A variety of compromises were offered to simply delay certain portions and make it less painful on the population. The answer from the senate and the administration was to play hardball, no negotiation whatsoever, which led to the shutdown.
So where are we now? 5,000,000 people that have become “magically” uninsured with no chance of regaining insurance in the near future.
Now, the “we will not negotiate” bomb-throwers in the senate that used vile hate mongering to defend a political position are now saying the exact same things that was being said by those trying to avoid the disaster in the first place.
I hate to see anyone get the shaft! This is also not a fluke … this same kind of story is cropping up in the news more and more frequently. I do think, however, this is a little “poetic injustice” and folks like these got exactly what they voted for!
Since 1995, Hammack and Brothers have received their health coverage from Kaiser Permanente, where Brothers worked until 2009 as a dietitian and diabetes educator. “We’ve both been in very good health all of our lives – exercise, don’t smoke, drink lightly, healthy weight, no health issues, and so on,” Hammack told me.
The couple — Lee, 60, and JoEllen, 59 — have been paying $550 a month for their health coverage — a plan that offers solid coverage, not one of the skimpy plans Obama has criticized. But recently, Kaiser informed them the plan would be canceled at the end of the year because it did not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. The couple would need to find another one. The cost would be around double what they pay now, but the benefits would be worse.
“From all of the sob stories I’ve heard and read, ours is the most extreme,” Lee told me in an email last week.
I’ve been skeptical about media stories featuring those who claimed they would be worse off because their insurance policies were being canceled on account of the ACA. In many cases, it turns out , the consumers could have found cheaper coverage through the new health insurance marketplaces, or their plans weren’t very good to begin with. Some didn’t know they could qualify  for subsidies that would lower their insurance premiums.
So I tried to find flaws in what Hammack told me. I couldn’t find any.
They do not qualify for premium subsidies because they make more than four times the federal poverty level, though Hammack says not by much.
Hammack recalled his reaction when he and his wife received a letters from Kaiser in September informing him their coverage was being canceled. “I work downstairs and my wife had a clear look of shock on her face,” he said. “Our first reaction was clearly there’s got to be some mistake. This was before the exchanges opened up. We quickly calmed down. We were confident that this would all be straightened out. But it wasn’t.”
I asked Hammack to send me details of his current plan . It carried a $4,000 deductible per person, a $40 copay for doctor visits, a $150 emergency room visit fee and 30 percent coinsurance for hospital stays after the deductible. The out-of-pocket maximum was $5,600.
This plan was ending, Kaiser’s letters told them, because it did not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act. “Everything is taken care of,” the letters said. “There’s nothing you need to do.”
The letters said the couple would be enrolled in new Kaiser plans that would cost nearly $1,300 a month for the two of them (more than $15,000 a year).
And for that higher amount, what would they get ? A higher deductible ($4,500), a higher out-of-pocket maximum ($6,350), higher hospital costs (40 percent of the cost) and possibly higher costs for doctor visits and drugs.
When they shopped around and looked for a different plan on California’s new health insurance marketplace, Covered California , the cheapest one was $975, with hefty deductibles and copays.
In a speech in Boston last week , President Obama said those receiving cancellation letters didn’t have good insurance. “There are a number of Americans — fewer than 5 percent of Americans — who’ve got cut-rate plans that don’t offer real financial protection in the event of a serious illness or an accident,” he said.
“Remember, before the Affordable Care Act, these bad-apple insurers had free rein every single year to limit the care that you received, or use minor preexisting conditions to jack up your premiums or bill you into bankruptcy. So a lot of people thought they were buying coverage, and it turned out not to be so good.”
What is going on here? Kaiser isn’t a “bad apple” insurer and this plan wasn’t “cut rate.” It seems like this is a lose-lose for the Hammacks (and a friend featured in a report last month  by the public radio station KQED.)
I called Kaiser Permanente and spoke to spokesman Chris Stenrud, who used to work for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. He told me that this was indeed a good plan. Patients in the plan, known as 40/4000, were remarkably healthy, had low medical costs and had not seen their premiums increase in years. “Our actuaries still aren’t entirely sure why that was,” he said.
While many other insurance companies offered skimpier benefits, Stenrud said, “our plans historically have been comprehensive.”
Kaiser has canceled about 160,000 policies in California, and about one third of people were in plans like Hammack’s, Stenrud said. About 30,000 to 35,000 were in his specific plan.
“In a few cases, we are able to find coverage for them that is less expensive, but in most cases, we’re not because, in sort of pure economic terms, they are people who benefited from the current system … Now that the market rules are changing, there will be different people who benefit and different people who don’t.”
“There’s an aspect of market disruption here that I think was not clear to people,” Stenrud acknowledged. “In many respects it has been theory rather than practice for the first three years of the law; folks are seeing the breadth of change that we’re talking about here.”
“We believe that the Act is good for health care, the economy, & the future of our nation. However, ACA options for middle income individuals ages 59 & 60 are unaffordable. We’re learning that many others are similarly affected. In that spirit we ask that you fix this, for all of our sakes,” he and Brothers wrote.
Consumer advocate Anthony Wright said it’s important to remember the way the insurance market worked before the act was passed, when insurers could deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions. “It’s impossible to know what the world would have looked like for these folks in the absence of the law,” said Wright, executive director of the group Health Access.
“We certainly had an individual market, especially in California which was the Wild Wild West, where there was huge price increases, cancellations, a range of other practices.
“That doesn’t mean that there were certain people who lucked out in the old system, who wound up in a group with a relatively healthy risk mix and thus lower premiums,” he added. “The question is: Is health insurance something where people get a rate based on the luck of the draw or do we have something where we have some standards where people who live in the same community, of the same age, with the same benefit package are treated equally?”
Wright said discussions should focus on how to provide consumers like Hammack with assistance if they barely miss qualifying for subsidies.
So what is Hammack going to do? If his income were to fall below four times the federal poverty level, or about $62,000 for a family of two, he would qualify for subsidies that could lower his premium cost to as low as zero. If he makes even one dollar more, he gets nothing.
That’s what he’s leaning toward — lowering his salary or shifting more money toward a retirement account and applying for a subsidy.
“We’re not changing our views because of this situation, but it hurt to hear Obama saying, just the other day, that if our plan has been dropped it’s because it wasn’t any good, and our costs would go up only slightly,” he said. “We’re gratified that the press is on the case, but frustrated that the stewards of the ACA don’t seem to have heard.”
by Charles Ornstein
It is amazing to me that, like Lemmings, they still gulp down their daily allotment of cool aid and continue to worship and follow Dear Leader! The old saying is, “Be careful what you wish for … it might come true!”
Can you say … Duh! The Affordable Care act (ObamaCare), Obama’s only real achievement since becoming president in 2008, is in real serious trouble. A new AP poll finds that only 1/3 of Americans support his takeover of our nation’s healthcare system.
Many small businesses have already had to start cutting employee hours or even have been forced to have layoffs to avoid the business-killing regulations imposed by ObamaCare. This has not helped an already terrible economy. To make matters worse, the recovery has also been further stalled by uncertainty as Obama’s massive tax hikes (you know, the ones Nancy Pelosi had to “pass” the bill to see were hidden in it) have slowly come into the light. But then, Pelosi can just exempt herself from ObamaCare … can’t she. Handy … isn’t it!
Small businesses aren’t the only ones trying to mitigate Obama’s jobs-killing rules, either. Even unions have begun to understand how bad ObamaCare will be and have started making noises … and asking if it should be repealed.
Remember Obama’s claim that his new law would lower medical costs for all? Now, even the government is admitting that costs will actually go up as a result of ObamaCare. In fact, insurance rates and healthcare costs are skyrocketing as the full effect of ObamaCare is beginning to be realized. Maybe somebody should have read it before Congress rammed it on through! Ironically, Sen. Democrat leader Harry Reid just recently asked for even more money for ObamaCare.
Some elected Democrats are running scared over their support of ObamaCare, worried that it will cost them their seats. And it should! Republican or Democrat, we pay our representatives a six-figure salary to do their jobs … which should, I would think, include reading and understanding the legislation they are voting to pass.
ObamaCare is making healthcare costs go up, is already making healthcare harder to get, is already driving doctors out of the field, is driving up the costs of business, depressing wages, and is hurting our already delicate economy. We have Obama, Pelosi, Reid and their group of radical, non-reading left-wing thugs to thank for that! Remember that in 2016!
Obama, the Anointed One, would be incapable of lying … wouldn’t he?
How about it Uncle Joe? Could it be true?
But, alas, it seems he does … again and again and again … ad nauseam!
Remember how, during the 2012 election campaign, Democrats denied that ObamaCare made $716 billion in cuts to Medicare in order to provide funding toward $1.9 trillion in new entitlement spending over the next ten years.
Well, guess what? It has begun and the truth will set you free! On Friday, the Obama administration revealed that it would significantly reduce funding for Medicare, a move that one health insurance analyst said “would turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable.”
You would think some Cool Aid drinkers would begin to see the light … but they won’t! They are too damn stupid!
Health insurance stocks crashed following the announcement that a large part of the Medicare cuts would come from the successful Medicare Advantage program, a market-oriented system in which participants can choose coverage by a private company that contracts with Medicare to provide all Part A and Part B benefits. This should actually come as no surprise, it is merely the Obama way … tax those things (people, programs, and things) that do work to pay for those things that will not work!
According to health care analyst Carl McDonald, the new rates proposed by the Obama administration will have the net effect of reducing payments to Medicare Advantage plans by seven to eight percent in 2014. McDonald projects:
If implemented, these rates and the program changes CMS [Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] is suggesting would be enormously disruptive to Medicare Advantage, likely forcing a number of smaller plans out of the business and creating disarray for many seniors.
According to Richard Foster, former chief actuary to the Medicare program, ObamaCare’s cuts to Medicare Advantage will likely force half of its current participants back into the old Medicare program, originated in 1965. It is estimated that this change will cost Medicare enrollees an average of $3,714 in 2017 alone.
Democrats have long been unfriendly toward the Medicare Advantage plan, which was passed as part of the Balanced Budget Amendment of 1997 and has seen tremendous growth over the past 10 years. Today, more than 25 percent of seniors receive their health benefits through Medicare Advantage.
Last year it was revealed that, while AHIP was openly supporting ObamaCare and working on a deal with the White House, it was also secretly funneling over $100 million to the Chamber of Commerce to be spent on advertising designed to convince Americans that the new legislation should be defeated.
Sometimes, being able to say, “I told you so,” just isn’t enough!
Parts of this post may be offensive to some people. If the coarse language in the included quotes that were spewed forth by liberals bothers you, please don’t read this post. I apologize for the quotes, but the point needs to be made!
When SCOTUS upheld ObamaCare’s individual mandate, Sarah Palin tweeted this message to her followers:
So, this is Sarah Palin’s opinion, stated with absolutely no foul language or personal attacks (and I would say … based soundly on the available facts). The liberal response is something else entirely! Again, do not read this if you are easily offended by the liberal version of 1st Amendment free speech
@RFLAWLESS: White Bitch, With your slut daughter and retard child
@Dike_Turner: And your retard baby cries?
@insanityreport: Levi Johnston got in your daughter’s thighs
@O_Sh1tT: shut up bitch before we run a train on your slut ass daughter.
@whtwoudjesusdo Go suck a %#*! with your daughter bitch (edited for descency)
The last one by @whtwoudjesusdoabout say’s it all … doesn’t it! I feel I can safely say Jesus would do, or even say, nothing of the sort! Just so you know … if you have a Twitter account, you can reply back to these wonderful liberals and let them know how much you admire their oh-so-enlightened verbal gems!
Ok! What if Justice Robert’s and the SCOTUS ruled the individual mandate penalty is a tax? Well, Congress does have the ability to create taxes … and Congress also has the ability to rescind them. Roberts gave us the means to end ObamaCare. Upon Congress’ return from its July recess, they should act immediately to repeal this terrible new tax on the American people, and in fact, they should repeal Obamacare in its entirety. But they won’t … unless thinking American citizens (you know … Americans who can actually think beyond launching vile attacks on Sarah Palin’s children) stand up and force them to!!
This is the most brazen, underhanded, sweeping new tax (and abusive government overreach) imposed on the American people in the history of this country!
The American People did not ask for this tax! We do not want this tax! We certainly can’t afford this tax! ObamaCare is not the answer to America’s health care issues.
Is Sarah Palin wrong? Did Obama Lie? More and more about what was actually written into the ObamaCare bill that Robert Creamer and SEIU wrote, and nobody in Congress had time to read before they passed it to find out what was in it … is slowly coming to light! You tell me:
Lie #1: Obama said, “Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.”
Reality: The individual mandate is far from being alone on Heritage’s lengthy list of Obamacare’s new taxes and penalties, many of which will heavily impact the middle class. Altogether, Obamacare’s taxes and penalties will accumulate an additional $500 billion in new revenue over a 10-year period. Yesterday, a senior economist for The Wall Street Journal revealed that 75 percent of Obamacare’s new taxes will be paid for by American families making under $120,000 a year. Among the taxes that will hit the middle class are the individual mandate, a 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices, a 10 percent excise tax on indoor tanning, and an increase of the floor on medical deductions from 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income to 10 percent.
Lie #2:Obama said, “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period.”
Reality: Research continues to show that as many as 30 percent of employers will dump their employees from their existing health care coverage. The Administration itself has admitted that “as a practical matter, a majority of group health plans will lose their grandfather status by 2013.”
Lie #3: Obama said, “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits—either now or in the future.”
Reality: As Heritage analysts explain, “A close examination of what [the Congressional Budget Office] said, as well as other evidence, makes it clear that the deficit reduction associated with [Obamacare] is based on budget gimmicks, sleight of hand, accounting tricks, and completely implausible assumptions. A more honest accounting reveals the new law as a trillion-dollar budget buster.”
Lie #4: Obama said “I will protect Medicare.”
Reality: A Heritage Factsheetshows the various ways Obamacare ends Medicare as we know it, including severe physician reimbursement cuts that threaten seniors’ access to care and putting an unelected board of bureaucrats in charge of meeting Medicare’s new spending cap.
Lie #5: Obama said, “I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family’s premium by up to $2,500 a year.”
Reality: Obamacare does not accomplish universal coverage; it leaves 26 million Americans without insurance. Moreover, Heritage research outlines 12 ways that Obamacare will increase premiums instead of reducing health care costs. Requirements that plans allow young adults to stay on their parents’ coverage and offer preventive services with no cost sharing are already leading to higher growth in premiums.
Polls show 70 percent of Americans hold an unfavorable view of the individual mandate. It’s doubtful that Justice Robert’s calling it a “tax” will dramatically change their opinion. Now that Obamacare and its endless lies with sky-rocketing costs will remain the law of the land, it’s up to the American people (as it should be) to see to it that the law is ultimately repealed by Congress. Then, maybe we can move forward with real health care reform that actually puts patients’ health care needs (instead of the government’s need for more power) first.
The reaction to this decision is amazing. It has really stirred up the American people and that may be a really good thing!
Progressive-liberals are cheering this “landmark” affirmation of their health care reform. Pelosi even threw a party! This strikes me as really funny because, neither she (by her own words), nor Obama (by his own words), knew what was in this bill before it was passed (and … probably still don’t). Obama (if we can believe it) didn’t even know it was actually a tax. Remember when Obama told us that if we “thought it was a tax … then obviously we didn’t know the law”. So … how did all this confusion (or lying) come about? Could it simply be because they actually did not write this law and they have never actually read it? Does anyone know who wrote this bill? I don’t know who wrote this bill and I actually even tried to find out.
Max Baucus (D-Mont.), lead sponsor and supposed author of the Senate bill, admitted recently that he never even actually read it (never mind wrote it). There are stories about Robert Creamer (husband of far leftist Congress woman Jan Schakowsk) writing it while serving time in jail for 16 counts of bank fraud; and there are stories about it passing through the hands of Andy Stern, the infamous corrupt union boss of SEI. No wonder Pelosi snuck it through Congress … she really did have to pass it to find out what was in it!
One wonders why, if it is such a “great” bill, it does not apply to members of Congress? Or … why 729 companies representing 2.1 million employees, the AARP (who fought so hard to get it passed), and labor unions (hmmm … isn’t the SEIU a labor union) are requesting and receiving exemptions from ObamaCare? Maybe this helps explain Obama’s $1, 000,000,000 political war chest.
But, anyway back to my thoughts:
Many conservatives have been trashing Justice Roberts for his role in this decision. I am a conservative and I think they are wrong in doing that. And, actually, I think progressive-liberals are celebrating a bit too soon. All this trashing and celebration occurred as “knee-jerk” reaction before anyone had actually read and understood the Court’s decision. Let’s look at what has actually done.
Conservatives are pro-constitutionally based government … so lets look at the constitutional aspects of this decision:
If we consider the ideas of “checks and balances” and “co-equal branches of government,” we have to ask … do we really want the Supreme Court signing or vetoing our laws? 435 members of the House, 100 Members of the Senate, and the President passed this law. It is not the Supreme Court’s job to veto laws that Americans decide they do not like! It is the Court’s job to decide the constitutionality of a law … which they did. And, if the “penalty” for not purchasing healthcare is a tax used to help pay the massive debt this bill will incur, then it is constitutional … because Congress has the power to tax.
The solution to this problem is that we, as Americans, have to be careful who we choose to represent us. It seems we all love to hate Congress …. but we love our own individual Congressman or Congresswoman. After all. we keep re-electing them! I still remember the Congressional Bank Rubber Check Scandal! The names of members of Congress who were writing massive bad checks on the Bank of Congress were even published in newspapers. Guess what? In the next election about 95% of them got re-elected. I was appalled! So, people, we reap what we sow. You want better laws? Elect better representatives! Elect statesman … not greedy, corrupt politicians concerned with a political career, transforming the country, and/or “getting theirs!” Don’t expect the Supreme Court to do the job you won’t do because you are too lazy!
Either Obama did lie … or he is not as smart as people think. Either he denied it was a tax because he did not read the bill and did not know it was a tax, … or he knew it was a tax … but also knew Pelosi’s Senate needed to sneak it through Congress behind closed doors using sneaky “rules of reconciliation.” And, he did not want Americans to think he was raising taxes right after his campaign pledge not to.
So exactly what did Justice Robert’s do?
This case held a real danger for the Supreme Court from its beginning. This danger was the likelihood that the SCOTUS would be drawn into a serious confrontation over “policy” with the executive branch in the middle of an election year; and … “policy” does not (and should not) fall under the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction. The Justice Robert’s opinion can be seen as maneuver to avoid just such a pitched battle, while simultaneously blocking the Obama Administration’s attempted power grab.
It is important to remember that Roberts sided with the conservative members of the Supreme Court on most aspects of this decision. Pointing to the Commerce Clause … Obama’s administration, argued that Congress can regulate any behavior (or even non-behavior) that has even a minor effect on commerce. Justice Roberts rejects that contention lock, stock and barrel. In fact, this is the first time in the Supreme Court’s modern history, that the Court made a clear and decisive decision that actually limits what the federal government may do with its commerce authority! This Supreme Court decision means that Congress may regulate only real economic activity, and may do so only if the activity has a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Congress may not regulate a person’s choice to not enter into that stream of commerce. If progressive-liberals actually understood this … they would be screaming rape at very this moment!!
By setting the Commerce Clause aspect of this decision as he does, and by stating unequivocally that the individual mandate cannot survive on commerce grounds, Justice Roberts makes the Commerce Clause holding necessary to the decisions’ s final judgment (which, by the way, Obama and his cronies see as a victory). However, in reality this means that future commerce-clause-based Congressional actions will be controlled and limited by this decision (on which Justice Roberts and the four dissenting justices agree).
Another key part of Justice Roberts’ opinion is his conclusion that the individual mandate is actually a tax and not a penalty. While this decision does then make the mandate constitutional (because of Congress’s accepted power to tax) and allows the mandate to stand, it also effectively makes the mandate an isolated decision based on already accepted congressional power, and denies the Obama administration a new source of regulatory power.
By declaring the mandate a tax rather than a penalty, this decision has another effect. It makes repealing ObamaCare a bit easier. Now that the mandate has been revealed as the taxation it really is, it can be repealed through the use of the very same “reconciliation process” Pelosi, Reid, and company used to sneak it through in the first place. This means that a new, more conservative Senate would need only a bare majority vote for its repeal, and not 60 votes. Add to this the fact that, we know (because they have told so us repeatedly) that many members of Congress would never have voted for ObamaCareif they had known it was a tax. Now we can hold their collective feet to the fire in a “repeal” vote!
I think it is important to point out that at the beginning of his opinion, the Justice Roberts clearly states that the Court does not render an opinion as to whether ObamaCare contains sound policies. He re-visits this very same thought at the end of the opinion, stating that the Court does is not expressing an opinion on “the wisdom of the Affordable Care Act,” adding that, under the U.S. Constitution, that final judgment is actually reserved for “the people.” It sounds to me like Justice Roberts is asking the “people” to render a verdict on the inept leaders who wrote this horrible law in the first place! I strongly believe We the Peopleshould do exactly as he suggests.
As a nation, we absolutely cannot afford this unaffordable Affordable Care Act! Our government is broke! I don’t care if you are liberal, conservative, Democrat, or Republican! We have $16 Trillion in debt and a $1.6 Trillion deficit. Who is going to pay for it? Obama, we have just found out, has passed the largest tax increase on the middle class in the history of modern man disguised as a health care reform bill. The taxes and cost hidden in the bill are only now coming to light.
This bill is not about health care … it is about socialists seizing power! If it was written by Robert Creamer and the SEIU, this would make perfect sense. The poor are already dependent on liberal entitlement programs … so they have no choice but to tote the socialist party line. If the middle class can be forced into dependency on the government for their healthcare (by say … single payer system), then progressive, liberals, socialists (or whatever you want to call them) gain power and control over a huge block of Americans and will effective control their votes. It would be hard for these middle class Americans to “bite the hand that now feeds them.”
This next election is so important. It is time for conservatives, Republicans, and real Americans to come together! Romney was not my first choice but he is who we have. While not perfect … he is so much better than Obama there is no comparison. If we can elect him and at the same time gain a few more conservative seats in the House and Senate, we can restore common sense to our government and turn this ship around before it is too late and we are forced into another American Revolution by an out-of-touch, socialist regime lead by Emperor Obama.
One last note.
I recently signed up for a Twitter account. After the SCOTUS decision, Sarah Palin commented via a Tweet on the lies we all know Obama has told to get ObamaCare and his socialist agenda passed. We all know the lies … they are there and plentiful, … lies like: I will reduce debt by half, I will run a transparent administration, didn’t know Jermiah Wright was a radical, any health care deal will be seen on C-Span, I will not raise taxes, no earmarks in stimulus package, Obamacare will pay for itself, my father fought in World War II, I will lead in a bi-partisan manner, No boots on the ground in Libya, ObamaCare will not raise the deficit, I had an uncle who helped liberate Auschwitz, ObamaCare fee is not a tax, etc. It has gotten so bad even many honest liberals are commentating it.
Sarah Palin simply stated what we all know (but some won’t admit), and she did it without a single foul word The liberal responses I saw on Twitter to Palin’s Tweet would shame the most foul-mouthed, coarsest-speaking scumbag the world has ever known. They attacked her, her daughter, and her special needs son in ways that should not, and in a more civil time … in the America I love, would not have been expressed. If these “liberal” expressions of free speech reflect the kind of world they want to create, and the path these people have in mind for America … I reject it totally. I would fight another revolution to keep my grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and great, great grandchildren from having to live in a society such as that!
So, aside from adding a new 3,8% sales tax when I sell my house (this is on top of the sales tax I paid when I bought my house), I wonder what else is in store for me that is deeply buried in the new HEALTH CARE BILL:
For instance, why should I have to pay for things I don’t need … or will never use?
I will neither need a pap smear, nor give birth. I don’t want a hair transplant, and will never use the alcohol/drug rehab plan. I don’t need free condoms! And yet, I am forced to pay for this coverage under ObamaCare. THe truth is I rarely go to the doctor and really just want major medical coverage. So …. how exactly does this new bill lower my premiums?
Does this new HealthCare Bill do anything at all to lower the cost of malpractice insurance?
I know several doctors and malpractice insurance can cost in excess of $70,000. How do doctors pay for this insurance … by raising fees. On the other side of the coin, ambulance chasing lawyers like John Edwards have nothing to lose. Most cases simply get settled no matter how frivolous or ridiculous they are because doctors want to practice medicine and stay out of court. Lawyers, on the other hand, have nothing at risk but their time. They never have to pay court or legal fees. I think an easy fix would be that the loser pays all court costs and legal fees of both parties. That $70,000 malpractice insurance premium could then be drastically reduced, and the cost savings passed on to us. (I do not mean this to imply all lawyers are crooks … I also know some good lawyers with high ethical standards and real integrity!)
How exactly does ObamaCare lower my monthly health insurance premium ?
Please explain to me how ObamaCare can possible lower premiums when insurance companies are now required to cover more things for more people … while, at the same time, distributing free condoms, abortions, and “morning after” pills for all! And … don’t give me your abstract, emotionally based, feel-good liberal platitudes based on fantasy math! I want to see the real numbers!!!
If insurance companies are now required to cover all pre-existing conditions, what prevents people from canceling their coverage, paying the lower “fine/tax” as opposed to the sky-rocketing premiums caused by ObamaCare; and getting health insurance only when they need major medical care?
What will happen when insurance companies go out of business because they cannot compete with the government-owned health care monopoly? Will the government option (can you say “single-payer system“) be the only option? What then happens when our already nearly bankrupt government can no longer afford to sustain this system … hmmm sounds like what is now happening in France, Canada, the U.K., Greece, Spain, etc? Ring a bell?
When the government has total control of how much a doctor (or a hospital) can charge for a procedure, what will that do to the number of people willing to enter the medical field as a profession. Doctors average about $146,000 per year. Hmmm! Sounds like a lot to me … at least on the surface! But, then they also incur a great bit of debt completing medical school; the average debt being about $150,000. Our enlightened government is doubling the interest on student loans next month (another indirect tax perhaps?). How do doctors pay back these loans making less and less for each procedure as dictated by Obama bureaucrats? God Forbid, but what if Doctors are forced to join a government union like the SEIU? So, putting all this together …. and then adding 30 million more people to the health care system, thereby vastly increasing demand; how does the supply side look to you? Oh wait … I have the solution! Free medical school for everyone. Yep! It’s the second line … just past the condom line!
Can someone please explain to me (again … not by using emotionally based, liberal, feel-good platitudes or fantasy math; I want the real numbers) how, when supply gets overwhelmed by demand, rationing can be avoided?
What will happen to our now “single-payer” health care system coverage when the government, after going really, really, really, really broke; decides it needs to “contain” costs by instituting extreme austerity measures? Will we have riots in the street like they had in Greece or France, as our entitlement-minded subjects (sorry, they gave up their right to be called “citizens”) vent their righteous anger at having to actually reap what they sowed?
What new “life-style laws” will soon be passed in the name of “protecting us” from ourselves? Will we be allowed to buy two Hershey Bars per month? Will the school cafeteria police raid our homes because our child had a turkey sandwich with mayonnaise on whole wheat bread (instead of the government mandated fish sticks with 2.5 celery sticks)? Will hamburgers be mandated to be no larger than 2 .5 ounces of beef? Will we be forced to eat our daily government required ration of 12 ounces of bean curd? Will we be fined if we don’t utilize our weekly ration of free condoms?
Pssst!! Hey buddy … yeah …. you. Wanna know a secret? That’s right … another of Obama‘s “secret …. ssshhhhhh …. taxes!” No wonder Pelosi did not want anyone to read the ObamaCare bill before they passed it “to find out what is in it.” Did you know that it includes a new property tax? That’s right folks!! If ObamaCare is not repealed, and you sell your house after 2012; you will pay a wonderful new 3.8% sales tax on it? That’s $3,800 on a $100,000 home.
Wait just a minute? The hell you say? When and how did this happen?
I do find one bit of “poetic justice”, if you will, in this new secret Obama tax! Yes … you Occupy Wall Street folks … you 99% -ers; this is a new tax on you!! Yep! That’s right … this tax is not just on the 1% club …. you, know those dastardly millionaires and billionaires who own businesses, create real private sector jobs, hire people like you and me, buy the stuff we make, and otherwise stimulate the economy! This tax is on you as well! Obama is even screwing you … his loyal cool aid drinkers! This is a tax on Joe the Plumber, Bob the Builder, Terry the high school teacher, Tommy the cab driver, Harry the hamburger flipper, and Buffy the Obama-zombie.
So, you weren’t aware this new property tax was hidden in the Obamacare bill … were you? Well, don’t feel like the lone ranger, because … you aren’t alone. There are many members of Congress that also weren’t aware of it (Remember, they did not have time to read it). And … it was carefully concealed in a HEALTH CARE BILL; written by SEIU and ACORN, and then shoved down America’s throat by Pelosi, Reid and Company … despite the reasoned objections of most thinking Americans.
For some reason, it doesn’t goes into effect in 2013. Why 2013 … you might ask? Could it be that … it is because it wasn’t supposed to become public knowledge until AFTER the 2012 elections … when it would be too late … especially if Obama somehow gets re-elected!? So, tell me, is this the “change you can believe in?”
Under the new HEALTH CARE BILL all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax. If you sell a $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. Simply put, this bill is designed to screw the retiring generation who often downsize their homes on retiring. Thanks very much AARP!
So, I have to ask you … does this make your November 8, 2012 vote any more important to you now that we’re finally finding out what’s really in Obamacare.
And don’t forget you pay that 3.8% even if you have no gain on the sale of your house.
And if you do happen to have a gain … your capital gains tax is going up from 15% to 20% PLUS the 3.8% tax. Wow! It just keeps getting better!
So, we are finding all these new secret, indirect, and otherwise hidden “Revenue Enhancements,” and still Obama wants to raise taxes to fund more “shovel ready jobs” for his campaign bundler buddies, ohhh … and his family’s vacations and new ergonomic grips for his golf clubs!!
Hearing audio clips from the case before the Supreme Court arguments on Obamacare has been encouraging. Justices Roberts, Scalia, and Kennedy have asked key questions of Solicitor General Donald Verilli, who has had an extremely tough time making valid arguments. Part of the confusion arises because of the Obama administration’s argument that the power to enforce the individual mandate is rooted in Congress’ taxing power — but that the mechanism itself is designed to be a penalty, not a revenue-generating policy.
Even U.S. Solicitor GeneralDonald Verrilli, seemed confused; using the phrase “tax penalty” multiple times to describe the individual mandate’s backstop. He portrayed the fee as a penalty by design, but one that functions as a tax because it’s collected through the tax code. This prompted Justice Samuel Alito to comment, “General Verrilli, today you are arguing that the penalty is not a tax. Tomorrow you are going to be back and you will be arguing that the penalty is a tax,” causing a few moments of laughter during the 90 minutes of argument Monday.
The comment by Justice Scalia underlines the song and dance routine that the Obama White House is playing in its argument; and just how badly written the Obamacare legislation actually is. On one hand, Obama’s administrations claims the backstop is not a tax, because that could subject it to the Anti-Injunction Act; while on the other, they claim that the power to impose a penalty derives from Congress’ broad taxing power. That’s in part because calling it a tax makes defending the individual mandate a bit easier because Congress’ power to levy taxes is less in question than its power to force people to do things.
Even Obama appointed Justice Elena Kagan (who should have recused herself due to her advisory role to the Obama administration in formulating the Obamacare legislation) asked whether refusing to buy insurance would constitute breaking the law. Verrilli responded by saying he would argue that if people “pay the tax, then they are in compliance with the law.” This comment caught the attention of Justice Stephen Breyer.
“Why do you keep saying tax?” Breyer asked, causing a few more laughs.
The justices, particularly the four Democratic-appointees, and Justice Antonin Scalia, appear very skeptical that this “fine” constitutes a “tax,” which would then make it a penalty imposed for not complying with the law. This would make the Individual Mandate an unconsitutional abuse of congressional power. By forcing individuals into financial contracts for services they do not want to purchase or face a government imposed penalty, the Obama administration is violating several Constitutional rights. You would think liberals, ever so willing and ready to defend a woman’s right to choose … would also be lined up to defend a citizen’s right to choose and working to defeat Obamacare. Ah well … just more of that selective “moral outrage!”
Anyway, it is too early to say, but this does not bode well for Obamacare.
As usual, your comment plays on the emotions and fears of the uninformed, but has little in the way of fact and reality. You paint the picture of “Ron Paul conservatives” cruelly turning people away from urgently needed medical care. Oh …. those cold-hearted conservative bastards! They make Scrooge look like Mother Teresa! Did you know conservatives eat their young! Barak Obama, the Messiah … the Holy One … will save us all from the evil, fascist, chauvinistic, racist, hate-mongering conservatives!
Don’t like spending nearly a trillion bucks on stimulus? You’re a racist! Don’t like ObamaCare? You’re a racist!
Why is it when liberals rant … it is “free speech,” but when conservatives rant, it is “hate speech?” Need some examples? Maybe I can find a few …. it isn’t very hard …
Margaret Carlson of Bloomberg News comparing the Tea Party caucus in Congress to terrorists: “I mean, they’ve strapped explosives to the Capitol and they think they are immune from it.”
Former Rep. Paul Kanjorski (Dem): “Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to put him against a wall and shoot him.”
Barack Obama, 2008 and 2010: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” & “We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends…”
New York Times Columnist Paul Krugman: “A message to progressives: By all means, hang Senator Joe Lieberman in effigy.”
Talk show host Montel Williams, directed at Rep. Michele Bachmann: “Michele, slit your wrist. Go ahead… or, do us all a better thing [sic]… start at the collarbone.”
Senator Harry Reid, 2008: Barack Obama is a “light-skinned” African-American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”
Reverend Jesse Jackson: “All Hymie wants to talk about is Israel; every time you go to Hymietown, that’s all they want to talk about.”
DNC Charmian Howard Dean: “You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here.”
The Washington Post’s Richard Cohen and CNN: “How much time do we have left to talk about how stupid Sarah Palin is?”
Foul-mouthed comedian Sandra Bernhard warning Sarah Palin she would be “gang-raped by my big black brothers” if she tried coming to New York.
Do you remember when Washington Post columnist Courtland Milloy said: “I know how the ‘tea party’ people feel, the anger, venom and bile that many of them showed during the recent House vote on health care reform. I know because I want to spit on them, take one of their ‘Obama Plan White Slavery’ signs and knock every racist and homophobic tooth out of their Cro-Magnon heads.”
Remember when Liberal talk radio host Mike Malloy said: “Drudge? Aw, Drudge, somebody ought to wrap a strong Republican entrail around his neck and hoist him up about 6 feet in the air and watch him bounce.”
And of course, we all know about Bill Maher ….
Remember when “stupid” Sarah Palin made Rahm Emanuel’s expletive-enhanced use of the word “retarded” an embarrassment for him and the the Anointed One? She forced the left to live up to its own P.C. standards. Saul Alinsky would have been proud.
But I digress ….
There will still be millions of un-insured under Obamacare. The cost for Obamacare has already been revised by the CBO from the original estimate of approx. $900 Billion to $1.8 Trillion … and it will continue to grow. The programs you mention; Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are, themselves, on the verge of collapse; therefore taxes will skyrocket to subsidise them and yet another massive, unsustainable entitlement bureaucratic-nightmare called Obamacare.
Doctors are fleeing the medical field or making decisions to not accept government-based healthcare plans because reimbursement levels are already too low and shrinking. (I know this because I have several friends who are doctors … and no they are not greedy monsters. They are normal folks, whose business costs are skyrocketing because of massive paperwork involved with regulatory compliance forced on them by Obamacare).
Enrollment in medical school is down because not too many students can afford to take on such massive debt in the form of the student loans required to complete a medical degree program … for the dwindling return on their investment. Doctor’s work very hard for their degrees (typically for at least 7 years) and incur a great deal of debt achieving it. To begrudge them a higher salary than folks who, say, decided to flip hamburgers for a living or just go on the public dole … is pretty short-sighted and very small-minded!
Tell me … do you begrudge George Soros, Warren Buffett, AL Gore, John Kerry, or George Clooney their massive incomes?
And yes … even those dastardly, despicable, racist, hate-mongering, tea bagging, slutty, conservatives (who hate autistic children, the mentally challenged, and who want old people to die starving in the streets) want American citizens to have access to affordable, transportable, quality health insurance. The problem is that Obamacare will not provide that. It will only bankrupt the country.
I am not a big fan of Ron Paul. I don’t believe Ron Paul is actually a true conservative. I like some of his domestic positions, but he is not truly a Constitutionalist. If you go back to Ron Paul’s early years and his influences, they include a list of folks who detested conservatives and the U.S. Constitution. Ron Paul mostly uses the U.S. Constitution as a hammer to bash all other candidates on the head. His foreign policy is to the left of even Barack Obama’s and I feel would be disastrous for this country and the rest of the world. Isolationist-based policies have indirectly caused several wars including World War I, World War II, and The Vietnam Conflict. His roots are, perhaps, slightly less scary than Barack Obama’s; while Obama is a Saul Alinsky “inspired” socialist, Ron Paul is essentially a Murry Rothbard inspired free-market anarchist.