Republicans to Officially Present Alternative to Obamacare

Changing Winds?

By Katie Pavlich – TownHall:  Republicans have voted more than 50 times to repeal or alter Obamacare as the popularity of the legislation continues to be nearly non-existent. In the process, Republicans have been criticized for failing to present an alternative piece of legislation to replace Obamacare. More than a dozen alternative plans have been crafted on the Hill, but Republicans haven't been able to rally around a single plan. Now, that's changing as Republican prepare to present Americans with an official alternative to the Affordable Care Act:

The plan includes an expansion of high-risk insurance pools, promotion of health savings accounts and inducements for small businesses to purchase coverage together. The tenets of the plan — which could expand to include the ability to buy insurance across state lines, guaranteed renewability of policies and changes to medical-malpractice regulations — are ideas that various conservatives have for a long time backed as part of broader bills.

But this is the first time this year that House leaders will put their full force behind a single set of principles from those bills and present it as their vision. This month, House leaders will begin to share a memo with lawmakers outlining the plan, called “A Stronger Health Care System: The GOP Plan for Freedom, Flexibility, & Peace of Mind,” with suggestions on how Republicans should talk about it to their constituents.

The timing for this legislation is great for Republicans who just came off of a special election win in Florida where Democrat Alex Sink lost by running on a fix, don't repeal platform. Not only can Republicans running for election in the fall run against Obamacare, a law that will only continue to make the lives of Americans worse and more expensive, they can run on a new alternative.

Technorati Tags: GOP,ObamaCare,Change,Hope,Healthcare,Republicans Unite,ACA,Affordable Care Act,PPACA,Alternatives,ObamaCare Alternatives,Election 2014,2014 Elections

Dr. Ben Carson, family and friends target of IRS harassment for criticizing Obama

We knew this was coming…

Examiner.com: February 11, 2014

On Monday, Dr. Benjamin Carson, the former director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, said he and his family were targeted by the IRS in retribution for comments critical of Barack Obama, Newsmax reported.

According to Carson, audits and other harassment began in May or June of 2013, just a few months after his speech at the National Prayer Breakfast. Gradually, he added, the harassment expanded to include family members, associates, and his charitable endeavors.

"I’ve been quite -- I would say astonished at the level of hostility that I have encountered," he told Newsmax TV's John Bachman.

"The IRS has investigated me. They said, ‘I want to look at your real estate holdings.’ There was nothing there. ‘Well, let’s expand to an entire [year], everything.’ There was nothing there. ‘Let’s do another year.’ Finally, after a few months, they went away. But they’ve come after my family, they’ve come after my friends, they’ve come after associates," he added.

Until now, Newsmax said, Dr. Carson has shied away from tying the IRS actions to his criticism of Obama, but now he says Americans live "in a Gestapo age" even though they may not realize it.

He also said Congress has to step up to the plate and do its job.

"The reason we have divided government is if one branch of the government gets out of control, starts thinking they’re too big for their britches, you need to be able to have control," he said.

Unfortunately, Congress as a whole has shown little interest in keeping the administration in check, but a handful of conservative Republicans have spoken out.

Carson told Newsmax this is the first time he's ever been audited by the IRS.

He also said the agency has targeted his children, but didn't go into much detail, expressing concern the agency would expand their probe even further.

Newsmax added:

He also said a charitable organization that aids inmates’ children was informed last year, for the first time in recent years, that they would no longer be receiving a $1 million annual grant from the Justice Department.

"This is solely because you were involved?" Bachman asked.

"Correct," Carson said.

He also told Newsmax these acts of retribution take place because Americans refuse to take action.

"We sit there and we say, ‘Oh this is horrible.’ But we don’t do anything. And see, that’s what I’m trying to get our congressional people, our lawmakers – they’ve got to get courage," he said. "Because why would anybody who has an agenda to fundamentally change this nation, why would they stop if no one is opposing them?"

Carson also believes the retribution will continue, but promises he will not be forced into silence.

"The only reason that I haven’t shut up is because in Romans 8 it says ‘If God be for you, who can be against you?’ And I believe in that protection that God gives you," he added.

Carson's experience is "not that different from what many others are experiencing," said GOP lawyer Cleta Mitchell. "It’s quite, quite troublesome and disturbing."

"I have heard this same story over and over and over throughout the last year," she said. "I cannot tell you how many donors to conservative organizations, people who have become active, have said ‘I was never audited until I started giving money to X conservative candidate or cause.’"

Acording to Mitchell, the targeting includes donors to candidates like Mitt Romney and Rick Perry and donors to conservative issue groups.

The IRS has not just limited itself to targeting conservative donors, Tea Party groups or well-known conservatives.

As we reported last November, a cancer patient critical of Obamacare was targeted by the IRS.

Lawmakers have also threatened to unleash the IRS on the NFL over the Washington Redskins team name and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., suggested President Obama use the IRS to silence the Tea Party.

Mitchell said the situation is "pretty scary because the people who are supposed to be the neutral arbiter and law enforcement officials appear to me to be completely in the bag for the administration."

Related:

• Dr. Ben Carson Becomes Chairman of Save Our Healthcare
• Report: Cancer patient critical of Obamacare targeted by IRS for audit
• Dem. Sen. Chuck Schumer: Obama should use IRS to curtail Tea Party
• Jay Carney to Piers Morgan: Scandals involving IRS, Benghazi, AP 'don't exist'

Technorati Tags: ObamaCare,IRS,Obamaland,Dr,Ben Carson,Big Brother Tactics,Scandals,Corruption

Dr. Ben Carson Becomes Chairman of Save Our Healthcare

Dear Friend,

I’ve got some exciting news to share with you.

My friends at American Legacy PAC are launching an important new project called Save our Healthcare - and I will be serving as Chairman.

Let me tell you a bit more about what we’ll be doing, and how you can help.

When I spoke just feet away from President Obama about the dangers of political correctness at last year’s National Prayer Breakfast, many were surprised.

After all, my background is medicine, not politics.

But it doesn’t take a brain surgeon like me to see that America is facing serious problems. And right now, the number one problem is Obamacare. 

Dropped coverage, failing websites, skyrocketing premiums - the list goes on and on.

I wish I could snap my fingers and make Obamacare disappear tomorrow, but we both know that won’t happen.

That’s why we’re launching Save our Healthcare - a national citizens’ effort to hold Washington accountable, re-center the healthcare debate around doctors and patients, and begin to answer the question of “What’s next?” - because real reform is absolutely vital.

Please join me, and sign our petition at SaveOurHealthcare.org.

It is our goal to recruit every American that believes we can do better than Obamacare, and make sure that our message is received loud and clear by every elected official and candidate in 2014.

Please sign up to support this project, and ask your friends and family to do the same.

Sincerely,

Dr. Ben Carson

Chairman, Save Our Healthcare

American Legacy PAC

 

Video: Dr. Ben Carson:  Let’s Save Our Healthcare 

And for anyone who missed this speech:

Video: Dr. Benjamin Carson's Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Published on Feb 15, 2013:  A politically incorrect speech by Dr. Benjamin Carson; criticizing government policies at the National Prayer Breakfast, attended by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.

Books:

America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great (Kindle)

Gifted Hands: The Ben Carson Story (Kindle)

Technorati Tags: ObamaCare,ObamaCare Alternatives,Books,Obamaland,Choices,National Prayer Breakfast,Dr. Ben Carson

GOP Senators’ Obamacare Replacement Beneficial to Young People says Senator Colborn as He Loses His Own Cancer Doctor in the Midst of His Cancer Fight

GOP senators’ Obamacare replacement beneficial to young people

Red Alert Politics: Just weeks into the new year and only months after Congressional Republicans attempted to defund the Affordable Care Act, a trio of Senate Republicans have unveiled a plan to replace Obamacare. And this alternative seeks to put money back in Millennials’ pockets.

Sens. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) joined forces in crafting a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, unveiling the proposal Monday. Called the Patient Choice, Affordability, Responsibility, and Empowerment Act, the law’s first step would be to repeal Obamacare. However, the proposed alternative does leave some key aspects of the current healthcare law in place, while offering some reprieves for Millennials.

“The American people have found out what is in Obamacare— broken promises in the form of increased health care costs, costly mandates, and government bureaucracy.  They don’t like it and don’t want to keep it,” Burr said in a press release. “…We can lower costs and expand access to quality coverage and care by empowering individuals and their families to make their own health care decisions, rather than empowering the government to make those decisions for them.”

Since the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, young Americans have found their premiums increasing, some as much as 260 percent. However, the law was designed to require Millennials to pay more for health insurance to subsidize coverage for the elderly, whose health insurance is deemed to be more costly.

The Patient CARE proposal, however, seeks to take the financial burden off of young people’s shoulders.

“Unfortunately, young Americans are on the front lines of experiencing the costs and consequences of Obamacare’s costly mandates and broken promises: skyrocketing premiums, fewer choices, employers deciding not to offer health insurance, cutting back hours, or not hiring all together,” Burr said in an emailed statement to Red Alert. ”They know that Obamacare is not fair to them or their future.”

Under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies can charge older Americans only three times as much as they charge “young invincibles.” This provision drives up the cost of health insurance for Millennials.

But under the Patient CARE proposal, that threshold is increased to allow insurance companies to charge the elderly a maximum of five times as much as they charge Millennials. States, though, can set their own ratio below that amount or opt out of the mandate by passing a law allowing it to do so.

Prior to the implementation of Obamacare, many states adhered to the federal benchmark proposed by Burr, Coburn and Hatch.

“Mr. President, we can see the importance of choice in the failings of ObamaCare, which is struggling to sign up young people who might just need a health plan that’s affordable instead of one that includes coverage they’ll never use or need,” Hatch said on the Senate floor Monday.

One of the Affordable Care Act’s most lauded provisions allows young people under the age of 26 to stay on their parents’ health insurance plans, and the measure has long been a staple of President Obama’s speeches and addresses surrounding his signature healthcare law. Sens. Burr, Corburn and Hatch included the provision in the Patient CARE proposal.

“While we believe fewer young consumers will utilize this option as the cost of health insurance decreases, retaining this policy has a very marginal effect on premiums and provides consumers with more choices,” it states.

The Congressional Budget office projected Obamacare would lead to 800,000 fewer jobs, likely as a result of the high cost of providing employees working more than 30 hours per week and other provisions in the employer mandate. But repealing the Affordable Care Act, as the Patient CARE measure seeks to do, provides both economic relief and opportunity for Millennials — a generation facing 15.9 percent unemployment.

“The Patient CARE Act would provide relief to young Americans by repealing Obamacare’s costly mandates, putting in place common-sense  insurance protections – like guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions, and empowering them to find a plan that meets their needs, including allowing health savings account dollars to go toward health premiums for the first time,” Burr said.

The Patient CARE legislation has yet to be introduced in the Senate, as the Republican triad hopes to “further refine and improve upon the proposal” and build support on both sides of the aisle.

Meanwhile, Cancer-stricken Sen. Tom Coburn revealed Tuesday that his health insurance under Obamacare doesn’t cover his oncologist.

The Oklahoma Republican’s spokesman confirmed to POLITICO that since the senator enrolled in his health insurance plan under Obamacare, his coverage has been reduced and he lost coverage for his cancer specialist. Coburn will continue to pay out of pocket and see his oncologist, his office said.

Luckily the former physician and Senator can pay for his doctor of choice and treatment out of pocked, but that is not the situation for many Americans who are losing their specialists, doctors or choice or their healthcare coverage completely and can’t afford the replacement.

His spokesman said Coburn’s struggles with his own doctor illustrate the need for a new policy, saying that not every American has the option to pay out of pocket for care.

“We hope the White House will work with us to make sure Americans who can’t afford to pay out of pocket don’t lose access to life-saving care,” spokesman John Hart said. “As Dr. Coburn’s experience shows, the American people are about to learn they’re going to lose access to not only their doctors and plans, but their specialists and treatments.”

Technorati Tags: Patient Choice,Affordability,Responsibility,and Empowerment Act,ObamaCare Alternatives,GOP,Tom Colburn,Cancer,ACA,Millennials,Health Insurance

Obamacare Open Enrollment is ending soon. If you have pre-existing conditions you need to understand the new rules…

C. Steven Tucker: Today is January 15, 2014 and today is the last day to enroll in an individual (non employer sponsored) health insurance plan with a February 1, 2014 effective date. After tomorrow, the next available effective date will be March 1, 2014. In fact the first national “open enrollment” period is quickly coming to a close. The last date to enroll in any individual major medical health insurance plan will be February 15, 2014 for a March effective date. So, if you have a preexisting condition or are one of the 6.3 million policy holders who have lost your plan because of the PPACA (Obamacare) you need to start familiarizing yourself with how “open enrollment” works now, not later now.

The old rules are gone

The old rules pertaining to purchasing health insurance in the individual major medical market are now gone. You can no longer purchase individual major medical health insurance coverage whenever you want, all year long. There are now specific time periods where this kind of coverage will be available in 2014 and in subsequent years. Those periods are called “open enrollment” periods. Outside of those “open enrollment” periods individual major medical health insurance coverage will not be available for sale. This means that you will not be able to get coverage for preexisting conditions.

This is why it is essential that you understand the new rules for they will affect you and everyone you know who has a preexisting condition or has lost their health insurance because of Obamacare. This is especially true because our existing state run high risk health insurance pools which provided guaranteed issue coverage for those who were declined health insurance coverage for decades before Obamacare are now being dissolved.

Buying insurance on and off the Obamacare exchange

It is important to know that you do not have to purchase health insurance at Healthcare.gov. All products sold on and off the new Obamacare HIX – “Health Insurance Exchange Marketplace” will be guaranteed issue products during the two national “open enrollment” periods. They are:

Open Enrollment Period One: 1/1/14 – 3/31/14

Open Enrollment Period Two: 11/15/14 – 1/15/15

This means that you can not be denied coverage and no exclusion riders can be placed on your policy whether you buy the product on or off the Obamacare HIX but only during these two time periods. After these two time periods you can be denied coverage. In fact, individual major medical products will not be offered between these two national “open enrollment” periods. If insurance carriers continued to offer guaranteed issue coverage all year long it would lead to adverse selection. As it did in Massachusetts.

What you need to know right now

Since time is of the essence (and their is nothing timely about purchasing health insurance on the exchange). You need to know the only reason to purchase health insurance inside the HIX – Health Insurance Exchange Marketplace (Healthcare.gov) is if you qualify for an APTX – Advance Premium Tax Credit – (subsidy) to artificially lower the high cost of the Obamacare “Medal” plans – Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum. In order to qualify for an APTX your 2014 total household MAGI – Modified Adjusted Gross Income – income after taxes and retirement contributions must be less than:

$46,960 for an individual
$62,040 for a couple
$78,120 for a family of three
$94,200 for a family of four
$110,280 for a family of five
$126,360 for a family of six

If your income is more than the aforementioned amounts, you should purchase your health insurance outside of the HIX. The same plans are available off the exchange and the application process is much faster and far more secure. Again, all major medical health insurance products purchased inside and outside the HIX will be guarantee issue (no preexisting conditions) during the two national “open enrollment” periods in 2014.

PLEASE NOTE: The cheapest 2014 Obamacare “Medal” plan is the “Bronze” plan equivalent. This plan will expose a couple or a family to $12,700 in out of pocket risk each year for in network claims. For single applicants, that risk will be $6,350. So you are better off purchasing the Silver, Gold or Platinum plans if they are within your affordable range.

For Illinois residents the best priced 2014 ‘Medal’ plans are insured and underwritten by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois a Division of Health Care Services Corporation. Find the right health insurance plan for you by exploring all of the plan options, save plans that fit your needs in your Shopping Cart and return to apply for coverage when you are ready. Don’t forget the last day for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Open Enrollment is February 15, 2014.

To shop for all plans on and off the Obamacare HIX in all 50 states click the banner below:

A cheaper option for those without preexisting conditions

If you do not have any serious preexisting conditions, you can save a lot of money if you purchase a Temporary health insurance policy for a period of one year. These health insurance policies do not cover preexisting conditions nor do they include all of the federally mandated “Essential Health Benefits” such as Maternity, Drug Rehab coverage and Pediatric Dental. This also means that they are not considered ‘Qualified Health Plans’ meaning that you will be subject to the 1% of your MAGI penalty in 2014 if you purchase one of these plans. That stated the premium difference between these plans and ‘Qualified Health Plans’ is significant. Far outweighing the additional fine you would pay to the IRS in most cases.

To run quotes for a Temporary health insurance plan off the exchange click the banner below:

If that Temporary insurance quote engine does not work in your state click the banner below:

Very Important Note: Since the PPACA mandates that all health insurance policies cover preexisting conditions during the first national “Open Enrollment” period from 1/1/14 – 3/31/14 and the second national “Open Enrollment” period from 11/15/14 – 01/15/15. You can now safely purchase Temporary health insurance knowing that when your one year Temporary policy ends you will qualify by Federal law for any ‘Qualified Health Plan’ regardless of preexisting conditions during the second annual “Open Enrollment” period in 2014. Outside of those two aforementioned “Open Enrollment” periods you will not be able to obtain coverage for a preexisting condition. For this reason you must not purchase the 6 month Temporary health insurance option.

Only the 12 month Temporary insurance option is acceptable at this juncture. If you purchase a 6 month Temporary policy your coverage will end in between the two aforementioned “Open Enrollment” periods and you will not be able to obtain another policy that will cover a preexisting condition that you may develop during the first 6 months of Temporary policy ownership. HHS may yet provide us with further guidance as to whether or not the loss of a Temporary health plan outside of “Open Enrollment” periods will qualify as a “Special Enrollment” period in 2014 so that one could obtain a “Qualified Health Plan” on a guaranteed issue basis outside of “Open Enrollment” periods. As of the date of this writing no such guidance has been received.

Technorati Tags: Speical Enrollment

The GOP’s Grandfather Weapon

Daily Caller: ‘If You Like Your Obamacare, You Can Keep Your Obamacare’: I don’t quite understand the new, near-unanimous Dem line on Obamacare – which is that because it has signed up a few million people, many previously uninsured, it is now somehow invulnerable to repeal. From WaPo:

“A fundamental political shift happened on January 1 because millions of Americans now have health insurance,” said Dan Pfeiffer, an Obama senior adviser. “The Republican strategy now means taking that insurance away. It was all theoretical until now, and the Republican repeal plan is no longer politically viable.” [E.A.]

It may be true, as the New York Times hopefully declared, that “[o]nce a benefit has been bestowed, it is nearly impossible to take it away” (though there are a million or so Americans who’ve been receiving long-term unemployment benefits who might want to argue the point). But there’s a traditional political solution to this Take Away Problem, namely the “grandfather clause.”

It wouldn’t be hard for Republican repealers to write a law that got rid of Obamacare while somehow keeping those few million who’ve signed up on some form of similar insurance. “If you like your Obamacare you can keep your Obamacare.” Exchange policies could be converted to non-exchange policies in a special, no-new-enrollments program, for example. Over time, attrition would whittle this grandfathered class down to trivial size–a process with which you’d think Obamacare’s architects would be familiar.

I don’t know if Obamacare will survive or not. Even its cockiest defenders, now whistling past the graveyard of missed deadlines, concede** that (as one of them, Josh Marshall, puts it) if “the mix of young and old people, healthy and sick” is “significantly out of whack you’ll have problems.”*** Problems that include, in Greg Sargent’s words, the possibility that “insurers pull out, and the exchanges collapse.”

But I do know that if Obamacare isn’t repealed it won’t be because two (or ten) million people in a country of 300 million have already signed up.

P.S.: Its also possible that Obamacare, instead of collapsing, will become a long term, slow-bleeding, painfully unpopular policy wound, as millions more middle class Americans who don’t qualify for subsidies get shunted into the individual market where they have to buy policies that offer them less for more. It’s not clear that this outcome is better, politically, for the Democrats.

P.P.S.: You want a health care benefit that would be nearly impossible to take away, or to grandfather? Extending Medicare to age 55 would have been more or less impossible to take away, even by grandfathering (i.e. by continuing Medicare for existing 55 year olds but denying it to new 55 year olds). Just sayin’.

_____

**– Marshall also downplays the non-payment problem –i.e. the possibility that many of the 2 million who’ve signed up on the exchanges “won’t end up paying their premiums.” He says GOPs who make this argument are “dead-enders” in an “intense form of denial.” But the non-payment threat seems like a reasonable worry for supporters of the law as well as a source of hope for opponents.

***– I favor a more panicked, pro-active approach that accepts the need for reasonably big fixes (e.g. fewer mandatory benefits). Letting Americans know improvements (if necessary) are planned might in turn help build confidence and boost enrollment.

Technorati Tags: ObamaCare,Grandfather Clause,GOP,ObamaCare Alternatives,Stand-Up,Exchanges

House Launches Investigation Into Obama’s Blatant Political and Illegal Delay of ObamaCare

Well folks… we are being played again!!

JoshuaPundit: With everything else that's going on, this hasn't gotten as much notice as it should. Even the drones at CBS can't conceal what a trainwreck this is. And now the President is simply manipulating things to move past the 2014 midterms, and not even the Obama Media can avoid it.

Oh, one more thing...it's totally illegal.The law does not allow any discretion whatsoever in its timetables. The President is simply taking unprecedented powers - again- while the media covers for him and the Republicans in the House let another opportunity go by.

The truth of the matter is that ObamaCare is truly a poorly thought out piece of legislation. That's because it was shoved through in a quasi-legal fashion using the reconciliation process reserved for budget matters to avoid having to bring the House bill to a confirming vote in the senate after Scott Brown was elected in Massachusetts.

The individual provisions of ObamaCare, the taxes, the fines, the obscene diktats - still remain and will kick in 2014. After the midterms, in 2015, you will indeed see massive layoffs and workers thrown out of their company health plans to be forced into ObamaCare health exchanges...which are still in the process of being defined!

One thing we already know is that a minimum coverage Bronze level policy will cost $20,000 per year for a family of five, that rationing will be the new normal and that long waits to see a doctor if you're even allowed to have a procedure will be standard. And amnestia? Any bill that provides amnesty for the 11 to 12 million illegal aliens now in the U.S. and gives them access to Obama Care (and it's difficult to see how they can or should be excluded)is going to exacerbate these problems.

Needless to say, the Leftist elites from President Obama on down who lied to you aren't going to be faced with this choice...they have their own plan that covers themselves and their families that's far cheaper, better and more inclusive.

I agree with talk show host Mark Levin here. Instead of allowing the Prevaricator-in chief to get away with this, what if Boehner(or hopefully someone more articulate) went on television and simply told the American people that they were shutting down the government for a week or however long it takes to slash the money going into ObamaCare to protect their healthcare, to keep their premiums from going up, to allow their employer to keep from laying them off or make them switch to part time work. That President Obama was acting illegally to try and shove through a poorly thought out and highly damaging law, and that the House, with the power of the purse was going to act for the benefit of all Americans by exercising this oversight.

As a matter of fact, the House could have stopped ObamaCare or any of this presidents other serial abuses of power at any time simply by refusing to fund them. But that would have taken courage and  principle.

How long, O Lord?’

Well low and behold… Speaker Boehner with a print out of the ObamaCare Bill… and still growing at his side actually did step up and speak out… just not vehemently enough:

WASHINGTON, DC – MAY 16: Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) stands next to a printed version of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, during a news conference on Capitol Hill May 16, 2013 in Washington, DC. On top of calling for the repeal of Obamacare, Boehner fielded questions from reporters about the Obama Administrations’ subpoena of AP phone records, the IRS scrutiny of conservative political groups’ applications for tax exemption and other issues. Credit: Getty Images

WASHINGTON (TheBlaze/AP) — Republicans finally seized upon the administration’s abrupt delay of the employer mandate in the health care law as fresh evidence that President Barack Obama’s signature domestic policy is unworkable and should be repealed, an argument that energizes the party base ahead of 2014 congressional elections. 58% of Americans now want ObamaCare repealed in its entirety.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said the administration’s unexpected postponement of a key provision designed to insure more Americans was an admission that the 2010 law is unfeasible. Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce’s oversight panel embarked on an investigation of the decision, seeking documents from the Treasury and the Health and Human Services departments.

“House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders today wrote to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, and Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, requesting documents and information regarding the administration’s decision to delay full implementation of the health care law’s employer mandate for one year. The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Tim Murphy (R-PA), has held a series of hearings on the president’s health care law and will examine the administration’s delay of the employer mandate in the coming weeks,” read a statement from House Republicans.

But the White House’s willingness to respond to the concerns of business – and avoid the specter of job layoffs due to the unpopular health care law – spares Democrats one political headache in next year’s races.

“The best delay for Obamacare is a permanent one,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said Wednesday, hours after the administration announced a one-year delay in requiring businesses with 50 or more employees to provide health coverage for their workers or pay a penalty.

Success in midterm elections depends in large part on turning out the party’s core voters, and Republicans see the latest twist as an opportunity to further vilify the health care law and ignite a GOP base already strongly opposed to Obama’s overhaul. GOP members of Congress pounced on the administration’s decision to make a point they hope will resonate with voters in their states.

“I’ve heard from countless employers in Maine who say that the onerous penalties and provisions in Obamacare provide perverse and powerful incentives to not hire new workers or to cut back on the hours that their employees are allowed to work,” said Senator Susan Collins, who faces re-election next year.

In their strategy for next year’s elections, Republicans were determined to focus on how medium and large businesses would respond to the law’s requirement and the possibility that would translate into job losses. The GOP was ready to place the blame on Democrats who voted for the law if companies had to lay off workers.

The one-year delay to January 2015 largely erases that aspect of the health care criticism in the midterm-election year.

Ken Hoagland, chairman of the conservative Restore America’s Voice and a fierce opponent of the law, said it spares House and Senate Democrats who voted for the law.

“Pushing back the economic damage of Obamacare past the next election won’t change the reality of harm to employees or to the overall economy,” Hoagland said in an interview. “It just seeks to protect those responsible for the legislation.”

Democrats sought to cast the issue as the administration listening to the business community.

“The administration has demonstrated its commitment to implement the Affordable Care Act with increased flexibility for the 4 percent of America’s businesses impacted by the employer responsibility requirement,” House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement Wednesday.

Pelosi argued that a significant majority of businesses already provide health insurance to their employees. The California lawmaker who was instrumental in ensuring the law’s passage when she was speaker of the House insisted that Americans will soon benefit from increased access to affordable health care.

Democrats have always been dogged by the fact that few Americans understand the law and many fear its effect.

In the most recent polling, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that more Americans view the law unfavorably than favorably, a negative tilt that has remained steady since Obama signed it in March 2010. The foundation’s survey this spring found 43 percent with an unfavorable opinion of the law, 35 percent with a favorable view and 23 percent undecided.

The poll also found more people saying the nation will be worse off under the law than better off, a switch from public opinion immediately following its passage.

Democratic strategist Steve Elmendorf said Americans opposed to the law remain vehement while other Americans are waiting to see what happens.

The administration’s one-year delay “impacts a very small number. … A lot more people are going to be impacted by their ability to get insurance in the exchanges, removal of pre-existing conditions and by ultimately what the price is going to be. … I think in terms of the `14 elections, I just don’t see this particular decision having much impact.”

Brad Dayspring, a spokesman for the Senate Republicans’ campaign committee, called the move “the worst of all worlds for Democratic candidates” because it will frustrate liberals who support the law while doing little to quiet Republican derision.

“What is a Democratic candidate supposed to say in light of this?” Dayspring said. “‘Yes, I supported Obamacare, but thankfully we delayed it to protect you from how bad it is’?”

Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, who won last year in Republican-leaning North Dakota, offered a template for how Democrats could respond when faced with questions about the health care law and the administration’s latest move.

“I have repeatedly said that there is good and bad in the health care law, and we need to improve it. One improvement needed is to make it as simple as possible for our businesses to comply. I applaud the administration for delaying this requirement until there is a system in place that is workable for businesses,” she said in a statement.

Thus far the response from the Obama Administration:

There are people working on alternatives out there… people like Dr. Ben Carson.  Get-involved and educate yourself on this law.

Comments:

desertspeaks

Jul. 4, 2013 at 10:36am

Avoiding Obamacare! Rescind your signature with social security, and yes it is possible and legal!

Secondly, know that UNLESS you are a naturalized citizen, you are NOT a US CITIZEN! only US CITIZENS are subject to Obamacare!!!
STATUTE AT LARGE to become a US citizen, act of Congress of April 1802, (2 Stat. 153, c. 28, § 1; Rev. St. § 2165 THAT ACT SAYS, and PAY ATTENTION; provides that “an alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, AND NOT OTHERWISE!!.”

The following of the act is paraphrased to save room for this to post!

1) That YOU 2 yrs prior to admission absolutely renounced and abjure all allegiance and fidelity “before a court” to any potentate or sovereignty.
2) And had given YOUR intentions to the court to become a U.S. Citizen / SUBJECT of a corporate nature in writing.
There is no other provision of the acts of congress under which YOU could have been naturalized. The Court and public law, did State” AND NOT OTHERWISE.” “which proceedings shall be recorded by the clerk of the court.” And since the STATUTE AT LARGE, NOT code, says IT SHALL BE RECORDED in fact two.
3) reside “within” the US for 5 yrs, 1 yr in the state or territory where such court is and be a “MAN” of good moral character.
If you haven’t done ALL the above, YOU ARE NOT A US CITIZEN!

Your welcome!

See more comments at TheBlaze

Related: 

Obama Administration Guts Obamacare

5 Effects Obamacare Will Have on Working Americans

McCaughey: Obamacare is About Funding Democrats

California Schools To Train Kids To Sell ObamaCare

Washington Examiner: Kaiser: Most Say Nation Will be Worse Off Under Obamacare

Was Justice Roberts Intimidated Into Voting for ObamaCare?

Mendacity and ObamaCare: "It is better to do this right than fast."

Consequences of ObamaCare Delays

UnitedHealth Leaves California Insurance Market

ObamaCare’s Death Knell

Desperate Congress Realizes They're Getting ObamaCare, Seeks a Waiver

Books: 

ObamaCare Survival Guide  -  Nick Tate

Beating Obamacare  -  Betsy McCaughey

 Obama Health Law  -  Betsy McCaughey

By Marion Algier  -  cross-posted at AskMarion

Technorati Tags: Obamaland,ObamaCare,ObamaCare delay,watch the other hand,politics,repeal and replace ObamaCare,defund ObamaCare,ObamaTax,manipulation of the public,The Blaze,Speaker John Boehner,Ben Carson,ObamaCare lies,John Roberts,smoke and mirrors,stand-up America,get-involved,Betsy McCaughey,Election 2014

A Healthier Alternative to ObamaCare

The Foundation

The Patriot Post: "In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws: its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any." --James Madison

Editorial Exegesis

"[T]he Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is no more popular now than when it was passed, as Americans have come to realize that it will neither protect patients nor provide for affordable care. While full repeal of the law is not within the realm of short-term political reality ... repeal should nonetheless remain the end goal, either one piece at a time for now or root and branch. The price tag for Obamacare has gone from shocking to preposterous. In March 2010, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the ten-year cost of the law at $898 billion; by February 2013, that number had climbed to $1.6 trillion, and it is likely that further revisions will be in the upward direction. ... As mind-boggling as its price tag is, expense is not the main reason to repeal Obamacare. What is not sufficiently understood is that Obamacare does not reform or regulate health insurance: It effectively abolishes health insurance. ... In short, the system created by this ill-advised law would prevent the emergence of normally functioning markets in medical services and health insurance. Instead, it establishes a top-down system of price controls and subsidies that will discourage healthy people from buying insurance in the first place, reward those who exploit the system's defects, and discourage doctors and other health-care providers from extending their care to those who most need it. ... Republicans made a critical error during the debate over Obamacare when they left the impression that they approved of the U.S. health-care system. In truth, that system was deeply defective before Obamacare was passed.... With a functioning market in place, offering assistance through tax benefits or direct subsidies becomes a much simpler set of challenges, as does enacting targeted, narrow regulation to curb the abusive practices toward which the health-insurance industry is occasionally inclined. ... Republicans can and should begin taking it apart and building something better on the ruins." --National Review

Upright

"OK, Obamacare. Up on the table. It's time for your annual physical. Three years old, eh? ... I can see one problem already. Have you seen these tax hikes? Let's see -- five, 10, 15, 18 tax hikes in all. ... It all adds up, Obamacare. It's not healthy. Hate to tell you this, but it gets worse. See this? That's the number of people who are going to lose their current health insurance because of you. Not thousands, but 7 million, according to the Congressional Budget Office. ... Wait. Obamacare, didn't you say that nobody who liked his current plan would lose it? Yes. You promised it, in fact -- repeatedly. I'd better note that in your chart. You may be getting uncomfortable, but we're not done yet. Over here, there's another serious problem: You're hurting hiring.... There's more. It's a good thing you're sitting down. It turns out you're making it more difficult to access Medicare services. ... Finally, I see that insurance premiums are going to skyrocket under you. It's those coverage mandates you put in place; they're the culprit. ... You can pay the receptionist on your way out. No, I'm afraid we don't accept that insurance plan anymore." --Heritage Foundation president Ed Feulner

"We could improve America's future just by recognizing what so-called 'public choice' economists started to realize around the time of World War II: that government isn't just a 'public servant.' It's not a demon, either. But government and its employees are selfish, like anyone else. That explains most of their behavior better than occasional shifts to the political left or right. We all tend to overspend and act lazy when we can get away with it. In the private sector, though, that eventually means that you get fired or realize you're depleting your bank account. In Washington, the Fed just prints more money. As long as Washington spends other people's money, there will be little incentive for them to be prudent -- or humble." --columnist John Stossel

"Three weeks ago we gave Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood government a $250 million economic stimulus package, and this week we decided to double-down in our national support for anti-Semites by giving the Palestinian Authority its own $500 million bonus. ... It is beyond strange how a Western elite so carefully attuned to racism or even racial insensitivity allows itself to not just turn a blind eye to the avalanche of anti-Semitic hate pouring out of the Muslim world, but then denigrates its critics as 'Islamophobes' and subsidizes some of the worst offenders. ... I'm reminded of the scene from the movie adaptation of The Two Towers when King Theoden observes the approaching army of Saruman and asks, 'What can men do against such reckless hate?' Apparently the American answer is, 'Give it lots of money.'" --National Review's David French

Insight

"Nothing just happens in politics. If something happens you can be sure it was planned that way." --President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882 - 1945)

"There should be a tax on every man that wanted to get a government appointment, or be elected to office. In two years that tax alone would pay our national debt.'" --humorist Will Rogers (1879 - 1935)

Demo-gogues

"[ObamaCare] helped us honor our promise of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to the American people. ... And just think, if you could be a photographer or writer, start your own business, be self-employed, as well as change jobs or start a business and not have to be constrained by whether you had affordable and accessible quality health care. Well that's what this legislation does." --House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

"[Sequestration] will cause pain. It will cause economic dislocation. And then, the wailing will begin. ... And they'll say, 'Well, okay, instead of the sequester which is causing all this pain, let's cut Social Security. Let's cut Medicare. Let's cut medicaid.' This is the first step down a slippery slope toward 'you work until you die.' And that's why this has to be fought so vigorously." --Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL)

"We're talking about millions of kids dying -- being shot down by assault weapons. This is not just a political issue, it's a moral issue." --Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) (Fact is, of the 12,664 murders in 2011, the most recent year for complete FBI statistics, there were 323 homicides committed with a rifle of any type, and likely fewer than 50 children (those under age 18) killed with rifles. By comparison, there were 496 murders committed with hammers in the same year.)

“Think about what happened out in -- where Gabby Giffords, my good friend, was shot and mortally [sic] wounded. Think about when that young man had to try to change the clip. Had he only had a 10-round clip when he changed the clip and fumbled and had it knocked out of his hands, how many more people would have been alive? And tell me, tell me how it violates anyone's constitutional right to be limited to a clip that holds 10 rounds instead of 30, or in Aurora, 100." --Joe Biden

Dezinformatsia

"I wonder, in Noah's ark, when God had pairs of everything, were they, were they male-female, or could they have been lesbian or homosexual couples? I betcha a few, a few lesbian or homosexual couples snuck through there." --radio host Dr. Mike Newcomb

"You do understand Dr. Carson's success is, in part, thanks to government assistance aka college loans? No one builds it alone." --MSNBC's Toure

"When the media covers something, it's important to do basic homework. You can't just repeat something over and over again until it sounds true. It's not fair." --NBC's Matt Lauer

"90% of Americans want universal background checks. ... Among those people who own guns, 85% support. Are you thwarting the will of the American people by standing in opposition to universal background checks?" --NBC's David Gregory to NRA's Wayne LaPierre

"In the months since the Newtown, Conn., school massacre, some gun rights supporters have repeatedly compared U.S. gun control efforts to Nazi restrictions on firearms, arguing that limiting weapons ownership could leave Americans defenseless against homegrown tyrants. ... But comparisons between a push by gun control advocates in the U.S. and Hitler have become so common ... they're often asserted as fact, rather than argument." --Associated Press writer Adam Geller

Newspulper Headlines:

We Blame Global Warming: "Challenge to Australian Prime Minister Evaporates" --Associated Press

That's Actually Fewer Than We'd Have Expected: "12 People Left Behind During America's Recovery" --Huffington Post

The Lonely Lives of Scientists: "Giant Squid DNA Study Produces 'Tantalizing Questions' for Scientists" --Agence France-Presse

Help Wanted: "Porta-Potty Serial Arsonist Sought" --Seattle Times

Bottom Story of the Day: "Public Opinion Stays Static on Affordable Care Act" --NationalJournal.com

(Thanks to The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto)

Village Idiots

"Did you realize that over 90% of the guns in this country are owned by white people in the suburbs and in rural areas? Ninety-percent of our guns are not owned by African-Americans, hispanics, minority groups, they're owned by white people. Now what are these white people so afraid of out in the suburbs?" --filmmaker Michael Moore

"We're going to work on this ['assault weapon' ban]. We're going to find the votes. And it deserves a vote and let's see if we can get it done." --White House chief of staff Denis McDonough

"Scientific evidence affirms that children have similar developmental and emotional needs and receive similar parenting whether they are raised by parents of the same or different genders. If a child has 2 living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interests of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation." --American Academy of Pediatrics endorsing same-sex marriage

"'Cold Dead Hand' is about you heartless motherf-----s unwilling to bend for the safety of our kids. Sorry if you're offended by the word safety!" --actor Jim Carrey on his new "song" about the bitter people who cling to their guns.

"What the extremists do is spread fear and unrealistic theories of conspiracies and the citizenry that needs to be armed because the government is possibly tyrannical, and they need their arms to defend themselves against the tyrannical government." --NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo

"I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom. ... [I]f you want to smoke, I think you have a right to do so and I would protect that. ... You certainly have a right to have a gun if you want. If you want to eat a lot and get fat, you have a right to do it. But our job as government is to inform the public." --New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg

Essential Liberty

"New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg said that he thinks 'there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom.' If he really believes that, then he truly is a little tyrant. ... If the state can infringe on freedom at 'certain times,' then it can do it at any time. Once that wall has been breached, it's only a matter of how far government goes. And as we've seen, and as Thomas Jefferson foresaw, the trend has been for government to grow and liberty to yield. That wall has been breached and it only gets bigger as the invaders drive deeper into occupied territory. The Declaration of Independence rightly said that people are born with unalienable rights given them by their Creator. ... Our rights, our freedoms, our liberties are with us when we are born, and we lose them only when they are stolen from us, when lawmakers impose their views on others. There is no balance, no halfway mark or compromise that produces some ill-defined greatest good. ... Not so many years ago, H.L. Mencken thoughtfully noted that 'The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.'" --Investor's Business Daily

Short Cuts

"In case you missed it, on his first mission as Secretary of State, John Kerry boasted to a group of Germans, 'In America, you have a right to be stupid.' A right?! For years now, the Democrats have relied on it to win elections. As for horse-faced John Kerry, were it not for the terminally stupid, he would have spent the last 30 years not in the Senate, but in a stable." --columnist Burt Prelutsky

"A 28-year-old woman from Serbia has a rare brain condition where she sees everything upside down. The good news? She's now been given a job at the White House as President Obama's economic adviser." --comedian Jay Leno

"President Obama's limo wouldn't start at Ben Gurion Airport after they rolled it off the U.S. transport plane. It turns out the Israeli ground crew filled it up with the wrong type of fuel and it wouldn't start. They filled the tank with water instead of wine." --comedian Argus Hamiton

"You can't be against fascism and for government expansion. That's like being against mass shootings while arming the mentally ill. If the push for gay marriage is like the civil rights movement of the 60s, did the civil rights movement have this much self-back patting?" --humorist Frank J. Fleming

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Nate Jackson for The Patriot Post Editorial Team

Technorati Tags: ObamaCare,ObamaCare alternatives,wake-up America,step-up America,The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

The Patient OPTION Act: True Patient-Centered Care

FreedomWorks

As we eagerly await the upcoming Supreme Court decision here at FreedomWorks, we’ve been reviewing our favorite bills to repeal and replace ObamaCare.

One of the most comprehensive “replace” bills we’ve seen so far is the Patient OPTION Act (H.R. 4224) introduced by Congressman Paul Broun, M.D. (R-GA). The Patient OPTION Act fully repeals and replaces ObamaCare with a system that puts more choice and freedom in the hands of the patient. Rather than focusing on “expanding coverage”—a goal that puts policymakers in a trap that inevitably leads to more centralized government control, a la ObamaCare—this plan focuses on two commonsense goals: (1) reduce costs through greater choice and competition, (2) expand individual liberty.

For more information about this bill, including a summary of its major provisions, you can view our guide to the Patient OPTION Act.

TAKE ACTION: Urge your Members of Congress to cosponsor the Patient OPTION Act!

Patient_OPTION_Act_Summary.pdf - 657.14 KB

 

Technorati Tags: Health Care Reform,Congressman Paul Broun,health care reform,ObamaCare,OPTION Act,Patient OPTION Act,C4,repeal and replace ObamaCare,FreedomWorks

Replacing ObamaCare: True Insurance

By Daniel Anderson on April 30, 2012 -  FreedomWorks

Consider this: Why does your job offer health insurance, but not auto insurance? Certainly, you need to be healthy to come into work, but most Americans also need a car to get to work. For that matter, why doesn’t your job offer home or life insurance? What makes health insurance a common, nearly-ubiquitous benefit of employment in the United States?

The prevalence of employer group-based health insurance in America is a result of World War II. During the lead-up to the war in the Great Depression, there was an enormous surplus of labor relative to demand. However, as millions of Americans were sent overseas to fight in World War II, the labor pool shrunk dramatically. At the same time, the demand for labor skyrocketed as the federal government poured enormous resources into war production, creating a massive industry that desperately needed workers.

Given these conditions, businesses would normally raise wages in order to attract workers. However, the federal government also imposed wage controls on many American industries. In order to get around these wage controls, businesses began to offer health insurance to lure in prospective employees, along with other “fringe benefits.”

Following the war, Congress created a tax code that rewarded employer group-based health insurance. If businesses provided their employees with health insurance, that insurance benefit would not be taxed. However, if businesses simply raised their employees’ wages, the wages would be taxed. Understandably, most businesses decided to offer health insurance to their employees instead of raises.

In this way, the federal government largely created the employer group-based health insurance system. This system is unique to the United States. Every other developed country has some form of government health care, whether it’s truly socialized medicine such as in Britain, or a single-payer system like in Sweden. Our system is a result of both the unforeseen consequences of government involvement in business, and the natural American aversion to big government.

For most Americans, employer-based health care works. A March 28th Reason-Rupe poll found that:

• 87% of Americans are covered by health insurance

• 63% of Americans with health insurance are covered by employer group-based plans

• 23% of Americans with health insurance are covered by Medicare or Medicaid

• 58% of Americans are satisfied with their overall health care

• 23% of Americans are dissatisfied with their overall health care

So, the vast majority of Americans have health insurance coverage, a majority of Americans with health insurance receive it through their employer, and a majority of Americans are satisfied with things as they are.

What does this mean?

Simply put, there’s little reason to dramatically alter health insurance in America as things stand. Unfortunately, the provisions in ObamaCare will force a radical, fundamental shift in health care from employer group-based health insurance to health insurance exchanges controlled by the federal government. ObamaCare won’t destroy the employer group-based system, but it will change the basic dynamics of the health insurance market.

Still, while the polling numbers strongly support the continuation of the employer group-based system, not everyone is happy with it. After all, more than a tenth of Americans lack coverage, and nearly a quarter of Americans are dissatisfied with their overall health care.

What’s the best way to respond to those numbers? Congress could follow the ObamaCare route: mandating insurance and expanding federal control of health care through government health plans. For most Americans, this unconstitutional and expensive path toward addressing the problem is unacceptable.

The solution to helping people left behind by the employer group-based health insurance system isn’t an expansion of the government group-based health insurance system. Instead, we ought to encourage true, individual insurance.

What are some of the benefits of true insurance? The main benefit is portability. For most Americans, losing or leaving their jobs means losing their health insurance as well, since the two are connected. This increases the hardship of the unemployed, while simultaneously discouraging entrepreneurial Americans from leaving their jobs and their health insurance in order to start their own businesses.

But if you purchase health insurance separately from your job, like you purchase auto or homeowner’s insurance, that insurance now stays with you regardless of your employment status. The portability of true, individual insurance helps to calm some of the anxieties that come with unemployment while also freeing up America’s entrepreneurs to start businesses and to create jobs.

True insurance’s portability also helps to deal with the problem of pre-existing conditions in health care. The problem of pre-existing conditions should not be overstated, as it only afflicts about 1% of Americans. Still, it was a key impetus behind the push for ObamaCare, and all health care policy experts who hope to implement reform must address it. While by no means a silver bullet, the ability to keep the same insurance provider throughout several jobs, and possibly throughout your entire career, helps to alleviate the pre-existing conditions problem.

Most people acquire their “pre-existing condition” during their adult life, while in the workforce. When that happens, their insurance will most likely cover the new condition, similar to other ailments. But once these people change jobs, they now suddenly have a “pre-existing condition.” The portability and continuity of true insurance would do a great deal to reduce the number of Americans who have trouble accessing health care due to their pre-existing conditions.

Finally, true insurance provides Americans with greater choice and freedom with their health care. In a sense, when you apply for a job today, you’re also applying for that job’s health plan. Unfortunately, you don’t really know the details of the health plan until you’ve already taken the job and the plan.

What if you purchase true, individual insurance? You can pick a plan that the right premium and deductible. You can ensure that the plan covers the things you want covered. In short, you can get a plan that appeals to you, instead of being forced into your employer’s pre-packaged plan, which may or may not cost what you would prefer or cover what you want covered.

So, there are several major advantages to a true insurance system. How do we encourage its growth? The most important step to growing the true insurance market is to equalize tax treatment of the employer and true insurance systems. Full deductibility of all health care expenditures would help to level the playing field in the insurance market, thereby increasing patient choice.

The employer group-based health insurance system works for most Americans, but it’s not perfect. For those Americans who would prefer something different, we ought to forgo government group-based health insurance like in ObamaCare in favor of encouraging true, individual health insurance.

TAKE ACTION: Urge your Members of Congress to cosponsor the Patient OPTION Act!