liberal senator's office.
She represents her own special interest ..not the people.
I'm betting that many police officers feel exactly as the protesters do, and the longer this health care reform issue drags on the more the police will be LESS inclined to take VALUABLE time away from protecting their city to go harass "We The People", protesting the fact that we're NOT being heard. Everyone has a breaking point--push the fine men & women of the police force to "protect you from the protesters" and you could hear the 911 operator laughing at the other end of the phone.
But don't you know that Senators and Congressmen no longer work for the people, or even care about what the people think, for that matter? Federal politicians, regardless of their party, are no more than employees to their party. They don't care about the well being of their country, just their party, power and paychecks.
What makes you think because they pass this bill that people will have health care? This is about extracting more money from the people, setting up a bigger, more complex government program and making people dependent on the government. THIS IS NOT ABOUT HEALTH CARE. Ron Paul has introduced excellent free market solutions to the health care problem, but they won't even consider this alternative. Nor will the press talk about it. WHY? Because gov doesn't care about health care, only raising $.
She represents her own special interest ..not the people.
I'm betting that many police officers feel exactly as the protesters do, and the longer this health care reform issue drags on the more the police will be LESS inclined to take VALUABLE time away from protecting their city to go harass "We The People", protesting the fact that we're NOT being heard. Everyone has a breaking point--push the fine men & women of the police force to "protect you from the protesters" and you could hear the 911 operator laughing at the other end of the phone.
But don't you know that Senators and Congressmen no longer work for the people, or even care about what the people think, for that matter? Federal politicians, regardless of their party, are no more than employees to their party. They don't care about the well being of their country, just their party, power and paychecks.
What makes you think because they pass this bill that people will have health care? This is about extracting more money from the people, setting up a bigger, more complex government program and making people dependent on the government. THIS IS NOT ABOUT HEALTH CARE. Ron Paul has introduced excellent free market solutions to the health care problem, but they won't even consider this alternative. Nor will the press talk about it. WHY? Because gov doesn't care about health care, only raising $.
Long Island, New York protest against Obama Care
GRAND SLAM FOR FREEDOM JULY 17, 2009!
It is Time to Take Action Against Schumer, Gillibrand, Israel & Bishop!
Protect Your Standard of Living. Save the Middle Class. Fight Cap & Trade and Nationalized Health Care!
Congressmen Tim Bishop and Steve Israel voted for the Biggest Tax Increase in American history when they voted for the Cap & Trade Energy Tax. Now they want to Nationalize Health Care as part of the Nancy Pelosi-Barney Frank Tax Squad in Congress!
Schumer and Gillibrand now get their chance to vote on Nationalize Health Care and Cap & Trade
It is Time to Take Action Against Schumer, Gillibrand, Israel & Bishop!
Protect Your Standard of Living. Save the Middle Class. Fight Cap & Trade and Nationalized Health Care!
Congressmen Tim Bishop and Steve Israel voted for the Biggest Tax Increase in American history when they voted for the Cap & Trade Energy Tax. Now they want to Nationalize Health Care as part of the Nancy Pelosi-Barney Frank Tax Squad in Congress!
Schumer and Gillibrand now get their chance to vote on Nationalize Health Care and Cap & Trade
The Revolution gainst Obama Care begins in South Austin, Texas
It started in mostly liberal South Austin, Texas.
Rep Doggett met with constituents outside a grocery store in south Austin regarding the health care bill. Apparently the event was mostly advertised in liberal leaning local publications. He did not bring a megaphone, so hearing what he had to say was difficult. When he started making the move to leave, the crowd erupted chanting "Just say no!" His worker got the car ready to shuttle him away but the crowd surrounded it and it took a while for him to get out of the parking lot. The whole time, the "Just say no!" chant continued. It probably won't matter - from his facial expression, body language, and what was heard to come out of his mouth, he's for the the health care bill in its present form and has no openness to change on that.
The people *not Rep or Dem* are tired of the BS. They are sick to death of the doing things against us EVEN WHEN WE DO SPEAK OUT IN OPPOSITION! Thank God, FINALLY they are turning off their TV's for a few hours and GETTING INVOLVED! They are pissed, and are NOT going to take it anymore! Politicians need to take the warning and start doing what they were elected to do: Follow what We the People say, and DEFEND (not destroy) the Constitution. I don't remember "Health Care" being in there.
This Obamacare thing is not a Republican or a Democrat thing: it is a human thing. The powers behind the universal health care push want total control over the masses. The way to control the people is to control access to doctors and medicine. The push is laying the groundwork for a bloodless coup - an overthrow of the Constitution. It's that simple.
The people from the Austin Texas tea Party belong to his district. And the Campaign for Liberty is the Libertarians. Neither of those responses indicate that these people were from outside the district. And again...Doggett was NOT there for dialogue. If he were, he would have brought a sound system of some sort to make himself heard. He was there for an appearance...to look like he is listening to his people. He is not, never has.
Rep Doggett met with constituents outside a grocery store in south Austin regarding the health care bill. Apparently the event was mostly advertised in liberal leaning local publications. He did not bring a megaphone, so hearing what he had to say was difficult. When he started making the move to leave, the crowd erupted chanting "Just say no!" His worker got the car ready to shuttle him away but the crowd surrounded it and it took a while for him to get out of the parking lot. The whole time, the "Just say no!" chant continued. It probably won't matter - from his facial expression, body language, and what was heard to come out of his mouth, he's for the the health care bill in its present form and has no openness to change on that.
The people *not Rep or Dem* are tired of the BS. They are sick to death of the doing things against us EVEN WHEN WE DO SPEAK OUT IN OPPOSITION! Thank God, FINALLY they are turning off their TV's for a few hours and GETTING INVOLVED! They are pissed, and are NOT going to take it anymore! Politicians need to take the warning and start doing what they were elected to do: Follow what We the People say, and DEFEND (not destroy) the Constitution. I don't remember "Health Care" being in there.
This Obamacare thing is not a Republican or a Democrat thing: it is a human thing. The powers behind the universal health care push want total control over the masses. The way to control the people is to control access to doctors and medicine. The push is laying the groundwork for a bloodless coup - an overthrow of the Constitution. It's that simple.
The people from the Austin Texas tea Party belong to his district. And the Campaign for Liberty is the Libertarians. Neither of those responses indicate that these people were from outside the district. And again...Doggett was NOT there for dialogue. If he were, he would have brought a sound system of some sort to make himself heard. He was there for an appearance...to look like he is listening to his people. He is not, never has.
The Health Care Bill
This is the health care bill in the House of Representatives. Click on the link below to read the bill. I have listed page numbers below that may concern you. To view that page, simple click in the page number at the top of the pdf form and input the page that you want to read....
http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
The Obama Health Care Bill
• Pg 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Pg 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Pg 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
• Pg 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.
• Pg 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
• Pg 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
• Pg 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
• Pg 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
• Pg 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Pg 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
• Pg 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
• Pg 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
• Pg 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
• Pg 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
• Pg 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
• Pg 354: Government
• Pg 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
• Pg 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
• Pg 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
• Pg 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
• Pg 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
Pg 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.
• Pg 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
• Pg 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
• Pg 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.
• Pg 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
• Pg 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
• Pg 167: Any individual who doesn't' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Pg 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
• Pg 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
• Pg 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Pg 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Pg 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
• Pg 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
• Pg 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
• Pg 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Pg 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Pg 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Pg 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Pg 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Pg 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
• Pg 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Pg 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
Pg 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
• Pg 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer
Read H R 3200, the Health Care Bill
• Pg 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Pg 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Pg 30: A government committee will decide what treatments & benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf
The Obama Health Care Bill
• Pg 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Pg 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for ACORN.
• Pg 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy. Government intervenes in your marriage.
• Pg 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining, creating and rationing those services.
• Pg 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
• Pg 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
• Pg 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have at end-of-life.
• Pg 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare by phone).
• Pg 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
• Pg 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate taxes ahead of time.
• Pg 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources, guiding you in death.
• Pg 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand without government approval.
• Pg 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
• Pg 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures: i.e., rationing.
• Pg 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage Plans, HMOs, etc.
• Pg 354: Government
• Pg 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven wheelchairs.
• Pg 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of rationing!
• Pg 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems preventable re-admissions.
• Pg 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
• Pg 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in healthcare companies!
Pg 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." Yes, it really says that.
• Pg 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors and the poor most affected."
• Pg 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
• Pg 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional judgment, etc.
• Pg 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private healthcare industries.
• Pg 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
• Pg 167: Any individual who doesn't' have acceptable healthcare (according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
• Pg 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes (Americans will pay for them).
• Pg 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
• Pg 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
• Pg 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the government-run public plan. No alternatives.
• Pg 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees AND their families.
• Pg 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
• Pg 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services; translation: illegal aliens
• Pg 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
• Pg 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled: you have no choice in the matter.
• Pg 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No "judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put simply, private insurers will be crushed.
• Pg 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
• Pg 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
• Pg 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
• Pg 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits for you. You will have no choice. None.
• Pg 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free healthcare services.
Pg 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
• Pg 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer
Read H R 3200, the Health Care Bill
• Pg 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
• Pg 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
• Pg 30: A government committee will decide what treatments & benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals process)
Health Rations and You
http://www.HealthAdministrationBureau.comWe all know health rationing makes good sense. But, did you know that it's popular too?
It is! Citizens from around the country have embraced the chance to give a lot--and take a little.
Are you up for the challenge?
The Health Administration Bureau: dedicated to ensuring that all Americans, regardless of age (where appropriate) and need (where appropriate), receive adequate health care.
It is! Citizens from around the country have embraced the chance to give a lot--and take a little.
Are you up for the challenge?
The Health Administration Bureau: dedicated to ensuring that all Americans, regardless of age (where appropriate) and need (where appropriate), receive adequate health care.
Obama Care
We all agree the health care system is in need of reform. That's not the issue. The debate is really what kind of reform is needed. There are those rooting for nationalizing health care - Obama Care. What's that you ask? Obama's idea of reform is a government takeover of the health care system. One of the most popular forms of government takeover is the "Massachusetts Model." Those of us opposing "reform" that involves yet more government interference, wish to see a system that incorporates more consumer choice and more competition. Take a minute to watch this new video outlining just one of the many reasons the Massachusetts model has failed.
"National Health Care" already used in the United States [Failing]
Glenn Beck gives an example of a failing "National Health Care System" already used in the United States. [Mass]
Obama Health Reform and Wait Times Visualization
In 2006, Massachusetts passed health care reform that implemented a number of policies that are now being mirrored in the Obama health reform plan. The president has repeatedly claimed that his plan will lower health care costs but not decrease health care quality. This visualization looks at how the Massachusetts plan has panned out in terms of cost and wait times
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)