Thursday, October 31, 2013
Sebelius, ObamaCare and More Spin…
Probably the most disappointing part of the entire Congressional Committee Hearing on the PPACA (ObamaCare) Implementation Failures was when HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was questioned, more than once, about if it were possible for her to drop her first class federal healthcare coverage and go into the exchanges under ObamaCare, would she… She refused to answer directly… She refused to say, “Yes”. Like the restaurant where the owners, chef, workers and their families refuse to eat… but now you are forced to…
The Blaze: Things didn’t go well for Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius during a congressional hearing Wednesday, and it became pretty clear when she was caught muttering, “Don’t do this to me”:
It’s unclear the exact context of the remark. Washington’s CBS station says it was said to an aide, but it’s unclear if she was speaking to the aide or about someone else.
Sebelius’ unscripted comment came immediately after an intense exchange with Rep. Billy Long (R-Mo.) who repeatedly asked her if she planned to enroll in the health care law she oversees.
The secretary avoided answering the answer head-on, saying she would “take a look at it.”
She also stated that it would be illegal for her to enroll in Obamacare because of her status within the federal government. This is inaccurate; Sebelius is eligible to enroll, she just is not eligible for specific subsidies.
When Sebelius muttered, “Don’t do this to me,” it was after conferring with one of her colleagues. It seems pretty clear she wasn’t addressing Long, but it’s unclear what, exactly, was said to prompt her flustered muttering. You can here the entire exchange HERE
Video: Mike Rogers Slams Secretary Kathleen Sebellius At Obamacare Hearing - 10/30/13
10/30/13 - On his radio show this afternoon, Rush Limbaugh criticized the Republicans for what he believed to be a lackluster performance during Wednesday morning's hearing with Health & Human Services Sec. Kathleen Sebelius. "It's very frustrating for me," Limbaugh said. "[Sebelius] was clearly the punching bag" but "I don't know that the Republicans did much damage. It's like they're afraid to. It's like there's still a fear of going after Obama."
He wondered whether there is instruction "from on high" within the GOP instructing Republican committee members to "not be mean" and not tear into Sebelius.
"That's such a mistake," he lamented, "because with every day of chaos, Obama and the Democrats are getting closer to what they want and that is single-payer."
Limbaugh also suggested the Republicans are "afraid of success" and perhaps "talk themselves out" of being more aggressive "because they don't think they can win."
Video: Rush Limbaugh: Republicans Seemed 'Afraid' to Go After 'Punching Bag' Sebelius
Video: Full Congressional Committee Hearing - "PPACA Implementation Failures: Answers from HHS Secretary Sebelius" Oct 30, 2013 (3:34:01)
Obamacare Website Company CGI Federal Contributed to Obama Campaign
The fun just doesn’t stop… not only did the contract for the $634 Million Dollar website ObamaCare website that doesn’t work go to a non-American company (guess we don’t need the jobs?) and a sorority sister of Michelle Obama’s (cronyism) that was already under investigation… but now we find out that they also contributed to Obama’s campaign…
Freedom Outpost: Have you heard of CGI Federal? It's the company that received a $678 million no-bid contract to develop the disaster that is healthcare.gov. It is also the company whose officials are now coming under scrutiny for the roll out of the Obamacare exchange web portal. But it also seems like those officials are also buddy-buddy with the Obama administration.
According to The Daily Caller, Toni Townes-Whitley, a senior vice president at CGI Federal, is a Princeton classmate of First Lady Michelle Obama. Townes-Whitley and Mrs. Obama are both members of are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.
As reported by the Washington Examiner in early October, the Department of Health and Human Services reviewed only CGI's bid for the Obamacare account. CGI was one of 16 companies qualified under the Bush administration to provide certain tech services to the federal government. A senior vice president for the company testified this week before The House Committee on Energy and Commerce that four companies submitted bids, but did not name those companies or explain why only CGI's bid was considered.
According to Federal Election Commission Records, Toni Townes-Whitley gave $500 in 2011 and 2012 to Obama's reelection, and another $1,000 to the Obama Victory Fund.
The Washington Examiner reports that senior officials at CGI Federal had White House access. Before being granted the no-bid contract, CGI Federal officials attended several invitation only addresses by President Obama. White House visitor logs show that "CGI Federal President Donna Ryan visited the White House six times prior to her company being selected to do the IT design work behind the high-profile website."
Two of the meetings attended by CGI executives were with Vivek Kundra, Obama's chief information officer. Kundra was a key figure in Obama administration information technology initiatives across the government.
Ryan met Kundra on June 21, 2010, in the latter's Old Executive Office Building office, according to the White House visitor logs.
In addition to the $88 million contract awarded to CGI Federal for the health-insurance exchange website, the company has received a total of $422 million in contracts related to Obamacare since the legislation was signed into law, according to Bloomberg News.
Fox News reported a number of occasions in which the company had failed to meet deadlines or experienced botched launches similar to that seen with the launch of healthcare.gov.
"In projects stretching from Canada to Hawaii, parent company CGI Group and its subsidiaries ran into complaints about its performance," Fox reported.
"The morning I heard CGI was behind [Healthcare.gov], I said, my God, no wonder that thing doesn't work," said James Bagnola, a Texas-based corporate consultant who was hired by the Hawaii Department of Taxation (DOTAX) in 2008, to Fox News.
Bagnola suggested that CGI has been shrewd politically, giving to both Democrats and Republicans at both the state and federal levels. In the case of Hawaii, Bagnola said the company was able to continue to work on the DOTAX contract despite repeated complaints from management and a "corrosive" environment in which government employees felt pitted against CGI staff. This was noted in the final 2010 audit.
"I don't have an ax to grind here, except I was just trying to do my job for this team and stop the state of Hawaii from being ripped off," he said.
According to campaign records at OpenSecrets.com, CGI Group contributed $345,600 to federal candidates and parties — both Democratic and Republican — during the 2011-12 cycle. Some $147,000 went to the Republican Governors Association; and $35,000 to the Democratic Governors Association. The company spent $400,000 in lobbying expenditures between 2011 and 2012.
Glenn Beck: "The Available Care Act"
As the Obamacare rollout continued to be marred by poor enrollment numbers and glitches, one former supporter has come forward with a scathing critique of the President’s signature healthcare law. Sue Klinkhamer spent two years fighting for Obamacare while working for Congressman Bill Foster (D-IL). Now that she has seen the effect of President Obama’s healthcare overhaul on her health insurance rates, however, Klinkhamer is openly admitting she was “very wrong.”
“I wouldn’t have sympathy for them, but so many people who were against this [law] are being forced into it now. This is the problem. You can vote and have your little utopia, but unfortunately, if we have a government, a federal government that makes all of the rules, there’s no place for us to go,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “You can have it in Massachusetts. You could have it in California. Try your little utopian experiment. Do it. But leave me out of it. I don’t want anything to do with it. Did you see the letter from the woman who is actually working on the healthcare plan?”
Video: Glenn Beck: "The Available Care Act" (4:15 Mins)
In an email sent to her former boss, Rep. Foster, and other Democratic colleagues, Klinkhamer reportedly wrote:
I spent two years defending Obamacare. I had constituents scream at me, spit at me and call me names that I can’t put in print. The congressman was not re-elected in 2010 mainly because of the anti-Obamacare anger. When the congressman was not re-elected, I also (along with the rest of our staff) lost my job. I was upset that because of the health care issue, I didn’t have a job anymore but still defended Obamacare because it would make health care available to everyone at, what I assumed, would be an affordable price. I have now learned that I was wrong. Very wrong.
According to the Chicago Sun Times, when Klinkhamer lost her congressional job, she had to buy an individual policy on the open market. Three years ago, it was $225 a month with a $2,500 deductible. As of September 1, the policy cost $291a month with a $3,500 deductible.
And then came the letter from her insurance company stating that her policy was no longer in compliance with Obamacare standards.
“Blue Cross,” she said, “stated my current coverage would expire on Dec. 31, and here are my options: I can have a plan with similar benefits for $647.12 [or] I can have a plan with similar [but higher] pricing for $322.32 but with a $6,500 deductible… Blue Cross also tells me that if I don’t pick one of the options, they will just assume I want the one for $647. … Someone please tell me why my premium in January will be $356 more than in December?”
But her rant continued: “I am a Democrat and I believe in health care for all,” she said. “And I was excited that previously uninsured people could now get insurance on the open market. But this is not affordable to me. Just call it the Available Care Act.”
“It won’t be available either,” Stu quipped. “Wait till you get to the doctors lines and all the other stuff. That will take a while. Once that kicks in, it won’t be available.”
Related:
No Bid Contract For ObamaCare Website Was Given To Michelle Obama's Pal And Sorority Sister
Betsy McCaughey: Obamacare designed to vastly expand single payer Medicaid by eviscerating Medicare
“Mr. President, I’m Leaving the Medical Field”; Letter from a Physician to Obama
$634 Million ObamaCare Website Company was Fired by Canada
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Suzanne Somers Calls ObamaCare "A Socialist Ponzi Scheme"
WSJ:
First of all, let’s call affordable health care what it really is: It’s socialized medicine.
I’ve had an opportunity to watch the Canadian version of affordable health care in action with all its limitations with my Canadian husband’s family. A few years ago, I was startled to see the cover of Maclean’s, a national Canadian magazine, showing a picture of a dog on an examining table with the headline, “Your Dog Can Get Better Health Care Than You.” It went on to say that young Canadian medical students have no incentive to become doctors to humans because they can’t make any money. Instead, there is a great surge of Canadian students becoming veterinarians. That’s where the money is. A Canadian animal can have timely MRIs, surgeries and any number of tests it needs to receive quality health care.
My sister-in-law had to wait two months to get a General Practitioner. During this period she spent her days in bed vomiting continuously, unable to get any food or drink down because she couldn’t get an appointment with the doctor. When she finally did, the doctor said, “Oh you don’t need me, you need a specialist.” That took another two weeks until she got a pill that corrected the problem.
Really, is this what we want?
All of my husband’s cousins are doctors. Several have moved to the U.S. because after their years of intensive schooling, they want to reap financial rewards. My 75-year-old Canadian girlfriend was denied treatment because she was too old. She died recently, having been given palliative care. That’s all the system would allow.
Affordable care will allow for pre-existing conditions. That’s the good part for retirees. But, let’s get down and dirty; the word “affordable” is a misnomer. So far, all you are hearing on the news is how everyone’s premiums are doubling and tripling and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to recognize that the whole thing is a big mess. Plus, even after Obamacare is fully implemented, there still will be tens of millions of people not covered. So what’s the point? Medical care will be degraded, the costs will skyrocket, and most frightening of all, your most intimate and personal information is now up for grabs.
So, is affordable care a good thing for retirees? Perhaps over time, it might work if you don’t get too old and you don’t get too sick, and you don’t live too long. But frankly, the economic ramifications with our already swollen debt load don’t add up. Retirees who are on Medicare will suffer the consequences of 700 billions of Medicare dollars instead being used to cover the skyrocketing cost of Obamacare. In essence, less dollars for seniors, means less service. Not fair. The Boomers are going to take the “hit.” In Obamacare, “too old” has limitations of service.
Boomers are smart. They see the train wreck coming… most I speak with think the Affordable Care Act is a greater Ponzi scheme than that pulled off by Bernie Madoff.
CORRECTIONS AND AMPLIFICATIONS:
An earlier version of this post contained a quotation attributed to Lenin (“Socialized medicine is the keystone to the arch of the socialist state”) that has been widely disputed. And it included a quotation attributed to Churchill (“Control your citizens’ health care and you control your citizens“) that the Journal has been unable to confirm.
Also, the cover of a Maclean’s magazine issue in 2008 showed a picture of a dog on an examining table with the headline “Your Dog Can Get Better Health Care Than You.” An earlier version of this post incorrectly said the photo showed and headline referred to a horse.
What will the Affordable Care Act mean for retirees?
Suzanne Somers (@SuzanneSomers) is a health advocate, entrepreneur, Emmy-nominated actress and author including: Newest Book: I'm Too Young for This!: The Natural Hormone Solution to Enjoy Perimenopause (Kindle), as well as: Bombshell: Explosive Medical Secrets That Will Redefine Aging, The Sexy Years: Discover the Hormone Connection: The Secret to Fabulous Sex, Great Health, and Vitality, for Women and Men, Sexy Forever: How to Fight Fat after Forty, Ageless: The Naked Truth About Bioidentical Hormones, Suzanne Somers' Get Skinny on Fabulous Food, Breakthrough: Eight Steps to Wellness, Suzanne Somers' Eat Great, Lose Weight: Eat All the Foods You Love in "Somersize" Combinations to Reprogram Your Metabolism, Shed Pounds for Good, and Have More Energy Than Ever Before, Bombshell: Explosive Medical Secrets That Will Redefine Aging and more.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Forum: What Do You Predict The Ultimate Fate Of ObamaCare Will Be?
Watcher of Weasels - Cross-posted at AskMarion: Every week on Monday morning , the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher’s Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day. This week’s question: What Do You Predict The Ultimate Fate Of ObamaCare Will Be?
The Independent Sentinel: I learned that no matter what the government does wrong, it will be the Republican’s fault.
Even Republicans will blame Republicans.
When Obamacare tanks, it will be the Republican’s fault for not trying hard enough to repeal it.
The Glittering Eye: Cutting to the chase, here’s what I wrote as a comment to this post of mine:
My off-hand conjecture is that on April 1, 2014 the scope of the problem of lack of healthcare insurance will be about the same as it was on February 1, 2009, healthcare will be substantially more expensive, and a bit more than five years will have been allowed to elapse without addressing the fundamental problem of cost.
There are no prospects for the PPACA being repealed until after 2016. Neither the president nor Senate Democrats will allow that to happen. As to its fate after 2016, who knows? The frequent assertion that once enacted into law entitlements are sacrosanct is incorrect—the long-term care benefit enacted and repealed during the Reagan Administration is an example that comes immediately to mind as does AFDC.
As of this writing it looks very likely as though the PPACA will run into cost overruns more rapidly than anyone could possibly have imagined. That’s clearly what will happen if 85% of those who sign up for insurance under the plan are enrolled in Medicaid and the balance are already sick and desperate enough for insurance that they’ll put up with the ordeal of registering for insurance under the federal exchanges.
Working together those will make decreasing healthcare’s outrageous costs all the more urgent than it was in 2009 and, sadly, the PPACA does very little beyond wishful thinking to do that.
The Right Planet : There isn’t enough pixels in the universe to contain all my work on the #ObamacareFAIL.
Bookworm Room: I don’t care if Obamacare fails. I hate the thought of our country’s medical care and economy failing….. (Especially since my husband currently earns a nice living thanks to the medical care system.) I foresee lean times ahead.
Simply Jews : I know that I will, most probably, piss off my Republican friends on this forum. However, my answer is less about this specific (and very doubtful) implementation of healthcare, rather about what I wish to happen in USA regarding that painful issue. So, instead of the ultimate fate let’s talk about the ultimate hope.
As one who has experienced for several years one of the existing medical insurances in US, here is my impression:
- Devilishly expensive, even for generally healthy people
- The “pre-existing conditions” could probably kill one with time
- Excellent medical care is followed (or even preceded in some cases) by a bureaucratic nightmare and a maze of phone calls with people who don’t understand, aren’t eager to help and in general couldn’t care less.
- Out of work – out of luck, or very soon so.
My apologies if I am wrong in some details, some time has passed since. Besides, we were mostly healthy then.
What I wish to happen to my American friends: a complete reform of the medical care, based on successful examples that proved to work in some countries:Japan, Israel, France and several others. Make it simple and efficient and make it work. And yes, add optional private insurances for those who want some additional bells and whistles – I am not a commie enough to be against this.
If you look at this table, US has the most expensive healthcare. Meaning the money is already there, and there is more than anywhere else in the world. It is just used (abused) by insurance companies very inefficiently. So the issue is not the lack of funding, rather the poor organization, spiraling uncontrolled insurance/care costs and chaotic oversight of the whole system, which by now became too complicated to manage successfully.
Will Obamacare succeed? They way it was set up – as a doubtful system of compromises and as an additional superstructure on top of the already crumbling base – I doubt it. But at least it may speed the process of destruction of the current status-quo and the birth of a really workable and working healthcare system.
And, by the way, there is another, but closely related, issue of litigation, ambulance chasing in simple words, that has helped the prices of treatment skyrocketing, doing the same to the insurance prices… this must be reigned in too.
GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD: Whale, I have absolutely no idea so I’m going with Skippy Klein’s Ouija board here:
1. Affordable Care Act is a success, and liberals build on it
Under this outcome, the law works as well as or better than its supporters predicted. After some initial hiccups, it expands insurance coverage to those in need without disrupting the health care experience for those who are already satisfied. The cost-control measures work, and providers are able to deliver better care at a lower price by taking advantage of government incentives to be more efficient. As a result, the government saves hundreds of billions of dollars on Medicare without seniors noticing any cuts to their benefits and access. Young and healthy Americans flood into the insurance market to offset the cost of providing insurance to older and sicker Americans, including those with pre-existing conditions. The new insurance exchanges are vibrant marketplaces offering beneficiaries a wide range of options, promoting competition that drives down the cost of premiums. Over time, more individuals and businesses demand access to the exchanges, and America evolves into an exchange-driven single-payer system.
2. Affordable Care Act is an epic disaster and it gets fully repealed
Under this scenario, the law unravels. The cost controls do not work, proving especially troublesome for smaller regional hospitals. They either start closing, stop accepting Medicare or cut services. This effectively reduces the benefits seniors can get out of Medicare, and they, along with industry lobbyists, pressure Congress into undoing the cuts that are one of the primary offsets to the law’s trillions in new spending. On top of this, new taxes kick in – mandate penalties, the insurance premium tax, the medical device tax, pharmaceutical tax, etc. – and businesses struggle to adjust to a raft of new regulations. The exchanges are swamped with technical problems and poorly administered, making it difficult for individuals to sign up. Not many insurers participate in the exchanges, meaning they don’t offer sufficient choices to promote competition. New regulatory requirements drive up the price of premiums, so young and healthy Americans decide they’d rather pay a penalty than invest in costly insurance. Without the younger and healthier people in the risk pool to offset the cost of sicker Americans, insurers raise premiums even further, prompting yet more individuals to exit the insurance market. And so, the dreaded insurance “death spiral” ensues. In the meantime, newly insured individuals start taking advantage of their free or heavily subsidized care, but the capacity of the health care sector does not grow quickly enough to meet demand, translating into long waits at doctors’ offices and difficulty getting appointments in the first place. The ensuing backlash from all fronts leads to a Republican takeover of the Senate in 2014 and helps elect a Republican president in 2016. At some point in 2017, a new Republican president signs a law wiping Affordable Care Act off the books.
3. Affordable Care Act is largely a disaster, but it survives, and possibly expands
At some point at least some constituency of voters will be deriving some benefits from the law. It’s one thing to support repeal when it means voting against theoretical subsidies for theoretical beneficiaries. But once the law goes into place, repealing the law would mean stripping away benefits from people actively receiving government aid. Let’s say, in 2017, there’s an incoming Republican president with – at best – control of the House and a narrow Republican Senate majority. Would he or she be willing to use reconciliation to push through a repeal bill when confronted with Democratic attacks that it would take millions off the Medicaid rolls and make millions more lose their subsidized private insurance? Republicans have not traditionally shown themselves to have the political fortitude to roll back entitlements once they are in place. At the same time, if Republicans do not respond with an alternative to clean up the mess, then liberals will begin to blame problems in the health care sector on the idea that Affordable Care Act left too much control in the hands of private industry. This will prepare the groundwork for a further move toward a socialized single-payer health care system, perhaps by, say, re-introducing a “public option.” There have been many times in American history when failures of government policy led to further expansions of government. Limited government advocates should be wary of this happening with Affordable Care Act.
4. Affordable Care Act is largely a disaster, and it gets reformed
Under this scenario, a combination of public backlash and adverse court decisions forces Congress to re-open Affordable Care Act. It doesn’t get fully repealed, but it gets reformed. Perhaps, for instance, exchanges remain, but there are far fewer restrictions on what type of insurance can be offered, broadening the range of options and providing more affordable choices for those who don’t have as many medical needs. States may be given actual flexibility on the operation of the exchanges, and Medicaid funds become block granted. Insurance is made accessible to those with pre-existing conditions without the “guaranteed issue” and “community rating” policies that force insurers to cover everybody who applies at a price effectively set by government. This allows Congress to get rid of the federal individual mandate.
Liberty’s Spirit:Note: I am going to address this as the parent of two special needs children. Someone who has had to pay hundreds of thousands for therapies, support systems and doctors that are not covered under any insurance plan. I have seen what the high cost of healthcare can do to do a family in this country and there is no question that there needs to be an overhaul of the entire system. So I am NOT against many of the provisions of Obamacare: allowing children to stay on their parents health insurance until they are 26 (for those of us with special needs children this is financial helpful. The cost for them for health insurance would have been staggering if our children could even get health insurance at all); not allowing insurance companies to deny a policy due to preexisting conditions (most insurance companies would not write a new policy for someone with autism, epilepsy and any other preexisting conditions); providing for autism treatments, etc. However, as the child of a parent on medicare advantage (Humana) I am concerned that this terrific program is going to end.
I am going to start off from another rather rebellious position….I think there is nothing wrong with requiring people to carry health insurance. If hospitals have to treat people when they get sick, there has to be some way that those bills get paid. Most people who have no insurance do not end up paying their hospital bills and that means the rest of us are left with the cost when we are sick. The problem is that the way the law is written it is still financially better for some people to pay the fine rather than carry health insurance. (Israel, which has one of the best healthcare systems in the world, requires their population to carry insurance plans.)
Also there is a huge issue with the general cost of medicine. Most nations that have socialized medicine negotiate with drug companies about how much they can charge, which means the American people end up paying the drug company’s loss when we by our medication. This has not been addressed.
The cost to educate a doctor is ridiculous. But that is the issue with the cost of higher education (another issue for another day). So many doctors coming out of medical school are hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and need to find a position that allows them to live and pay off their student loans. This makes healthcare very expensive in this nation.
Death panels are a big issue. The idea that bureaucrats will decide whether someone has the right to medical care is frightening. However, at the same time, insurance companies decide whether they will pay for some medications, surgeries and therapies, which if you cannot afford these on your own, can become a form of a death panel as well. The idea that certain persons (age, illness) and those with disabilities, do not have the same right to life as those of a certain caliber is replete in society and as seen by the writings of those like Ezekiel Emmanuel, who helped craft Obamacare, eugenics is considered not only acceptable but for the betterment of society. Furthermore, the targeting of conservatives by the IRS does not engender competence that politics will not be used as a weapon to deny healthcare to those who challenge the policies of the executive branch (which is what happens in a fascist society.)
There is no provision in Obamacare where you can sue the government if you disagree with a ruling by the panel. The law is that you cannot sue the federal government unless they allow it (sovereign immunity.) Unlike at present where you can sue your insurance company if they rule against you for a treatment, Obamacare does not allow for this remedy. Administrative relief is not always enough.
The issue with Obamacare is that the provision that the republicans wanted, the right to sell insurance across state lines, which would have brought down the cost due to the real free market, was rejected. The reality is that instead of providing people with a lower cost, more effective form of health insurance, Obamacare is a nightmare and does nothing to reduce the costs of healthcare in this country.
The exchanges are too costly and do not offer most people the same type of insurance that they were used to carrying. This needs to be fixed. No I do not blame Obamacare per se that people’s insurance policies have been canceled. Instead of complying with Obamacare the insurance companies have simply decided to cancel the policies and push people into the exchanges. While this was foreseeable, it is the choice of the insurance companies.
It is embarrassing that the government website is such a disaster. It does not engender competence that DC will be able to fairly and effectively regulate healthcare.
Will it survive? Yes it will. Does it need tweaking? Absolutely.
JoshuaPundit: ObamaCare as it is now will almost definitely fail. Among other things, it depends on young, healthy people applying for overpriced policies with scanty coverage and ridiculous deductibles that will not even cover them in the event they need emergency coverage from ‘out of network’ doctors. They’re staying away in droves, while the vast majority of people now signing up for the exchanges are people that qualify for MedicAid, there being an unlimited demand for free stuff at someone else’s expense. There is no way to fix this basic problem without spending huge amounts of money, because medical providers will simply opt out in order to avoid going bankrupt. And actually, that’s the whole idea.
Let’s start out with this basic truism – ObamaCare was never about healthcare per se. It is about increased taxation (and unconstitutional taxation at that, as anyone who can read the Constitution can discover for themselves) and government control. As I wrote a week or so ago, the end game for ObamaCare is single payer with government mandated rationing and ultimately the Sovietization of American healthcare. It was designed to fail, and as it does, the Left will hold out the carrot of single payer as a panacea.
I have always said that anyone unwilling to utter the words ‘tort reform’ and to deal with America’s problem with illegal aliens (another huge factor in driving up healthcare costs nobody wants to mention) is not serious about reforming healthcare and reducing the cost of it to the average citizen.
Tort reform hasn’t happened because the majority of members of congress are lawyers, many with practices back home, while the various trial lawyer associations are major donors to the Democrat party.And illegal aliens and those that advocate for them are becoming a constituency for a lot of politicians in Washington.Senator John McCain’s chief financial backer, for example, is the owner of the Spanish language media giant UniVision.
ObamaCare is the only major social legislation ever passed in America by one party alone, and the manner in which it was pushed through is in violation of rules that have governed how laws are passed by congress in our Republic for well over a century. It also is a perversion of the Constitution because it provides a precedent wherein the Federal government can use its police power to force its citizens to buy something or not buy something just because. The damage done to our institutions if ObamaCare stands as a precedent will be horrendous.
Another issue no one wants to discuss is the issue of social control. Government bureaucrats will decide who rates certain procedures and who doesn’t. Given how the IRS has been used in an unprecedented fashion to wage war on the Obama Administration’s political enemies and is in charge of enforcing ObamaCare, is anyone naive enough to believe that the huge amount of personal data accessible because of ObamaCare won’t be used to deny medical procedures outright to those whom don’t vote or donate correctly? Or at least send them to the back of the line?
And people actually laughed at Sarah Palin, one of the first public figures smart enough to point this out .
Will ObamaCare survive? Not if we wish to remain a free people. The 2014 elections will be key in determining whether the law is simply frozen until it can be repealed or whether it eventually morphs into single payer.That is something the American people will decide.
The Colossus of Rhodey: I predict that ObumbleCare will survive — but in a drastically altered form. Let’s face it: The promises made by Boss Obama and his acolytes virtually ALL turned out to be lies. “Keep your doctor?” Yeah, right. (I can see Obama spinning that one: “You CAN keep your doctor. If you lost your coverage, it wasn’t because of a government mandate. Your insurer made that decision on their own!”) “Costs will go down?” A total fantasy for the vast majority of Americans.
If something substantial is not done in the next few months, the 2014 mid-term elections may make 2010 (and 1994) seem pitiful in comparison. The GOP House majority could become prodigious, and the Senate could flip to Republican control, perhaps by a sizable margin. There is almost nothing Boss Obama can do to pin the ObumbleCare disaster on the GOP; he and the-then Democrat controlled House and Senate passed this clusterf*** without a SINGLE Republican vote. Not. One. Obama and the Democrats own this. 100% completely.
I believe that some of the worst aspects of the law will be repealed; that is, unless the Democrats want to get crushed next November. By next summer we’ll see that the employer mandate will be excised, and the individual mandate will as well. What will replace the latter is not for me to say; perhaps Obama will propose some new tax on millionaires and/or corporations to pay for those who need health coverage. But HOW he will do this will be fun to watch given that he NEVER takes responsibility — or apologizes — for anything. Expect much ridiculous spin and blaming of the GOP, the Koch Brothers and, of course, “racism” along the way.
Rhymes With Right:Frankly, I have very little hope regarding ObamaCare. I don’t see it being overturned by the courts, I don’t see it being repealed by Congress, and I don’t see it working anything like it was advertised. The most likely outcome I see will be even worse for America than what is currently enacted into law.
Let’s be honest — the ruling by the Supreme Court in 2012, and the opinion written by John Roberts in particular, were a disaster. The notion that the penalties in the legislation are a tax is completely at odds with the legislative history of the bill (such as it is) and the claims of the Obama Administration. The president and his henchmen admitted as much at the time of the ruling and have continued to do so since then. Based upon admissions made within days of the ruling that the Solicitor General’s office had committed a fraud upon the Court by making the argument that the penalties were taxes and and their arguments that John Roberts and the liberal wing of the Court got the decision wrong, the losing parties in the case should have made an appeal for rehearing under the Supreme Court’s Rule 44. Unfortunately they did not do so, and so it is likely that any future Supreme Court decision will continue to abide by the precedent in place.. At most we will see some nibbling around the edges based upon First Amendment issues and statutory language regarding state vs. federal exchanges, but no judicial flip on the question of constitutionality.
As for repealing ObamaCare, we don’t have the votes in Congress to do it, or even delay it one second longer than Obama wants it delayed for. After all, The Democrats control the Senate, Harry Reid is refusing to run that body in a collegial fashion, and there is no way we can get a veto-proof majority in either house of Congress even if Reid allowed the Senate to consider repeal legislation. That means that Obama can stop any Congressional effort to repeal ObamaCare with a stroke of his pen. The same will be true after the new Congress is seated after the 2014 elections — there is no way the GOP will have the sort of landslide that it would take to get to a veto-proof majority, and without one Obama will still wield the veto pen.
Which leads to the question of the implementation of the law. We’ve already seen that it is a fiasco and will likely continue to be for the foreseeable future. Software doesn’t work, prices are high, and millions are losing the medical insurance they like and the doctors they have been seeing, promises by Barack Obama notwithstanding. By 2016 it will be clear just how big a failure ObamaCare is — but too many Americans will already be dependent upon it. Republicans campaigning on a platform of repealing ObamaCare will be depicted by the Democrats and their media toadies as seeking to “take access to healthcare away from millions of Americans who cannot afford it”. Any Republican plan to replace ObamaCare with something else will be attacked by the lapdog media as even worse than the status quo. And into the fray will step Hillary Clinton and other Democrats who will declare that the failure of healthcare reform was the fault of Republicans who “opposed fixing the system” in 1993, refused to “work with us to care for the poorest Americans” in 2009, and whose efforts to thwart ObamaCare after the passage of the law was nothing short of a program of sabotage responsible for the every unpleasantness experienced by Americans due to ObamaCare’s failure. Their proposal will be nothing less than a single-payer system — perhaps “MediCare for All“. Presuming that the GOP does not manage to pull off a trifecta by holding the House, gaining a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and winning the White House, we will see the passage of a single-payer bill by the end of 2017. Any likely 2016 winner (and no, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Sarah Palin are not likely winners), regardless of party, will sign the resulting legislation on the basis that it will be better than ObamaCare — though I question whether that will prove to be the case over the long term. At that point we will have a federal health care system funded by massive tax increases for all but the poorest quintile.
Do I truly see such a dystopian future? Sadly, I do. The choices of the GOP since the adoption of ObamaCare have brought us to a position where we have failed to stop ObamaCare and are unlikely to find ourselves positioned to undo ObamaCare. The result will be the ultimate success of the sort of single-payer system that the Left has been seeking, the resulting expansion of federal power, and the increasing irrelevance of the Constitution as a blueprint for limited government and maximum individual liberty. The Reaganite vision of my youth will have failed, only to be replaced with an Obamunist state that will collapse within two generations.
The Razor: If you would have asked me four years ago, I would have said the Democrats would never stoop to using a legislative trick, reconciliation, to pass a law without a single Republican vote. Two years later I would have said there was no chance that a conservative supreme court justice would have allowed this mess to pass the test of constitutionality. Now I have to guess what it’s ultimate fate would be? Have you ever watched The Walking Dead? If this legislation doesn’t remind you of a zombie, I’m not sure what law would.
At this point I’m not sure what it would take to kill it, beyond a GOP triple play (owning both houses of Congress plus the White House). One that happens the GOP had better be ready with their own well thought out health care plan to replace this mess with.
Well, there you have it.
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.
It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?
Monday, October 28, 2013
No Bid Contract For ObamaCare Website Was Given To Michelle Obama's Pal And Sorority Sister
Joshua Pundit – Cross-Posted at AskMarion: There's an interesting thing that's surfaced regarding the disastrous $678 million ObamaCare website.
The company that built it, CGI Federal received a no bid contract to build the site, even though four other companies submitted bids which were never reviewed. Only CGI’s bid was considered.
And wouldn't you know it, there are a couple of other interesting coincidences.
As the Daily Caller reported, Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of ’85, is the senior vice president at CGI Federal...and not only a classmate and friend of the First Lady, who graduated from Princeton the same year, but a sister at the all black sorority Alpha Kappa Alpha and a fellow member of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni.
And to add to the mix, there's George Schindler, president of CGI, who became an Obama Campaign donor after CGI won the lucrative contract.
Even more interesting, there are rumors that CGI Technologies and Solutions, Inc. PAC – CGI Group’s political action group that donates to the campaigns - made a significant swing in donations to Democrats at around the same time.
Now, no bid contracts have come up before. Democrats threw a huge tantrum over no bid contracts awarded to Halliburton for services they performed in Iraq because of former Vice President Dick Cheney's past employment with them. Those services included saving Iraq's oil wells after Saddam Hussein set them on fire after we invaded.
The difference was that for most of the work Halliburton performed in Iraq, they were the only game in town and no other bids were submitted. Few companies had the expertise and/or the equipment to do what Halliburton contracted to do... observers who credited Halliburton with saving Iraq's oil wells while avoiding an ecological disaster characterized it as a miracle. Not only that, but few if any competitors were willing to send their equipment and employees into a war zone or pony up for the huge insurance costs involved.
What happened with CGI was very different, with four other companies submitting bids that were never even looked at.
It's the Chicago way...and always done using other people's money.
Betsy McCaughey: Obamacare designed to vastly expand single payer Medicaid by eviscerating Medicare
By Marion Algier – AskMarion – h/t to MJ
Betsy McCaughey, an expert on the Affordable Care Act, was on the Kelly Files regarding more enrollees in Medicaid is a signal for Single-Payer. McCaughey is the author of Beating Obamacare: Your Handbook for the New Healthcare Law, Decoding the Obama Health Law: What You Need To Know (Kindle) and Obama Health Law: What It Says and How to Overturn It (Encounter Broadsides) (Kindle). She knows of what she speaks!!
Video: Betsy McCaughey: Obamacare designed to vastly expand single payer Medicaid by eviscerating Medicare
One of the key Obamacare architects Zeke Emanuel – Rahm Emanuel’s brother - has lot in common with Hitler. He supports the rationing of medical care - you know denying care for the elderly. Betsy McCaughey cited 2 examples on Megyn's show - 1) a 2008 JAMA article in which Zeke said doctors take the Hippocratic Oath too seriously and focus too much on the needs of their patients. Instead they should be more focused on how resources can better be used for the young people. 2) He believes that 65 year olds have had their chance.
Video: Obamacare Architect shares Hitler's values; Supports rationing of medical care for elderly
Rationing healthcare in a single-payer system where boards, a mandate committee, of primarily non-medical experts and non-medical practitioners, especially not your own doctor, decide on your treatment based on the good of the many… not the patient at hand, is socialized medicine and no matter how you spin it is a death panel system. Someone will decide whether, or not, you, your grandparents, your special needs child or someone that the powers that be at the time don’t like get to have surgery, a major medical procedure or even an expensive medicine… or whether you will be left to suffer or just die. That my friends is a death panel, exactly what Sarah Palin and others who read the ObamaCare Bill warned us of. And because Palin was right and tried to warn Americans (about this and a lot of other things), the Progressives in power both hate and fear her, so the demonized her. But Sarah and Betsy are right… there are death panels in this law.
In 2007, Senator Obama said he wanted to eliminate private health insurance. And just recently Harry Reid admitted that the whole goal of ObamaCare is to get us all into a single payer system where the federal government controls one-sixth of our economy, will decide on who and when they will authorize treatment and will use the IRS as their enforcer to collect whatever premiums they set without competition. Think about it!
And as for ole Zeke Emanual… he is for death panels! Inform yourself about his Complete Lives System.
Video: Megyn Kelly Grills Zeke Emanuel on Obamacare Promises: Was Obama Lying or 'Grossly Mistaken'?
There are only two ways to stop this… (1) Win the House and the Senate in 2014 and then the White House in 2016 (2) and Repeal and then Replace ObamaCare!!
The time to get involved is now. This whole ObamaCare rollout website disaster is the least of our worries!!… even if it did cost us $634 Million of taxpayer money paid to a Canadian company with ties to George Soros and Michelle Obama for a site that doesn’t work, and now we have to pay again to fix it.
Related:
Obama's Health Rationer-in-Chief
Ezekiel Emanuel & The Complete Lives System: part 3 of Health Care: Why We are Scared (Video)
Doctors Quitting Over ObamaCare – Lindsey Williams –> Socialized Medicine… the Jewel of Socialism
Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, Says Constitution Backs Compulsory Abortion
"People 70 and over will not be treated under Obamacare… and you thought DEATH PANELS were gone"
Ezekiel Emanuel, architect of ObamaCare..please read
“Death Panel” Three Years Later
Death Panels 101? Chilling High School Assignment Makes Students Decide Who Lives and Who Dies
Bill O’Reilly on Socialism and a Shocking New Book
Will Sick Babies Be Starved to Death Under Obamacare?
Useless Eaters - Eliminate the Useless Eaters: A Disease of the Elitist Mind
Technorati Tags: ObamaCare,rationing healthcare,rationing for the elderly,Betsy McCaughey,Socialized Medicine,Zeke Emanuel,Rahm Emanuel,Hitler's Germany,Useless Eaters,elderly,seniors,Election 2014,Election 2016,Hippocratic Oath,Death Panels,Sarah Palin,Megyn Kelly,Fox News,Affordable Care Act,ACA,single-payer,Complete Lives System,Medicaid,Medicare,Get-Involved,You be the judge
Sunday, October 27, 2013
A Stunning New Court Defeat for ObamaCare
CFIF.org: Things just went from awful to worse this week for ObamaCare, and the Obama Administration more generally.
Nearly a month into its disastrous debut, it’s clear that the ObamaCare website isn’t just “glitching,” it’s completely melting down. This is quickly becoming a watershed moment, a failure so obvious and deep that it could permanently stain Obama’s presidential legacy among historians long after he’s gone. Among the familiar litany of failures throughout his tenure, healthcare legislation was the one signature legislative act to which he could point.
And now it is disintegrating before his very eyes.
In Florida alone, some 300,000 Florida Blue health insurance customers just received notice that their policies will be canceled due to ObamaCare because their coverage isn’t considered a “qualified health plan” under the new regulations. Although the Obama Administration continues to refuse to disclose how many people have actually enrolled in ObamaCare since October 1, whatever that number is appears to come far short of the Florida Blue cancelation alone.
And on that note, so much for the solemn pre-ObamaCare assurance that, “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”
Now, a new federal court ruling may legally doom ObamaCare before it ultimately collapses under its own unsustainable weight.
This week, a federal judge gave the green light for a lawsuit challenging ObamaCare’s structure of subsidies to proceed. Judge Paul Friedman also ruled that the case can proceed on an expedited basis, meaning that a final determination could occur before the March 2014 individual purchase mandate arrives.
The new lawsuit centers on a provision in the text of ObamaCare that allows subsidies to states participating in the program. By its terms, the subsidies do not cover those participating in the federal government’s program, but now that 34 states have refused to participate in ObamaCare, the Obama Administration is attempting to ignore the law and offer subsidies regardless of the law.
When ObamaCare was passed, Congress and the Obama Administration deliberately chose to empower individual states to carry out the law by creating health insurance exchanges, marketplaces in which those states’ citizens could buy insurance from authorized insurers. But because the Constitution doesn’t allow the federal government to force individual states to carry out its edicts, the law had to come up with another way to induce states to agree to participate. Consequently, the law offered individuals who chose to purchase insurance from state-run exchanges significant federal subsidies to persuade them to enroll.
There was one significant problem with that scheme: In states that chose to avoid participating in the looming catastrophe that is ObamaCare, residents would by law not be eligible for the subsidies offered to participating states.
As it turned out, some 34 states refused the Obama Administration’s offer. Consequently, the federal government is now on the hook for establishing exchanges for residents of non-participating states. But under the explicit provisions of ObamaCare itself, such individuals are not eligible for premium assistance subsidies.
So what did the Obama Administration decide to do?
Per habit, it sought to just ignore its own law via IRS fiat, as summarized by plaintiffs:
“Refusing to accept those consequences, the IRS promulgated the regulations at issue here, which base eligibility for premium assistance subsidies not on enrollment in coverage “through an Exchange established by the State,” as the statute requires, but rather on enrollment in coverage through any exchange, including the federally-established one. Of course, the federal government is not a “State,” as the ACA in fact expressly reiterates. Those regulations thus allow for the distribution of billions of dollars of federal funds that Congress never authorized. The IRS rule contradicts the plain text of the ACA, exceeds the agency’s authority, and is contrary to law.”
All of this presents a rich irony.
Throughout the government shutdown over ObamaCare earlier this month, the law’s supporters cried, “It’s the law!” Of course, the employer mandate was also “the law,” but the Obama Administration had no problem postponing it for a year. Similarly, the text of the law also mandated that members of Congress and their staffers were subject to its requirements. Yet the Obama Administration also had no problem granting an extralegal waiver, allowing subsidies that no other employees suddenly subject to ObamaCare’s provisions should receive.
The Obama Administration showed no greater deference for “the law” when it unilaterally announced that it would refuse to enforce settled immigration laws last year. Moreover, the very nature of a democratic republic is that settled laws can be revisited and often overturned, including by this administration. Think the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed by Bill Clinton, as just one example.
The court, however, wasn’t sufficiently impressed by the Obama Administration’s rationalization. Which raises the question of what will bring this unworkable law to an end first – it’s economic and logistical unsustainability, or judicial order. The latter would spare millions of Americans a great deal of unnecessary pain.
Betsy McCaughey: Obamacare designed to vastly expand single payer Medicaid by eviscerating Medicare
Saturday, October 26, 2013
“Mr. President, I’m Leaving the Medical Field”; Letter from a Physician to Obama
The Last Great Stand: Which props do you think Obama will use when he reads THIS letter on national television? Will he call back all the actors he dresses up in white lab coats to stand around him and look all doctor-like when he reads it?
No wait! I know, maybe one of the fake doctors in the lab coats will fake a faint, and Obama will be there to save HIM! What do you think? Am I close?
No. Lord Barrack has a funny way of reading letters from the pile that only has about 4 letters in it. The pile that is now responsible for 1% of the annual budget in storage because of the size never seems to get read from. I wonder why??? I’m kidding about the 1% by the way. I’m sure he just burns all the hate mail telling him what a boob he is.
Barack Hussein Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20500
Mr. President,
I was born at Centennial Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. My mother would later take a job delivering babies in that same operating room only a couple years later. My parents got a divorce when I was young. There were many times during the summer when she would be forced to take my sister and I to work with her. I vividly remember the child version of myself walking the halls of the same floor I was born on in fascination as the years passed. The anesthesiologists use to bring us candy and watch movies with us. When the holidays came, a nurse by the name of Patty Vaughn (we called her Granny), would have bags of presents for my sister and I. Donna Smith, a surgical first assistant who came to America from Canada to work in a free-market healthcare system, use to babysit us.
I’m Hanging Up The White Coat Because Of Obamacare To Pursue My Doctorate In Economics And Head To Wall Street
I’m Hanging Up The White Coat Because Of Obamacare To Pursue My Doctorate In Economics And Head To Wall Street
Donna’s two-story town-home became a 3rd home (2nd was the hospital). We spent countless nights at her house.
Patty passed away when I was ten. I still remember the last box of moon pies she gave me for Halloween that year. To this day every time I see a moon pie I think of her. Donna helped me through my undergrad at Belmont University. With tuition at $30k/year money was tight. Donna never let me go without a meal.
You see Mr. President, the smell of sterile operating rooms, horrible coffee, crisp white coats, and cold metal was my destiny. The first time someone ever asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up I responded, “Anesthesiologist”. I had no idea what they even did, but it was the first big word I learned to pronounce as a 6-year-old. The hospital is my family. It’s all I’ve ever known.
Twenty-one years after my birth, in the same hospital, I listened to a fetal heart beat through my very own stethoscope. You know, it’s quite magical. As the cool, metallic bell lies upon the tight skin of a young mother’s stomach anxiety, fear and joy are all present in her face. A week before my birthday I stood at the side of the laboring mother. There’s no other way to explain childbirth than witnessing the face of God. The emotion is enveloping. You can only try (unsuccessfully) to hold the tears back. I knew at that moment what a gift God had given me. To be allowed the involvement of such a beautiful, pure moment was not to be unappreciated.
When I started college I knew where I was going. You had just won the election. I remember the cameras focusing in on Oprah Winfrey’s face. Tears streamed down. At the time, I knew nothing about politics. My biggest concern was a girl in my Anatomy & Physiology class I had a crush on. I paid little attention to Washington DC.
I worked hard. Multiple all-nighters, falling asleep behind the wheel of my car countless times, thousands of shots of espresso (I actually took a job at Starbucks to support the habit) and 15k note-cards later I had graduated in the top 5% of the country. However, during those last few years something changed.
We studied medical legislation for an entire semester. It’s no secret that the federal government has over-burdened the healthcare market, which has manifested astronomical costs to consumers. However, in 2010, democrats forced through the partisan Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), which was later funded by both democrats and republicans.
Since the passage of Obamacare everything has changed. When I started college I never intended to work for the government. I never thought I’d have a government bureaucrat dictate what I was worth to the market, and I certainly never imagined those same bureaucrats (who have absolutely no medical training) telling me how to treat my patients.
I remember the day Obamacare became law. I was sitting in the hospital working in the anesthesia department part-time to cover the costs of tuition. Dr. Alfery, a mentor of mine, looked over at me and said, “Run– It’s not too late to change majors.”
Your legislation has caused countless doctors to go into retirement early, opt for cash-only practices, and has discouraged bright, young minds from entering the field.
With student loans reaching $300k, incalculable opportunity costs and 8 years lost to school, students seeking medical degrees give their lives to the practice. Starting our careers at 30 while dictating to us how much money we can make is nothing short of destroying all incentive to enter the field.
Since that day I’ve yet to find a doctor who recommends the field. People respond to my complaints, “It’s still going to be a good job”. I don’t want a “good job”. I have not fought for a government entitlement of a “good job”. I want an incredible career. That’s what I have fought tirelessly for.
I have been on a path to enter the Air Force and continue my education in medicine. I have been dreaming of specializing in pediatric neurosurgery for half a decade.
After quite literally losing my hair from the internal conflict, considering the sunk costs and evaluating different avenues I have decided.
I have decided that I believe in the principles of a truly free-market, and I trust the free-market. Because of this deep, internal value system I cannot, with clear conscience, continue on this path. My life has value. Such value cannot be calculated by Washington bureaucrats. I won’t allow it. Only a true free-market can accurately assess the value I am capable of.
Mr President, I’m leaving the medical field. I’m hanging up the white coat. However, let me be clear. You have not won. Unless something “changes”, you’ve lost and will continue to lose. You will fail because you lack principle. Meanwhile, we will succeed because we are born of principle.
Regards,
Michael Gordon Lotfi
2014 IS RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER!!!! GET-INVOLVED!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)