The Reaper Curve: Ezekiel Emanuel used the above chart in a Lancet article to illustrate the ages on which health spending should be focused. "Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions" The Lancet, January 31, 2009 making way for death panels as part of his system and part of the ObamaCare plan!
PJ Tatler: Ezekial Emanuel, the brother of Rahm Emanuel and former health care adviser to President Obama, is just salivating at the thought of the demise of health insurance companies. Why, he’s downright gleeful.
Ezekial Emanuel, brother of Chicago mayor and former Obama staffer Rahm Emanuel, is cheerily predicting that Obamacare will bring about the death of the private insurance companies in the US. Ezekiel makes the provocative prediction in the New Republic.
Emanuel writes that Obamacare is already causing insurance companies to either die or evolve into something else. “The good news is you won’t have insurance companies to kick around much longer,” he writes.
Obamacare was not sold to the American people as a means of destroying private health insurance companies or even forcing them into turning into a different type of company. It was sold as a means of bringing insurance costs down while increasing access. It has turned out to cause about 6.2 million Americans to lose their insurance while forcing some Americans to buy insurance or pay a fine to the IRS. “If you like your healthcare, you can keep your healthcare,” President Barack Obama repeatedly promised. Emanuel’s article provides more evidence that the president was knowingly lying, and that people like Emanuel, who were close advisers while Obamacare was being written, knew that it would cause chaos for millions of Americans and their insurance.
Emanuel writes that Obamacare is already causing some medical services providers to seek exclusive contracts with employers, cutting insurance plans out but also limiting the choices available to customers.
Ezekiel has consistently predicted, after Obamacare became law, that it would kill insurance companies. While Obamacare was being debated, Democrats denied that its purpose was to destroy private health insurance companies. Emanuel claims, without providing any evidence, that Americans will be happier in the new employer-based health provider networks.
“So be prepared to kiss your insurance company good-bye forever,” Emanuel concludes at the end of the article.
About 85% of Americans were happy with their healthcare before Obamacare.
It’s really no secret that the Democrats’ plan all along was single payer. Some just aren’t willing to admit it.
Update: Emanuel appeared on Morning Joe talking about how great Obamacare is doing. He didn’t, however, mention his glee at the coming demise of the insurance companies.
This administration is canceling health insurance plans all over the nation that they designed under the PPACA regulations in order to force these existing policy holders to subsidize the high cost of the “Medal” plans which will be available inside and outside the new ‘Health Insurance Marketplace” beginning 1/1/14. This is a deliberate action the administration new about for more than 3 years.
Cancer and Obamacare victim, Bill Elliott and C. Steven Tucker each got letters from the IRS, on the same day, just before Thanksgiving, to let them know they are being audited.
That would be this man, suffering from a long bout with cancer, whose life had already, potentially been put to an end by Obamacare, and the man who helped him recover his cancelled health insurance policy.
How it has been playing out and fits into the whole “big f___ing deal,” as Vice President Biden more aptly called the “Affordable Care Act”? See link below:
C. Steven Tucker’s answers this Friday evening (indented) to questions from the Bound:
Q1: So Tuck, what out of Hell just happened? So, Bill Elliot comes on Megyn Kelly’s Fox News show on the 7th, says his insurance has been canceled due to Obamacare and since he can’t pay for his cancer treatments he’s just going to let nature run its course. You help him understand that previously written law requires his insurance company not cancel him. (And then you write a killer article warning other Americans of the same!) He and his company connect and they reinstate him. Now he indicates he’s in remission? And then what day did you each get a letter from the IRS and what did it say?
Bill got his audit letter on the same day I received mine. That date was Monday November 25th. Bill’s letter informed him that is being officially audited in the spring of 2014 whereas the IRS sent me a letter simply demanding $4,000 from me for the year 2003 and $2,000 from the year 2010 which must be received at their offices no later than December 26, 2013. Merry Christmas from the IRS.
Q2. So, Happy Thanksgiving from the New Washington D.C., O Sovereign United States Citizen patriots in the way of Obamacare Marxofascism, right? How do you feel about this?
I am disgusted that the IRS can pull numbers out of thin air, demand the money in a month’s time and that there is no statute of limitations. 2003? For God’s sake! Worse yet, my taxes are prepared each quarter by a professional CPA. I pay on time and I do not get ‘tax refunds’ and this is the thanks I get for doing the right thing each and every quarter year after year. And Bill worked for the government during the tax year in question so the government agency he worked for would assure that his IRS fillings were accurate. So this whole thing is a political witch hunt. There is a reason that Lois Lerner pleaded the 5th during congressional testimony and their is a reason that the IRS chief counsel repeated the phrase “I do not recall’ more than 80 times during his congressional testimony. This is tyranny. Plain and simple.
Q3. The news of it is getting all over the patriot blogosphere. Anything you believe is important to add, or correct, by this moment?
No. The New Media has done a phenomenal job of covering this story. I am eternally grateful for their due diligence and for their willingness to consistently perform the job that Barack Obama’s Praetorian Guard media refuses to do.
Q4. I’m expecting to see you on network TV and radio about this, any updates there?
I have sent the follow up information to Megyn Kelly and hope that she has either Bill or I on her show for an important follow up to this story.
The American people need to know that there are existing Federal laws that protect them from having their health insurance terminated when they are sick. Barack Obama has been lying to the American people for 4 years. Public law 104-191 (HIPAA) section 2742 disallows any health insurer from canceling your health insurance coverage when you are sick. That law was passed by congress and signed by president Clinton in 1997.
Here is the salient point. HIPAA is a federal law duly codified by congress and signed by president Clinton. HIPAA is referred to and expanded upon throughout the PPACA. It trumps a posting in the federal register by HHS secretary Kathleen Sebellius which was made AFTER the PPACA was signed into law by president Obama. This posting in the federal register literally changed the definition of ‘grandfathered status’ that was originally written in the PPACA in 2010.
This posting has resulted in 5.8 million policy holders losing their health insurance coverage. Many whom are struggling with a major medical illness like Bill. This is exactly the opposite of what Barack Obama promised over and over and over again when he said “If you like your plan you can keep your plan and no one will take it away from you, period.” Using public law 104-191 section 2742, Bill was able to get his policy restored with the help of South Carolina governor Nikki Haley. Other Americans should be using the same section of HIPAA law to force their health insurers to comply and restore their coverage immediately. Most especially if they are sick.
Moreover, let me address another lie Barack Obama has been telling. That the plans being terminated are ‘substandard plans’. The plans being canceled now are not substandard plans. Millions of these health insurance plans were designed in large part by HHS regulations which were passed down after 9/23/2010. These regulations required all major medical policies sold in the U.S. to include unlimited lifetime maximum coverage amounts. 65 ‘free’ preventative care exams. “Children” staying on your plan until age 26 even if they are no longer living with you, dependent upon you or are even married.
This administration is canceling health insurance plans all over the nation that they designed under the PPACA regulations in order to force these existing policy holders to subsidize the high cost of the “Medal” plans which will be available inside and outside the new ‘Health Insurance Marketplace” beginning 1/1/14. This is a deliberate action the administration new about for more than 3 years.
As far as scheduled radio interviews. I will be on the Dan Proft and Bruce Wolf show on Chicago’s WLS Am890 at 7:35 a.m. central time on Tuesday December 2nd and later that same day with my two favorite “Chicks On The Right” on 93.1 WIBC in Indianapolis.
Q5. And… guessing you’re getting in touch with legal council and with one or two people who work for us Citizens in Congress?
I am indeed.
Q6. So, I suppose in addition to health insurance advise… you recommend to your friends who spell out the difference between authentic America and the Antiamerica of growing globalist collectivism… to keep their tax records secured and handy, eh?
Yes I do.
Bill Elliott
Part 1: Will our heroes do something?
Part 2: How Elliott and Tucker represent the smoking gun of Obamacare sabotage
And to those young people who signed this petition… you will some day also be old, or it could be your parents, grandparents or mentor. As anyone knows who ever studied history or lived in a system where euthanasia is acceptable…
First it will be the seniors with chronic illnesses…
Then it will anyone over a certain age…
Then it will be the special needs and handicapped people
And then it will anyone who stands up or speaks out against the system!!
Former governor and vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is blasting HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius for becoming a one-woman death panel. Sebelius is denying a young girl a lifesaving lung transplant — forcing the girl’s family to look to the courts for help.
The government will bend the rules left and right to harass targeted taxpayers, conservative patriots, selected journalists, etc., but it will strictly exercise inconsistent and subjective rules to deny a child a shot at life. And they called us liars when we spoke of “death panels” – faceless bureaucrats coming between you and your doctor to make life and death decisions about a loved one’s survival. It doesn’t sound so far fetched anymore, does it?
A federal judge has intervened to give hope to a young girl who needs a lung transplant as doctors have only given her weeks to live. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius received national condemnation after she refused to get involved to help the girl.
Sarah Murnaghan has been hospitalized for three months with end-stage cystic fibrosis. She is not giving up hope. She wants to be a singer, but needs a lung transplant to live. Her parents have been with her constantly while she waits at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.
Sarah’s parents asked a federal judge to intervene and order the Obama administration to alter longstanding organ-donation rules so she can get the lung transplant she desperately needs. A report shows the judge has given them hope that she can be put on the adult list.
Council and Heal: Birthday girl Clara Cowell has proved that it's never too late to change bad habits. At 102 years old, she finally quit smoking after picking up the habit in 1931. She did not even quit smoking because of her health - she finally stopped the habit because her family was worried that falling ash would set her house on fire.
According to the Daily Mail, Ms. Cowell has smoked two to three cigarettes a day since picking up the habit - amounting to about 60,000 cigarettes in her lifetime. But the centenarian finally quit at the urges of her family, who worried about the safety of her habit.
Ms. Cowell lives independently. Her daughters say that the secret to her success may be rooted in hard work and poverty, but also something more surprising: her cigarettes and her daily habit of a cup of tea with whiskey.
Indeed, Ms. Cowell's life has been rather tough. When her husband, a coal worker, was called in to fight during World War II, Ms. Cowell tasked herself with raising their four children by herself and working in an ammunition factory. A tailoress by trade, Ms. Cowell sewed parachutes. She says that, like many of the other girls, she took some silk for herself to sew some underwear. She says that the war was hard, that there was never enough to eat or time to sleep, but they did not suffer from the experience.
Ms. Cowell suffered from tuberculosis as a child, but does not believe in medication. At her age, she is now so sprightly that she wowed crowds at her 101st birthday as she performed a waltz. She says that she used to love to dance when she was young, particularly the waltz and the foxtrot.
Ms. Cowell appears to still have quite a bit of life left. Her daughters reported that they spent her birthday at a pub.
In addition to her four children, Ms. Cowell has nine grandchildren, 12 great-grandchildren and four great-great-grandchildren.
*We are certainly not encouraging people to smoke or to continue their negative habits until late in life. Some of us are blessed with great genes and they can do everything wrong… and still live into their 100’s with overall good health. But most of us aren’t that lucky. And with the cuts before us, especially for seniors, the better you live throughout your life, the better chance you have for living longer in the future.
Today while working my shift in the emergency room, an old lady was brought in very sick and in fact near death. I did my usual workup and evaluation and attempted to administer life saving treatment. It was my plan to admit this woman to the hospital. I found out a little later that this same woman had been a patient here just slightly more than 2 weeks ago with a DIFFERENT DIAGNOSIS. I was told that if this woman was admitted, the hospital would not be paid.
The new Medicare rule now is that if the same Medicare patient is re-admitted to the hospital within 30 days, the hospital will not be paid. When they first started this nonsense they said this only applied to patients with the same diagnosis. Now they have "expanded" the rule to include re-admissions for any reason. So if you're in the hospital for pneumonia, and 3 weeks later, you break your leg.......too bad. Medicare will not pay the hospital to fix your leg.
A little later a man was brought in by ambulance, very sick, in pain, and near death. I did my usual evaluation and treatment, doing my best to ease pain and stabilize this man's illness. He needed to be admitted. To my chagrin I found out that he had been treated for the SAME problem at a DIFFERENT HOSPITAL about 10 days prior. If I admitted this man, our hospital would be paid nothing. I admitted the man.
My friends I am caught in a terrible position. I could have given treatment to both of these people and sent them out. There is no doubt that both of them would have died. Oh, I could also be sued for malpractice, but nobody cares about that. That's why we have insurance, right?
My other choice is to admit the person, knowing full well that the hospital will have to absorb the cost of care without hope of remuneration.
This is the climate we as healthcare providers find ourselves in today. How many small and struggling hospitals will survive under such ludicrous payment schemes? Indeed many facilities will close their doors. Many doctors will retire early or simply go do something else. As more and more are added to the Obamacare rolls, there will be less and less access. People will get sicker and yes, people will die because of it.
I had a sick and sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach today after both of these incidents. We have a good hospital. Our nurses, technicians, and support staff work very hard and they deserve to be paid for their efforts. I am not so worried about myself as I am near retirement, but I worry for all the younger folks in the healthcare business and I worry about our seniors who are in the long run going to be sacrificed as the government implements cost cutting shenanigans to cover up their broken promise made way back in 1964.
List of Obama’s Czars Plus Two – Updated: 8.18.09 – Remember when the Czars were the hot topic… but they overwhelmed us and forgot them to do they scary dirty jobs…
Star Parker: “America's 'soulless materialism,' declining birthrate leading to disaster”
WND: With the first presidential debate and the only vice-presidential debate behind us, it seems pretty clear that so-called “social issues” are not going to get much attention in this year’s presidential politics.
It’s unfortunate, I think. We deceive ourselves to permit the assumption that values and behavior are not the real drivers behind our economic problems.
The fiscal crisis of our entitlement programs is the direct result of these values and behavior.
The fiscal soundness of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is rooted in the assumption that those working can fund the needs of our elderly through payroll taxes. In the case of Social Security, we’re talking about retirement income. In the case of Medicare, we’re talking about health costs of the aged, and, Medicaid, long-term care of low income elderly.
When these programs were founded, the approach of using payroll taxes to fund care for our elderly seemed like a viable idea.
The bottom has fallen out, however, because of changes in our behavior. There are fewer and fewer workers per retiree as result of longer life spans and a shrinking workforce.
In 1950, there were 16 working Americans for every retiree. Today, there are less than three. According to projections, by 2030 there will be less than two.
It doesn’t take a supercomputer to realize that if we don’t reduce the retirement and health care resources available to our elderly, the burden on each working American to provide those resources increases substantially when they must be provided for each retiree by two, rather than 16, workers.
Yet the discussion about this crisis is 100 percent focused on how to cut the spending, and zero attention is spent on restoration of values that could rebuild families, produce more children and stop destroying the unborn.
According to a new report just out from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the overall fertility rate of American women – defined by the number of births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44 – is the lowest ever recorded since the government started gathering this information.
According to demographers, a fertility rate of 2.1 is necessary to keep a population at a steady state – which means that the overall population remains the same size over time. The 2.1 rate means that each adult woman produces 2.1 children on average over her lifetime.
After years of the U.S. fertility rate hovering slightly above 2.1, it has now dropped below to 1.9. That means the overall U.S. population is shrinking.
We generally look to Europe to see low fertility rates and shrinking populations. However, according to the Economist magazine, the U.S., at 1.9, now has a fertility rate lower than France, whose fertility rate stands at 2.0.
A change in prevailing values could reverse this trend. But the opposite is happening.
According to a new Gallup poll, for the first time most Americans feel that government should not promote any particular set of values.
In 1993, the first year Gallup did this annual survey, 53 percent said government should promote traditional values and 42 percent said that no particular set of values should be promoted. Now, in this latest survey, it is the opposite. Fifty-two percent say no particular set of values should be promoted, and 44 percent say government should promote traditional values.
With no rebirth of traditional values that could lead to more babies, caring for our elderly will become an increasingly onerous burden. Where can this soulless materialism lead?
In a recent New York Times op-ed, New York investment banker and former counselor to the Treasury secretary in the Obama administration Steven Rattner provides a shockingly candid answer.
The op-ed begins, “We need death panels.”
Rattner then qualifies this by saying, well, maybe not “exactly.”
But he then concludes with, “We may shrink from … stomach-wrenching choices, but they are inescapable.”
List of Obama’s Czars Plus Two – Updated: 8.18.09 – Remember when the Czars were the hot topic… but they overwhelmed us and forgot them to do they scary dirty jobs…
by Sarah Palin on Monday, June 25, 2012 at 11:11am – on Facebook
As we wait for the impending Supreme Court decision on Obamacare, I reiterate what I wrote in my first post on this topic nearly three years ago. I stand by everything I wrote in that warning to my fellow Americans because what was true then is true now, and it will remain true as we hear what the Supreme Court has to say.
It was a pretty long post, but a lot of people seem to have only read two words of it: “death panel.” Though I was called a liar for calling it like it is, many of these accusers finally saw that Obamacare did in fact create a panel of faceless bureaucrats who have the power to make life and death decisions about health care funding. It’s called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), and its purpose all along has been to “keep costs down” by actually denying care via price controls and typically inefficient bureaucracy. This subjective rationing of care is what I was writing about in that first post:
The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.
Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.
Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.
We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, “Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late.
If the Supreme Court doesn’t strike down Obamacare entirely, then Congress must act to repeal IPAB and Obamacare before it is indeed “too late.” All of Obamacare must go one way or another.
Here is an article in the L.A. Times by Noam N. Levey, who attempts to carry the administration's water by chastising those in the U.S. who oppose ObamaCare. Specifically, he holds up efforts in China, Mexico and Thailand and others who are attempting to give universal health care to all of their citizens:
Even as Americans debate whether to scrap President Obama's healthcare law and its promise of guaranteed health coverage, many far less affluent nations are moving in the opposite direction — to provide medical insurance to all citizens.
China, after years of underfunding healthcare, is on track to complete a three-year, $124-billion initiative projected to cover more than 90% of the nation's residents.
Mexico, which a decade ago covered less than half its population, just completed an eight-year drive for universal coverage that has dramatically expanded Mexicans' access to life-saving treatments for diseases such as leukemia and breast cancer.
In Thailand, where the gross domestic product per person is a fifth of America's, just 1% of the population lacks health insurance. And in sub-Saharan Africa, Rwanda and Ghana — two of the world's poorest nations — are working to create networks of insurance plans to cover their citizens.
"This is truly a global movement," said Dr. Julio Frenk, a former health minister in Mexico and dean of the Harvard School of Public Health. "As countries advance, they are realizing that creating universal healthcare systems is a necessity for long-term economic development."
So after getting in a jibe at us anti-ObamaCare folks, Levey holds up China, Mexico, Thailand, Ghana and Rwanda as examples the U.S. should follow in terms of universal health coverage? Um, OKaaay. But the other thing that strikes me is Julio Frenk's assertion that creating universal healthcare is necessary for 'long-term economic development'. Not sure how he worked that out given that countries like the UK and France have done this for years and they systems are both bankrupt and rationing health care. Just for the record, entitlements have never proven to be an economic stimulus.
Look, the U.S. has been without universal health care for over 200 years and it appears to me that we've done pretty well for ourselves not to mention the rest of the world (you know leading the entire world in economic development and raising millions around the world out of poverty).
But further to the point of the article I just don't understand how you can compare the U.S. with any of these countries. For example Levey asserts that China's problem is that their population is 'saving excessively' due to the lack of coverage:
Chinese leaders were concerned their citizens were saving excessively because there was no system to protect them if they got seriously ill, said Yanzhong Huang, director of the Center for Global Health Studies at Seton Hall University. The high savings rate was restraining domestic demand for consumer items, making the economy overly dependent on selling goods abroad.
Here's a question: is this due to the high cost of health care or low earning for the average worker? According to Wikipedia the household median income for Mexico (the only country Levey cites in the top 34) is $4,689 (34th) while in the U.S. its $31,111 (2nd). So it would seem that the Chinese citizens are simply prioritizing their remarkably limited discretionary income. My point here is that the citizens of these countries have very little room for error given the lack of discretionary income compared to the U.S.
Further, Cristiam Baeza makes the point that 'people are demanding responses from their governments':
"People are demanding responses from their governments," said Cristian Baeza, health director of the World Bank. Indeed, in countries such as India, politicians have learned that one of the surest ways to secure votes is to promise better access to healthcare.
Given the low wages and lack of economic freedom I am not in the least surprised that the populations of these countries are looking for government help. My guess is that the populace is threatening to revolt unless something is done. So in order to stay in power, the powers that be will promise healthcare in exchange for civil peace. But here's the rub - there is no way these countries will be able to afford universal healthcare for their people unless they follow the UK model that gives substandard care and rationing of services. More specifically whom are these countries going to tax in order to provide these services? As noted above the median income of these countries is anemic at best so how can you tax someone if they have no money? But that's not the point of the article. Levey wants to make the embarrassing point that the U.S. is lagging these more 'forward' thinking countries like Rwanda and further call out us unenlightened troglodytes who oppose ObamaCare.
But the one thing Levey fails to address is the economics of universal healthcare. It is one thing for the politicians/dictators of these countries to promise universal healthcare and another all together to deliver in anything like the services we enjoy in the U.S. But just like all liberals Levey simply assumes that it's all free because it is provided by the 'government'.
After 3 days of hearings on the ObamaCare Bill by the Supreme Court… We the People, now sit and wait… The justices met on Friday and now know how they will vote, even though they could change their minds. The opinions will be written and reviewed by all the justices and then the decision will be released to us sometime in June.
Senate Republican staffers continue to look though the 2010 health care reform law to see what’s in it, and their latest discovery is a massive $17 trillion funding gap.
“The more we learn about the bill, the more we learn it is even more unaffordable than was suspected,” said Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Republicans’ budget chief in the Senate.
“The bill has to be removed from the books because we don’t have the money,” he said.
The hidden shortfall between new spending and new taxes was revealed just after Supreme Court justices grilled the law’s supporters about its compliance with the Constitution’s limits on government activity. If the court doesn’t strike down the law, it will force taxpayers to find another $17 trillion to pay for the increased spending.
The $17 trillion in extra promises was revealed by an analysis of the law’s long-term requirements. The additional obligations, when combined with existing Medicare and Medicaid funding shortfalls, leave taxpayers on the hook for an extra $82 trillion in health care obligations over the next 75 years.
The federal government has an additional $17 trillion unfunded gap in other obligations, including Social Security, bringing the total shortfall to $99 trillion.
That shortfall is different from existing debt. The federal government already owes $15 trillion in debt, including $5 trillion in funds borrowed during Obama’s term in office so far.
That $99 trillion in unfunded future expenses is more more than five years of wealth generated by the United States, which now produces just over $15 trillion of value per year.
The $99 trillion funding gap is equal to almost 30 years of the the current federal budget, which was $3.36 trillion for 2011.
Currently, the Social Security system is $7 trillion in debt over the next 75 years, according to the Government Accountability Office.
Also, Medicare will eat up $38 trillion in future taxes, and Medicaid will consume another $2o trillion of the taxpayer’s wealth, according to estimates prepared by the actuarial office at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
The short-term cost of the Obamacare law is $2.6 trillion, almost triple the $900 billion cost promised by Obama and his Democratic allies, said Sessions.
The extra $17 trillion gap was discovered by applying standard federal estimates and models to the law’s spending obligations, Sessions said.
For example, Session’s examination of the health care law’s “premium support” program shows a funding gap $12 billion wider that predicted.
The same review also showed the law added another $5 trillion in unfunded obligations for the Medicaid program.
“President Obama told the American people that his health law would cost $900 billion over ten years and that it would not add ‘one dime’ to the debt… this health law adds an entirely new obligation—one we cannot pay for—and puts the entire financing of the United States government in jeopardy,” Sessions said in a floor speech.
“We don’t have the money… We have to reduce the [obligations] that we have.”
Click Here to sign the petition to kill the Obamacare Death Panels!
A vote is coming up in the Senate on an amendment that has already passed the House repealing the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, established under Obamacare to slice $500 billion from Medicare.
The Commission is set to decide which treatments are most cost-effective and disallow the ones that it finds are not. That's "cost-effective", not just "effective." So if an expensive treatment cures a fatal disease, the Panel will decide how many "quality years" a patient has left in deciding if it is "cost-effective" to let her have the medication. The Panel, in other words, rations care and plays God.
We have a chance to kill this panel at best and, at worst, to put the Democratic Senators who won't repeal it on record so we can defeat them for re-election.
Please sign this petition and we will send your views to your Senators and Congressman. Please include your hard address so we can do so. We'll add your email address to our Alerts list so we can keep you posted on progress and next steps.
Click Here to sign the petition to kill the Obamacare Death Panels!
This isn't exactly news, but a number of people have forgotten this (myself included) until Glenn Beck mentioned it on Tuesday while discussing the ObamaCare case at the Supreme Court.
Are American Muslims exempt from the requirement to purchase health insurance under the individual mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA)? There has been a lot of talk, and a number of Internet rumors, to the effect that Muslims are exempt from the PPACA’s individual mandate; that Muslims will get free health care under the PPACA, while the non-Muslim population of the United States will be required to purchase government administered health insurance. Therefore, according to rumor, non-Muslim Americans will be paying for American Muslims’ health care; in other words “dhimmitude.” There is even a rumor that the word “dhimmitude” –used to denote subservience to Islam by non-Muslims, is actually used—on p. 107 of H.R. 3590 of the PPACA bill.
The rumors of free health care for Muslims are based on Shariah law’s prohibition on insurance. Insurance violates the tenets against riba (interest); al-maisir (gambling) and al-gharar (uncertainty). Interest paid on insurance investments violates Shariah’s rules against usury. Thus, under a strict interpretation of the Koran, Muslims are exempt from ObamaCare. However, the talk and the rumors are false—the word “dhimmitude” isn’t used anywhere in H.R. 3590, and depending on how PPACA rules are applied, there is at least an even chance that the scenario of American Muslims being exempt from the requirement to purchase insurance under the individual mandate won’t play out.
To be sure, the PPACA does grant a number of exemptions from the requirement to purchase the “minimum essential coverage.” (Whatever that is — Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius hasn’t yet defined it.) Prisoners, illegal aliens, and foreign nationals are exempt. In addition, there is a religious exemption.
Under Subtitle F, Part I, Section 1501—the individual responsibility requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage—individuals must be “a member of a recognized religious sect” that doesn’t participate in Social Security. According to a January 2011 Heritage Foundation WebMemo, they must pay no Social Security taxes and receive none of the benefits, in accordance with Section 1402(g)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code. The religious exemption applies to any person who is a member of a “recognized religious sect or division” with “established tenets or teachings” that would forbid that person from accepting public or private insurance. Thus the Amish, who believe in taking care of their own elderly and don’t participate in Social Security, are exempt, as are Mennonites and Scientologists.
Just one of many fatwas on the subject from the holy men at Islam Question and Answer:
Ruling on working in insurance companies or broker companies when insurance becomes obligatory Health insurance is going to be compulsory for all companies and associations in our country. The insurance company will not have direct relationship with companies or associations, as there will be brokers in between, this is also compulsory.
The question is: What is the ruling on working for these brokers? Its role is basically introducing offers to companies and individuals and dealing with claims. Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly: Health insurance is haraam like other types of commercial insurance, because it is based on ambiguity, gambling and riba (usury). This is what is stated in fatwas by the senior scholars. See the answer to question no. 39474 and 4210.
In Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (15/277) there is a quotation of a statement of the Council of Senior Scholars concerning the prohibition on insurance and why it is haraam:
1. Commercial insurance contracts are transactions based on probability and extreme ambiguity, because the customer cannot know at the time of signing the contract what he will give or take. He may pay one or two installments, then calamity may strike and he will be entitled to what the insurer committed to pay. Or no calamity may happen at all, so he pays all the installments and takes nothing. Similarly the insurer cannot know what he will give or what he will take with regard to any individual contract. In the saheeh hadeeth it says that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade ambiguous transactions.
END OF QUOTE
The defeat of ObamaCare may well happen in the Supreme Court although, as Yogi Berra famously said, "It ain't over 'til it's over." I'm no lawyer but I believe there is clearly a basis here for a further religious discrimination case filed by Christians and Jews who would be forced to buy these policies while Muslims could walk away from it.
In celebration of the official start of spring and life rejuvenated, Guinness World Records is recognizing the endless spirit and youthfulness of 101-year-old great-great grandmother, Mary Allen Hardison from Ogden, Utah, who is now recognized as the 'Oldest Female to Paraglide Tandem.' (She was perhaps inspired by former President George H.W. Bush, but beat him in age. She broke the 100-year-old female record set two years ago.)
Pushing record breaking to new heights, Mary's incredible feat was achieved as part of her 101st birthday celebration this past September 1st. On, as she describes, "a whim to not be outdone by her 75-year-old son Allen," who had recently taken up paragliding as a new outdoor activity, Mary took to the air fearlessly for her first flight.
Cheered on by her children, grandchildren, great grandchildren and even great-great grandchildren, Hardison was strapped in by Cloud 9 Paragliding Company representatives and took flight amongst the strong winds. Paragliding instructor Kevin Hintze describes Hardison as "hardcore" as they spun together hundreds of feet in the air.
A self-described rookie to the paragliding sport, Mary's primary hobby is knitting garments for the less fortunate: caps for children's' hospitals, crocheted bandages for leopards in India, and knit caps for premature babies. Her closest experience to anything extreme was riding all the rides at Disneyland at age 90.
Hardison comments, "I feel very humble in setting a new Guinness World Record. My desire is for the elderly to keep on going, do things as long as you are physically able. Be positive. Friends don't like a grumpy person."
Hardison also urges other senior citizens to stay moving and to continue to challenge themselves, even if it means them breaking her current record:
"When a person is busy, the hurts seem to ease up. If you are able and even older than I, then I'm happy for people to attempt to break my record. I promise the experience will be well worth it!"
Also See: Go Granny Go… These fun activities by seniors come at a time where we are simultaneously seeing both more people living to 100+ and on the flipside watching the fight against the provisions in ObamaCare to ration healthcare for seniors.
There are more Centurions on record alive today than anytime in history and with proper healthcare and continued research discoveries and inventions we should continue to see an increase in numbers as well as the quality of health in those who reach the rip old ages of 100 an above.
Ann Nixon Cooper, center, prepares to cut her cake as she celebrates her 107th birthday
However, we are living at a time that youth instead of the wisdom that comes with age are valued. We are also living at a time where we often stick our aging parents and grandparents into institutional facilities or ‘old people’s group homes’ instead of taking them into our homes to be part of the core family unit as people have done throughout history, where they can impart their wisdom, perspective and experience to the next generation… or two… or three.
Although the House of Representatives just passed a bill to do away with IPAB, it won’t pass the Senate if it even makes to the floor to be voted on, and many question whether any changes made now (before Election 2012) to ObamaCare won’t just be reversed if ObamaCare is either not declared unconstitutional in full or the individual mandate is not struck down by the SCOTUS and then President Obama is re-elected. The End of Life Provision was removed from ObamaCare in August 2009, but the ObamaCare Mandate Committee is alive and well. Rationed Healthcare, no matter how you spin it equals death panels for those who do not get the care and procedures they need. Seniors and special needs children and adults will be the first victims. Many see the days of Soylent Green in their future.
IPAB Spells Gloom And Doom For Medicare – On (03.22.12) the House of Representatives voted to repeal key 'Obamacare' provision” IPAB (the CLASS ACT has been nullified)
I was told by a friend whose husband works for one of our major U.S. hospitals that the HR department posts upcoming news on a weekly basis on their bulletin boards throughout the hospital. Late last week a posting went up stating:
PER THE U.S. FED GOV’T, AS OF APRIL 24, 2013 THERE WILL BE NO CHEMO/RADIATION/MEDICATIONS/FOR ALL PERSONS DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER AT AGE 76 OR OLDER. SURGICAL PROCEDURES WILL BE DONE ONLY IF THE SURGEONS CAN WITH HIGH CERTAINTY REMOVE IT ALL.
Grandparents (grandmas and grandpas) and the wisdom and experience of seniors were valued in our culture until Progressivism took hold. Those relationships and the transfer of generational wisdom are still valued in the Asian cultures whose children are number #1 overall in educational retention and the arts. Connection? And many of the values and traditions whose loss we question and yearn for could certainly be salvaged and resurrected if our children and grandchildren spent time with older generations.
In studies, the relationship between grandchildren and their grandparents have been shown to be some of the most valuable of their lives. (As they say grandparents and grandkids are so close because they have a common enemy!) Grandparents have time for grandkids, are generally more relaxed than parents and are often fun & funny. Perhaps it is time to take stock of our lives and weigh societal pressures and directions against common sense? It has to still exist somewhere deep down?!? How about setting up a neighborhood homeschooling network run primarily by grandparents since so many mothers work?
One really must question whether we as a society have moved so far down the road that we are truly considering standing still for killing off our elderly relatives and some of our greatest assets?!? And whether we are so brainwashed that we don’t realize that tomorrow it will be us.
There are Rationing Boards (Death Panels…. A Mandate Committee) and people/seniors over 76 and special needs patients will get few major services. once ObamaCare takes affect.
It’s official. The concern pro-life organizations had about the ObamaCare legislation funding abortions has been confirmed, as the Obama administration has issued the final rules on abortion funding governing the controversial health care law.
Nestled within the “individual mandate” in the Obamacare act — that portion of the Act requiring every American to purchase government — approved insurance or pay a penalty — is an “abortion premium mandate.” This mandate requires all persons enrolled in insurance plans that include elective abortion coverage to pay a separate premium from their own pockets to fund abortion. As a result, many pro-life Americans will have to decide between a plan that violates their consciences by funding abortion, or a plan that may not meet their health needs.
The Department of Health and Human Services has issued a final rule regarding establishment of the state health care exchanges required under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
As a knowledgeable pro-life source on Capitol Hill informed LifeNews, as authorized by Obamacare, “The final rule provides for taxpayer funding of insurance coverage that includes elective abortion” and the change to longstanding law prohibiting virtually all direct taxpayer funding of abortions (the Hyde Amendment) is accomplished through an accounting arrangement described in the Affordable Care Act and reiterated in the final rule issued today.
“To comply with the accounting requirement, plans will collect a $1 abortion surcharge from each premium payer,” the pro-life source informed LifeNews. “The enrollee will make two payments, $1 per month for abortion and another payment for the rest of the services covered. As described in the rule, the surcharge can only be disclosed to the enrollee at the time of enrollment. Furthermore, insurance plans may only advertise the total cost of the premiums without disclosing that enrollees will be charged a $1 per month fee to pay directly subsidize abortions.”
The pro-life advocate told LifeNews that the final HHS rule mentions, but does not address concerns about abortion coverage in “multi-state” plans administered by the Federal Government’s Office of Personell Management (OPM).
“There is nothing in the Affordable Care Act to prevent some OPM (government administered) plans from covering elective abortion, and questions remain about whether OPM multi-state plans will include elective abortion,” the pro-life source said. “If such plans do include abortion, there are concerns that the abortion coverage will even be offered in states that have prohibited abortion coverage in their state exchanges.”
The final rule indicates: “Specific standards for multi-state plans will be described in future rulemaking published by OPM…”
Set to go into effect in 2014, the unconstitutional provisions found in Section 1303 of the Obamacare Act compel enrollees in certain health plans to pay a separate abortion premium from their own pocket, without the ability to decline abortion coverage based on religious or moral objection.
That provision was the subject of a legal document that Bioethics Defense Fund’s Dorinda C. Bordlee, lead counsel for the group, submitted to the Supreme Court in February.
“This violates the Free Exercise Clause because religious exemptions are made for groups such as the Amish who morally object to purchasing any insurance, but no exemptions are made for Americans who have religious or moral objections to abortion,” Bordlee said.
“President Obama’s healthcare overhaul includes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ that blatantly violates the conscience rights and First Amendment religious rights of millions of Americans,” AUL president Charmaine Yoest said. “Nowhere in the Constitution does it require Americans to violate their beliefs and pay for abortions.”
ADF Senior Counsel Steven Aden says Americans should not be compelled to pay for other people’s elective abortions.
“No one should be forced to violate their conscience by paying for abortions, but that’s precisely what ObamaCare does,” he explained. “ObamaCare requires that employees enrolled in certain health plans pay a separate insurance premium specifically to pay for other people’s elective abortions and offers no opt-out for religious or moral reasons. Such a mandate cannot survive constitutional scrutiny.”
BDF president and general counsel Nikolas Nikas said the individual mandate not only forces individuals into private purchases, it also effectively mandates personal payments for surgical abortion coverage, without exemption for an individual’s religious or moral objections.
He told LifeNews in an email, “Like a Russian nesting doll, the individual mandate has nestled within it a hidden, but equally unconstitutional scheme that effectively imposes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ that violates the free exercise rights of millions of Americans who have religious objections to abortion.”
by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 3/12/12 7:11 PM
