Tag: Obamacare

Obamacare: Better Health Through Over-Taxation

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

obamadoctor“Let me tell you how it will be, It’s one for you, nineteen for me.” – Taxman, The Beatles

Well, Obama’s wasting no time getting ready to fund his monstrosity known as Obamacare.

Reuters.com has the story:

The Internal Revenue Service has released new rules for investment income taxes on capital gains and dividends earned by high-income individuals that passed Congress as part of the 2010 healthcare reform law.

The 3.8 percent surtax on investment income, meant to help pay for healthcare, goes into effect in 2013. It is the first surtax to be applied to capital gains and dividend income.

The tax affects only individuals with more than $200,000 in modified adjusted gross income (MAGI), and married couples filing jointly with more than $250,000 of MAGI.

The tax applies to a broad range of investment securities ranging from stocks and bonds to commodity securities and specialized derivatives.

The 159 pages of rules spell out when the tax applies to trusts and annuities, as well as to individual securities traders.

Released late on Friday, the new regulations include a 0.9 percent healthcare tax on wages for high-income individuals.

Both sets of rules will be published on Wednesday in the Federal Register.

The proposed rules are effective starting January 1. Before making the rules final, the IRS will take public comments and hold hearings in April.

Together, the two taxes are estimated to raise $317.7 billion over 10 years, according to a Joint Committee on Taxation analysis released in June.

To illustrate when the tax applies, the IRS offered an example of a taxpayer filing as a single individual who makes $180,000 in wage income plus $90,000 from investment income. The individual’s modified adjusted gross income is $270,000.

The 3.8 percent tax applies to the $70,000, and the individual would pay $2,660 in surtaxes, the IRS said.

The IRS plans to release a new form for taxpayers to fill out for this tax when filing 2013 returns.

Here is a brief overview of the timeline for the implementation of Obamacare, from a pdf prepared by the House Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce Committees on April 2, 2010.

2013

Payments to Primary Care Physicians. Requires that Medicaid payment rates to primary care physicians for furnishing primary care services be no less than 100% of Medicare payment rates in 2013 and 2014.

Administrative Simplification. Health plans must adopt and implement uniform standards and business rules for the electronic exchange of health information to reduce paperwork and administrative burdens and costs.

Encouraging Provider Collaboration. Establishes a national pilot program on payment bundling

Limiting Health Flexible Savings Account Contributions.

Increased Threshold for Claiming Itemized Deduction for Medical Expenses.

Medical device excise tax. Establishes a 2.3 percent excise tax on the sale of a medical device by a manufacturer or importer.

Limiting Executive Compensation.

Fee for patient-centered outcomes research.

2014

Reforming Health Insurance Regulations.

Eliminating Annual Limits.

Ensuring Coverage for Individuals Participating in Clinical Trials.

Establishing Health Insurance Exchanges. Opens health insurance Exchanges in each State to individuals and small employers. This new venue will enable people to comparison shop for standardized health packages.

Local hack politicians are lining up for jobs right now.

Providing Health Care Tax Credits.

Ensuring Choice through Free Choice Vouchers.

Promoting Individual Responsibility.

Small Business Tax Credit.

Quality Reporting for Certain Providers.

Health Insurance Provider Fee. Imposes an annual, non-deductible fee on the health insurance sector allocated across the industry according to market share.

2015

Continuing Innovation and Lower Health Costs. Establishes an Independent Payment Advisory Board to develop and submit proposals to Congress and the private sector aimed at extending the solvency of Medicare, lowering health care costs, improving health outcomes for patients, promoting quality and efficiency, and expanding access to evidence-based care.

Paying Physicians Based on Value Not Volume. Creates a physician value-based payment program to promote increased quality of care for Medicare beneficiaries.

2018

Excise tax on high cost employer-provided health plans becomes effective. Tax is on the cost of coverage in excess of $27,500 (family coverage) and $10,200 (single coverage), increased to $30,950 (family) and $11,850

As I noted earlier,the “Healthcare Exchanges” are supposed to be in place by 2012. Several states are refusing to co-operate. However, if they don’t, the president plans on punishing them,  as newsmax.com reports:

Residents of states that refuse to set up health insurance exchanges under Obamacare are set to be hit with higher premiums under new rules announced by the Health and Human Services Department.

Insurance companies will be charged 3.5 percent of any premiums they sell through the federal exchanges, the department announced Friday.

And insurers are likely to pass that surcharge on to clients, leading to higher premiums.

The only states to be affected are those that refuse to set up their own exchanges because of opposition to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. They are almost certain to be those under Republican control. In those states, HHS will set up the exchanges.

GOP governors are taking a hard line against implementing any part of the healthcare law, which will mean insurers in their states will need to pay the monthly fee, The Hill reports.

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced this week that her state will not set up an exchange, calling the proposal “too expensive and too risky.” Her decision brings the total of states refusing to comply with the act’s provisions up to 17.

The exchanges were supposed to be up and running in all states by 2014. HHS plans to charge insurers 3.5 percent of the premiums for each plan they sell through the federal exchange.

There are still some states that haven’t yet decided whether to set up their own exchanges or use the federal exchange option, so it’s not yet known how much money the HHS will collect from insurance companies. In addition, HHS said it might change the user fees later on as more people enroll through the exchanges.

But exchanges that don’t attract enough insurers may make the companies carry larger percentages of unhealthy and thus expensive, patients, making them appeal even less to customers.

Why didn’t Obama and his minions try capitalism, instead of Marxism, as a solution for the high price of Health Insurance? All they had to do was rule that all Health Insurance Companies have to be available for consumers to purchase in every state.

Yes, Scooter. All 57 of them.

That would force them to lower their rates, in order to be competitive.

Affordable health insurance mandated by the free market system.

Imagine that. Sounds like an American Solution, doesn’t it?

Capitalism works. Marxism never has.

Until He Comes,

KJ

What if Obamacare is Implemented and There are no Doctors Left?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

What if 83% of American Doctors gave up their practice, rather than suffer through the Politboro-driven coming catastrophe known as Obamacare?

Can you imagine?

The Doctors surveyed by the Doctor  Patient Medical Association can…and they’ve threatened to do just that.

ABOUT THE SURVEY

The survey was conducted by fax and online from April 18 to May 22, 2012. DPMAF obtained the office fax numbers of 36,000 doctors in active clinical practice, and 16, 227 faxes were successfully delivered. Doctors were asked to return their completed surveys by fax, or online at a web address included in the faxed copy. Browser rules prevented doctors from filing duplicate surveys, and respondents were asked to provide personal identification for verification. The response rate was 4.3% for a total of 699 completed surveys.

SURVEY RESPONDENTS

Doctors from 45 states responded, in addition to 130 who did not provide their geographical information.

Most are in solo or small group practice (81%) and office-based (89%) versus hospital-based (11%).

Most of the doctors are mid-career (77%) and have been in practice between 11 and 30 years.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS:

  • Almost unanimous that medicine is on the wrong track, and overwhelmingly blame the government;
  • Government-imposed solutions (PPACA, electronic health information) destined to fail;
  • Highest numbers ever opting out of Medicare or refuse Medicaid;
  • Vacuum in leadership in medical profession, feel abandoned by AMA & organized medicine;
  • Corporate medicine (including hospital and insurance companies) is intentionally trying to destroy private practice;
  • Doctors are pessimistic – failing financially & assume things will worsen;
  • See doctors and patients as the solution – not government;
  • Believe direct payment by patients will restore accountability & patient control;
  • Restored autonomy, elimination of government involvement, increased patient responsibility and free market reforms are solutions.

KEY FINDINGS

  • 90% say the medical system is on the WRONG TRACK
  • 83% say they are thinking about QUITTING
  • 61% say the system challenges their ETHICS
  • 85% say the patient-physician relationship is in a TAILSPIN
  • 65% say GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT is most to blame for current problems
  • 72% say individual insurance mandate will NOT result in improved access care
  • 49% say they will STOP accepting Medicaid patients
  • 74% say they will STOP ACCEPTING Medicare patients, or leave Medicare completely
  • 52% say they would rather treat some Medicaid/Medicare patient for FREE
  • 57% give the AMA a FAILING GRADE representing them
  • 1 out of 3 doctors is HESITANT to voice their opinion
  • 2 out of 3 say they are JUST SQUEAKING BY OR IN THE RED financially
  • 95% say private practice is losing out to CORPORATE MEDICINE
  • 80% say DOCTORS/MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS are most likely to help solve things
  • 70% say REDUCING GOVERNMENT would be single best fix.

The Republic of Texas stated its intentions concerning Obamacare, yesterday…in no uncertain terms: 

Governor Rick Perry said on Monday Texas will not implement an expansion of the Medicaid program or create a health insurance exchange, placing the state with the highest percentage of people without insurance outside key parts of President Barack Obama’s signature law.

The announcement makes Texas the most populous state that has rejected the provisions. Some 6.2 million people are without health insurance in Texas, or 24.6 percent of the state population, the highest percentage in the nation. California has more people without insurance but a lower percentage.

Perry joined fellow Republican governors of Florida, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Mississippi and Louisiana in rejecting the two provisions of the law, according to americanhealthline.com. They hope that November elections will result in Republicans winning the White House and enough seats in Congress to repeal the law.

“I will not be party to socializing healthcare and bankrupting my state in direct contradiction to our Constitution and our founding principles of limited government,” Perry said in a statement.

He sent a letter on Monday to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking her to relay the message to Obama that Perry opposes the provisions “because both represent brazen intrusions into the sovereignty of our state.”

“I stand proudly with the growing chorus of governors who reject the Obamacare power grab. Neither a ‘state’ exchange nor the expansion of Medicaid under this program would result in better ‘patient protection’ or in more ‘affordable care,'” said Perry, who dropped out of the Republican presidential race in January. “They would only make Texas a mere appendage of the federal government when it comes to health care.”

Sebelius spokesman Keith Maley said the department “will continue to work with states to ensure they have the flexibility and resources they need to implement” the law known formally as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Meanwhile, the House Republicans are sending a message of their own:

House Republicans this week are launching what some believe is a quixotic push to repeal the health care overhaul, in the latest display of campaign-messaging theater.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., announced that the House of Representatives would vote to repeal the entire Affordable Care Act after the Supreme Court issued its 5-4 decision to uphold the law.

The opening act begins with a House Rules Committee hearing late Monday afternoon. Members of the panel will set the parameters for the repeal bill’s floor consideration.

Floor debate commences Tuesday in Act II. Expect a long series of speeches from both sides praising or condemning the legislation.

The actual vote on the repeal bill will come Wednesday. The tally will likely fall along party lines much in the same way as the legislation passed in 2010. Not a single Republican voted in favor of the health care overhaul while 34 moderate House Democrats voted no.

This may prove to be a difficult vote for centrist Democrats facing tough reelection battles. Watch for members of the Blue Dog Coalition like Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and Larry Kissell, D-N.C., to potentially defect from their party on this issue as they gear up for the fall campaign.

Of course, at this point, with the Senate and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue under the control of the Democrats, this is strictly a symbolic gesture by the Republicans.

…But, at least they will get it on the record before the electoral nuclear explosion (i.e., The World’s Largest Tea Party) scheduled for November 6, 2012.

KJ’s State of the Nation: July 4th, 2012

On By kingsjesterIn Politics8 Comments

Last year, as I was contemplating what to write about on the 4th of July, I came upon an article titled, Down on the Fourth of July:  The United States of Gloom,  on the London Daily Telegraph’s website, written by Tony Harnden, their U.S. Editor.  Mr. Harnden presented a synopsis of the state of our country and came to the following conclusion:

On this day in 1776 a group of 13 colonies broke away to found a new nation free to govern itself as it saw fit, pledging that each citizen would have the unalienable right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. A nation, as Americans are apt to declare without equivocation, which became the greatest on the face of the earth.

That’s the good news. On the flip side, however, a country whose hallmark has always been a sense of irrepressible optimism is in the grip of unprecedented uncertainty and self-doubt.

With the United States mired in three foreign wars, beaten down by an economy that shows few signs of emerging from deep recession and deeply disillusioned with President Barack Obama, his Republican challengers and Congress, the mood is dark.

The last comparable Fourth of July was probably in 1980, when there was a recession, skyrocketing petrol prices and an Iranian hostage crisis, with 53 Americans being held in Tehran.

…The 2010 mid-term elections showed that the Tea Party movement, drawing its small-government, low-tax inspiration from the revolutionaries who overthrew the British, was a phenomenon that could turn American politics upside down.

Previous elections had been about choosing the lesser of two evils but 2010 was about throwing the bums out. Luntz, a Republican, predicts that 2012 will be a “none of the above” contest. What is needed above all is optimism: it is a prerequisite for the risk-taking needed to invest and start new businesses. Its absence could turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy as belief in American decline helps ensure that the halcyon years are indeed in the past.

The 1980 election was won by Ronald Reagan with his “Morning in America” message. Today, a 10ft bronze statue of Reagan will be unveiled outside the US Embassy in London’s Grosvenor Square, which, in another sign of the times, is due to move to Battersea next year because of concerns about its vulnerability to terrorists. Thus far, there is no sign of a new Reagan emerging.

More worryingly, the optimism he embraced and came to personify is all but absent in America this Fourth of July.

Pretty depressing, huh?

Mr. Harden did have a point.

Yes,  even to this day, America’s populace is still struggling through the worst economic situation our country has seen since the Great Depression.  Approximately 20% of our countrymen are unemployed, underemployed, or have just plain given up.  One-sixth of our nation has to rely on assistance from our government just to have food on the table, while remaining under the governance of a president who worships a Far Left political ideology steeped in the redistribution of wealth teachings of Karl Marx and Saul Alinsky.

Americans have watched, feeling helpless, as he and his self-centered minions in Congress took our tax dollars and spent all of it and then some, as if there was no tomorrow, leaving our children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren with a debt that this shining city on a hill may never recover from.

We’ve watched, with our mouths hanging wide open, as the President of the United States and his State Department, have reached out to embrace the very barbarians that want to murder each and every one of us, while at the same time, criticizing and alienating our closest allies.

And, on this 4th of July, in the year of our Lord 2012, our Supreme Court, filled with supposedly wise Jurists, has upheld a socialist taxation that, if left to stand, will bankrupt our nation…and the hand-picked GOP Nominee seems to be reticent to fight on our behalf.

However, even now, I do not subscribe to Mr. Harnden’s assessment of gloom and doom.  Rather, I stand with this man who embodied the American Spirit that is beginning to awaken across this blessed land.

Per military.com:

Gen. Anthony Clement McAuliffe is best remembered for uttering a single word — no mean feat, considering that even the shortest Bible verse has two. Commanding the U.S. Army’s beleaguered and surrounded 101st Airborne Division during World War II’s Battle of the Bulge, McAuliffe received a German surrender ultimatum. “Nuts!” he replied, and became a lasting symbol of American courage and determination under fire.

A 1918 West Point graduate, McAuliffe held various field artillery positions before World War II. On the eve of D-Day, McAuliffe jumped with the first wave as a commander of division artillery, although he had never received formal parachute training.

In December 1944, during the siege of Bastogne, Belgium, McAuliffe was acting commander of the 101st in Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor’s absence. The Americans had been holding the Belgian town “at all costs,” and on Dec. 22, Gen. McAuliffe received the encouraging news that the 4th Armored Division was beginning its drive north to relieve the 101st. Later that morning, members of the division’s glider regiment saw four Germans coming up the road carrying a white flag. Everyone hoped they were offering surrender. Instead, they presented two pages demanding the Americans’ surrender: “To the USA Commander of the encircled town of Bastogne. . .There is only one possibility. . .the honorable surrender of the encircled town.”

McAuliffe glanced at the message and said, “Aw, nuts!” When he told his commanders he didn’t know what answer to send, Lt. Col. Harry Kinnard said ‘That first crack you made would be hard to beat, General.” Everyone laughed as a sergeant typed up the succinct response: “To the German Commander: Nuts! The American Commander.”

Between this stoic reply, Patton’s troops from the south, and a change in the weather that allowed air reinforcement the following day, the 101st was able to hold Bastogne. Their victory resulted in the first full-Division Presidential Distinguished Unit Citation.

McAuliffe’s actions at Bastogne helped assure the final defeat of the Germans. Gen. McAuliffe continued to serve on active duty, including assignments as Head of the Army Chemical Corps, Commander, 7th Army, and Commander-In-Chief of the U.S. Army, Europe, until his 1956 retirement. He died in Washington, D.C. in 1975 and is buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

In the opinion of this 53-year-old, sitting in the Northwest corner of the Magnolia State in America’s Heartland, the current administration and Mr. Harden have underestimated the American Spirit, just as King George and the British Aristocracy did, so many years ago.

As our enemies, both foreign and domestic, have discovered since the birth of our nation, Americans will fight for our freedom.  And we shall prove it again, this coming November, with an electoral explosion of nuclear magnitude, which shall make November 2010 seem like a firecracker in comparison.

May God Bless you and your family on this 4th of July, the Year of Our Lord, 2012, and may God Bless America.

Obamacare and the FFRF: Intolerance in Action

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics4 Comments

Those oh-so-tolerant individuals of the Freedom From Religion Foundation are at it again.  This time they’re down in Dallas:

A new billboard along Interstate 30 is upsetting some Catholics. It urges members to quit the church.

The billboard is part of a national atheist campaign by the Freedom from Religion Foundation. It also says the Roman Catholic Church should put women’s rights over bishops’ wrongs.

It’s a dig at dozens of federal lawsuits by Catholic dioceses including those in Dallas and Fort Worth. They want to do away with an Obama Administration mandate that requires employers, including church-owned institutions like hospitals, to provide employees insurance coverage for birth control, something the church doesn’t believe in.

“I don’t like them imposing their religious beliefs on other people who don’t have those beliefs,” said Terry McDonald with the DFW Coalition of Reason, a local atheist group.

The Dallas Diocese said it has been getting phone calls about the sign located along westbound I-30 near Highway 360.

“It’s all been women who’ve called in to say they were offended and upset by the billboard,” said Annette Gonzales Taylor with the Catholic Diocese of Dallas.

The diocese believes the Freedom from Religion Foundation is in the wrong lane.

“We’re very offended that an entity that has no knowledge or understanding of the church would erect a billboard of this nature,” Gonzales Taylor said. “The issue is truly about religious liberty and protecting the church’s right to adhere to our faith principals.”

McDonald questioned that response.

“When you read that there’s a high percentage of Catholic women who use birth control, I wonder who’s complaining,” he said.

Last week, the FFRF released a 30 second spot  featuring Julia Sweeney.  A humanist named Mriana wrote the following for GodDiscussion.com:

This week the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) released an ad featuring Julia Sweeney, which they call “great experiment to storm the “Bishops’ Bastille”” countering the Catholic bishops’ war on contraception. This ad is part of their “Stand Up for Religious Freedom” and “Quit the Catholic Church” campaigns.

The 30-second spot, according to the FFRF, received various responses thus far and it will run 1200 times during a two-week period.

We’re getting a lot of phone calls at the FFRF office in response. Some callers are giving our female receptionists a hard time, making unprintable comments. But others are our kind of folks, such as a grandmother in Pennsylvania who said she was raised Catholic but is “98 percent atheist,” and is disgusted by the Catholic Church’s attempt, as she put it, to “put canon law over civil law.”

A kind man living in a remote area of North Carolina caught us on MSNBC’s Hardball With Chris Matthews. Another North Carolinian called after seeing Julia’s spot on a rerun of the The Daily Show and said people have forgotten the need for a strict separation between state and church. I couldn’t help replying: “It might sound strange for an atheist to say this, but hallelujah, brother.” He laughed and said, “Amen, sister.”

FFRF’s Facebook page received 500 new likes over the weekend, but request that people join them if they really like them.

The FFRF lists the various shows that will feature the ad through July 4, and updates the page frequently. The FFRF listed the times the ad will air as expected times for when the ad will air and listed as Eastern Time on a 24-hour clock and they are guaranteed over 42 million viewers.

In the ad, Julia says:

“Hi, I’m Julia Sweeney, and I’m a cultural Catholic. I am no longer a believer and I even wrote a play about it called “Letting Go of God.” But I wanted to let you know that right now Catholic Bishops are framing their opposition to contraceptive coverage as a religious freedom issue. But the real threat to freedom is the Bishops, who want to be free to force their dogma on people who don’t want it. Please join the Freedom From Religion Foundation and help keep church and state separate. [FFRF’s name, toll-free number and website are displayed throughout the ad.]

Actually the Freedom From Religion Foundation and the Obama Administration have a lot in common.  The Administration doesn’t seem to care for Christians, in general, and Catholicism, in particular, much either.

Catholic.org reports that

Obamacare compels Catholics to participate in anti-life activities, no matter how much they are opposed to it. Not only is this evil, but it is coercive and tramples upon our God-given, First Amendment protected, right to freedom of religion and conscience.

How does this happen?

Obamacare considers contraceptives, sterilizations, abortifacients, and abortion as “preventative services” under its definition of “health care”. The underlying presumption is that pregnancy is a disease. When people pay into the Obamcare scheme, whether as taxpayers or through their insurance, their dollars will be used to finance these procedures, some of which must be provided for free to all women. The people have no choice – the individual mandate means everyone pays.

It is ironic that a national federalized healthcare plan would make anti-life procedures absolutely free while still requiring people to pay out-of-pocket for lifesaving procedures and medications.

Worse, there is no means to allow supposedly free people to opt out of paying into such plans. Now, even your parish priest must pay for insurance or pay a penalty that will one way or another go into a system that uses his money to fund anti-life procedures.

Of course the Bishops of the Catholic church have raised this point on behalf of all Catholics, other Christians and people of good will, but the Obama administration has ignored their pleas.

Per Gallup, 78% of Americans proclaim their Christianity, 92% believe in God, and Liberals are the smallest political ideology in the nation, consisting of only 21%, compared to 40% for Conservatives and 35% for Moderates.

So, once again, what we are experiencing is the “Tyranny of the Minority”.

I thought Liberals were supposed to be the tolerant ones?

Et Tu, Roberts?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics5 Comments

Like the overwhelming majority of Americans, I, too, am fighting disappointment and rage at the seeming betrayal of Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, even though, at the same time, I realize that God is in control.

As I was turning this unthinkable debacle over and over again in my mind, I came up with two famous quotes:

Script of Act III Julius Caesar/The play by William Shakespeare

CINNA

O Caesar,–

CAESAR

Hence! wilt thou lift up Olympus?

DECIUS BRUTUS

Great Caesar,–

CAESAR

Doth not Brutus bootless kneel?

CASCA

Speak, hands for me!

CASCA first, then the other Conspirators and BRUTUS stab CAESAR

CAESAR

Et tu, Brute! Then fall, Caesar.

Dies

CINNA

Liberty! Freedom! Tyranny is dead!

Run hence, proclaim, cry it about the streets.

CASSIUS

Some to the common pulpits, and cry out

‘Liberty, freedom, and enfranchisement!’

BRUTUS

People and senators, be not affrighted;

Fly not; stand stiff: ambition’s debt is paid.

Americans know today just how ol’ Julie felt.

The second quote is rather long. But, it summarizes the way I feel about the situation we are in as a nation.

I thought about this moment in history…so very long ago…

To avoid interference from Lieutenant-Governor Dunmore and his Royal Marines, the Second Virginia Convention met March 20, 1775 inland at Richmond–in what is now called St. John’s Church–instead of the Capitol in Williamsburg. Delegate Patrick Henry presented resolutions to raise a militia, and to put Virginia in a posture of defense. Henry’s opponents urged caution and patience until the crown replied to Congress’ latest petition for reconciliation.

On the 23rd, Henry presented a proposal to organize a volunteer company of cavalry or infantry in every Virginia county. By custom, Henry addressed himself to the Convention’s president, Peyton Randolph of Williamsburg. Henry’s words were not transcribed, but no one who heard them forgot their eloquence, or Henry’s closing words: “Give me liberty, or give me death!”

…And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

OUR Revolution will be a peaceful one.  Our weapons will be our ballots. The outcome will be the same:  Freedom from those who would rule our lives.

November 6th, Americans will once again fire the shot heard ’round the world.

 

Obamacare: Today’s the Day

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

[On October 8, 2010, I wrote the following article on Obamacare.  This is why this morning’s ruling by the Supreme Court is so important.  The ruling this morning is about FREEDOM.]

President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) appeared on CBS’ 60 Minutes last night. During an interview with Steve Kroft, Scooter said that the political cost of overhauling the health care system turned out to be higher than he had expected.

Did he expect Americans to just shut up and take it?

He went on to say that the health care system itself is huge and complicated and that changing it eluded previous presidents because it was so difficult.

But he plowed right on through with it…because he’s special…and a socialist ideologue:

I made the decision to go ahead and do it, and it proved as costly politically as we expected — probably actually a little more costly than we expected, politically.

Obama went on to say, probably sarcastically, that he thought that he would find common ground with Republicans by advancing health care proposals that had been introduced by Republican administrations as well as potential presidential candidate Mitt Romney when he was governor of Massachusetts:

I bet ol’ Mittens was squirming in his recliner at the house when Scooter said that.

Obama said:

I couldn’t get the kind of cooperation from Republicans that I had hoped for. And that was costly, partly because it created the kind of partisanship and bickering that really turn people off.

So, what it is that everyone has been bickering about?  Here is a brief overview of the timeline for the implementation of Obamacare, from a pdf prepared by the House Ways and Means and Energy and Commerce Committees on April 2, 2010.

2010

  • Immediate Access to Insurance for Uninsured Individuals with a Pre-Existing Condition.
  • Eliminating Pre-Existing Condition Exclusions for Children.
  • Prohibiting Rescissions. Prohibits abusive practices whereby health plans rescind existing health insurance policies when a person gets sick as a way of avoiding covering the costs of enrollees’ health care needs.
  • Covering Preventive Health Services. All new group health plans and plans in the individual market must provide first dollar coverage for preventive services.
  • Extending Dependent Coverage. Requires all plans in the individual market and new employer plans that provide dependent coverage for children to continue to make that coverage available up to age 26
  • Reducing the Cost of Covering Early Retirees. Creates a new temporary reinsurance program for health benefits for retirees age 55-64.
  • New, Independent Appeals Process.
  • Improving Consumer Assistance.
  • Improving Consumer Information through the Web. Requires the Secretary of HHS to establish an Internet website through which residents of any State may identify affordable health insurance coverage options in that State.
  • Cracking Down on Health Care Fraud. Requires enhanced screening procedures for health care providers to eliminate fraud and waste in the health care system.
  • Rebates for the Part D “Donut Hole”. Provides a $250 rebate for all Part D enrollees who enter the donut hole.
  • Improving Public Health Prevention Efforts. Creates an interagency council to promote healthy policies at the federal level.
  • Strengthening the Quality Infrastructure.
  • Extending Payment Protections for Rural Providers.
  • Establishing a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Establishes a private, non-profit institute.
  • Ensuring Medicaid Flexibility for States.
  • Non-Profit Hospitals. Establishes new requirements applicable to nonprofit hospitals beginning in 2010, including periodic community needs assessments.
  • Encouraging Investment in New Therapies.
  • Tax Relief for Health Professionals with State Loan Repayment.
  • Excluding from Income Health Benefits Provided by Indian Tribal Governments.
  • Establishing a National Health Care Workforce Commission. Establishes an independent National Commission to provide comprehensive, nonbiased information and recommendations to Congress and the Administration for aligning federal health care workforce resources with national needs.
  • Strengthening the Health Care Workforce. Expands and improves low-interest student loan programs, scholarships, and loan repayments for health students and professionals to increase and enhance the capacity of the workforce to meet patients’ health care needs.
  • Special Deduction for Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS).
  • Indoor Tanning Services Tax.  There are a lot of torqued-off women out there.
  • Holding Insurance Companies Accountable for Unreasonable Rate Hikes.

2011

  • Bringing Down the Cost of Health Care Coverage.
  • Strengthening Community Health Centers and the Primary Care Workforce.
  • Increasing Reimbursement for Primary Care.
  • Increasing Training Support for Primary Care.
  • Improving Health Care Quality and Efficiency. Establishes a new Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation to test innovative payment and service delivery models to reduce health care costs and enhance the quality of care provided to individuals.
  • Improving Preventive Health Coverage.
  • Improving Transitional Care for Medicare Beneficiaries.
  • Expanding Primary Care, Nursing, and Public Health Workforce.
  • Increasing Access to Home and Community Based Services.
  • Reporting Health Coverage Costs on Form W-2: Requires employers to disclose the value of the benefit provided by the employer for each employee’s health insurance coverage on the employee’s annual Form W-2.
  • Standardizing the Definition of Qualified Medical Expenses. Conforms the definition of qualified medical expenses for HSAs, FSAs, and HRAs to the definition used for the itemized deduction. An exception to this rule is included so that amounts paid for over-the-counter medicine with a prescription still qualify as medical expenses.
  • Increased Additional Tax for Withdrawals from Health Savings Accounts and Archer Medical Savings Account Funds for Non-Qualified Medical Expenses.
  • Cafeteria Plan Changes.

2012

  • Encouraging Integrated Health Systems.
  • Linking Payment to Quality Outcomes.
  • Reducing Avoidable Hospital Readmissions. Directs CMS to track hospital readmission rates for certain high-volume or high-cost conditions and uses new financial incentives to encourage hospitals to undertake reforms needed to reduce preventable readmissions, which will improve care for beneficiaries and rein in unnecessary health care spending.  Can you say “here come the Death Panels”?

2013

  • Payments to Primary Care Physicians. Requires that Medicaid payment rates to primary care physicians for furnishing primary care services be no less than 100% of Medicare payment rates in 2013 and 2014.
  • Administrative Simplification. Health plans must adopt and implement uniform standards and business rules for the electronic exchange of health information to reduce paperwork and administrative burdens and costs.
  • Encouraging Provider Collaboration. Establishes a national pilot program on payment bundling
  • Limiting Health Flexible Savings Account Contributions.
  • Increased Threshold for Claiming Itemized Deduction for Medical Expenses.
  • Medical device excise tax. Establishes a 2.3 percent excise tax on the sale of a medical device by a manufacturer or importer.
  • Limiting Executive Compensation.
  • Fee for patient-centered outcomes research.

2014

  • Reforming Health Insurance Regulations.
  • Eliminating Annual Limits.
  • Ensuring Coverage for Individuals Participating in Clinical Trials.
  • Establishing Health Insurance Exchanges. Opens health insurance Exchanges in each State to individuals and small employers. This new venue will enable people to comparison shop for standardized health packages.   Local hack politicians are lining up for jobs right now.
  • Providing Health Care Tax Credits. E
  • Ensuring Choice through Free Choice Vouchers.
  • Promoting Individual Responsibility.
  • Small Business Tax Credit.
  • Quality Reporting for Certain Providers.
  • Health Insurance Provider Fee. Imposes an annual, non-deductible fee on the health insurance sector allocated across the industry according to market share.

2015

  • Continuing Innovation and Lower Health Costs. Establishes an Independent Payment Advisory Board to develop and submit proposals to Congress and the private sector aimed at extending the solvency of Medicare, lowering health care costs, improving health outcomes for patients, promoting quality and efficiency, and expanding access to evidence-based care.
  • Paying Physicians Based on Value Not Volume. Creates a physician value-based payment program to promote increased quality of care for Medicare beneficiaries.

2018

  • Excise tax on high cost employer-provided health plans becomes effective. Tax is on the cost of coverage in excess of $27,500 (family coverage) and $10,200 (single coverage), increased to $30,950 (family) and $11,850 (single) for retirees and employees in high risk professions.

Gosh, Mr. President, I can see why you can’t understand why the never-ending spider’s web of new government bureaucracies and excessive taxation that you and your Democrat minions in Congress rammed down our throats and gloated about has been met with such resistance.  After all, you did it for our own good, didn’t you?…Regardless of the fact that Government-run Healthcare has been a miserable failure wherever it has been tried.

Is Obama sorry that he stuffed this turkey of a bill down Americans’ throats at the cost of the 2010 Midterms?  I doubt it.  He said last night:

But I think that in terms of how I operated on a day-to-day basis, when you’ve got a series of choices to make — I think that there are times where we said let’s just get it done instead of worrying about how we’re getting it done. And I think that’s a problem. I’m paying a political price for that.

Gosh, Scooter.  Ya think?

[Regardless of the way SCOTUS rules this morning, we can not allow the legislative monster known as Obamacare to continue to live and suck the life out of the greatest nation on Earth.

When we elect Mitt Romney as President, with a Conservative House and Congress to back him, there will be no more excuses. If Obamacare doesn’t not die today, it must be de-funded.]

Thursday, 6/28/12: This Could Be the Start of Something Great

On By kingsjesterIn Politics7 Comments

Well, as everybody knows, (even Harvard graduates) this Thursday is shaping up to be Bad Day at Black Rock for President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).

Not only is the Supreme Court of the United States going to deliver its ruling on the Socialist Healthcare Plan known as Obamacare, but this nation’s House of Representatives are going to hold a vote as to whether to hold United States Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for his obfuscation of his role in Operation Fast and Furious, the sanctioned mission by the Obama Administration that wound up causing the deaths of over 200 Mexican nationals and 2 American Law Enforcement Officers.

How did America get to this point?

In the case of Obamacare…

The nation’s highest court heard three days of politically charged hearings in March on the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a landmark but controversial measure passed by congressional Democrats despite pitched Republican opposition.

The challenge focused primarily on the law’s requirement that most Americans buy health insurance or pay a fine.

How SCOTUS rulings could shape 2012 race Bachmann: Obama not talking health care

Supporters of the plan argued the “individual mandate” is necessary for the system to work, while critics argued it is an unconstitutional intrusion on individual freedom.

All sides preparing for political fallout from health care decision

Four different federal appeals courts heard challenges to parts of the law before the Supreme Court ruling, and came up with three different results.

Courts in Cincinnati and Washington voted to uphold the law, while the appeals court in Atlanta struck down the individual mandate.

A fourth panel, in Richmond, Virginia, put its decision off until penalties for failing to buy health insurance take effect in 2014.

The polarizing law, dubbed “Obamacare” by many, is the signature legislation of Obama’s time in office.

After a lengthy and heated debate marked by intense opposition from the health insurance industry and conservative groups, the law passed Congress along strictly partisan lines in March 2010.

When Obama signed the legislation later that month, he called it historic said it marked a “new season in America.”

While it was not the comprehensive national health care system liberals initially sought, supporters said the law would reduce health care costs, expand coverage and protect consumers.

The law establishes a staged series of reforms over several years, including banning insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, forbidding insurers from setting a dollar limit on health coverage payouts, and requiring them to cover preventative care at no additional cost to consumers.

It also required individuals to buy health insurance, either through their employers or a state-sponsored exchange, or face a fine beginning in 2014.

Supporters argue the individual mandate is critical to the success of the legislation, because it expands the pool of people paying for insurance and ensures that healthy people do not opt out of buying insurance until they needed it.

Critics said the provision gave the government too much power over what they said should be a personal economic decision.

Twenty-six states led by Florida say individuals cannot be forced to buy insurance, a “product” they may neither want nor need. And they argue that if that provision is unconstitutional, the entire law must go.

The Justice Department countered that since every American will need medical care at some point in their lives, individuals do not “choose” whether to participate in the health care market.

The partisan debate around such a sweeping piece of legislation has encompassed almost every traditional hot-button topic: abortion and contraception funding, state and individual rights, federal deficits, end-of-life care, and the overall economy.

And, regarding Attorney General Eric Holder…

Republican leaders plan to bring the issue to the floor on Thursday, meaning lawmakers likely will vote on contempt charges on the same day that the U.S. Supreme Court is slated to announce its ruling on the constitutionality of the 2010 health-care reform law.

The timing likely deprives advocates for contempt charges of the big headlines they might have received if the vote were held another day this week.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)said Sunday that the vote could still be postponed or scrapped if Holder and Justice Department officials present congressional investigators with documents related to a probe intoOperation “Fast and Furious,” the botched gun-running operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives out of its Phoenix offices between 2009 and 2011.

If the House votes to hold him in contempt, Holder would be the first U.S. attorney general in history held in contempt of Congress. The matter would be referred to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia — a Justice Department employee and Obama administration appointee — who would have to decide whether to bring criminal charges against the attorney general, his boss.

It should be an exciting Thursday to say the least, Bat-fans.

What has me puzzled is the rampant pessimism which I’ve seen so far in the posts of those identifying themselves as Conservatives.  If you’ve read some of these Eeyore-ish missives on Conservative Websites, you would think that the justices have already ruled 9 – 0 in favor of Obamacare and the House had voted not to hold the shady Attorney General in contempt.

What in the name of Dow Jones and all his little averages is a’goin’ on here?

In the words of a memorable speech given by the late Sen. John Blutarsky:

Bluto: Hey! What’s all this laying around stuff? Why are you all still laying around here for?

Stork: What the hell are we supposed to do, ya moron? We’re all expelled. There’s nothing to fight for anymore.

D-Day: [to Bluto] Let it go. War’s over, man. Wormer dropped the big one.

Bluto: What? Over? Did you say “over”? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!

Otter: [to Boon] Germans?

Boon: Forget it, he’s rolling.

Bluto: And it ain’t over now. ‘Cause when the goin’ gets tough…

[thinks hard of something to say]

Bluto: The tough get goin’! Who’s with me? Let’s go!

[Bluto runs out, alone; then returns]

Bluto: What the !@#$ happened to the Delta I used to know? Where’s the spirit? Where’s the guts, huh? This could be the greatest night of our lives, but you’re gonna let it be the worst. “Ooh, we’re afraid to go with you Bluto, we might get in trouble.” Well just kiss my !@# from now on! Not me! I’m not gonna take this. Wormer, he’s a dead man! Marmalard, dead! Niedermeyer…

Otter: Dead! Bluto’s right. Psychotic… but absolutely right. We gotta take these b!@#$%^s. Now we could do it with conventional weapons, but that could take years and cost millions of lives. No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody’s part!

Bluto: We’re just the guys to do it.

D-Day: [stands up] Yeah, I agree. Let’s go get ’em.

Boon: Let’s do it.

Bluto: [shouting] “Let’s do it”!

This is no time for Eeyore-ism. This is no time for squishiness.  This is not a time for “reaching across the aisle”.  This is not a time for defeatism.

This is a time for Americans to stand up on their hind legs, and to show the world what makes us the greatest country on the face of the Earth.

Walk tall. Talk loud.  Be Proud.  BE AMERICANS.

And, if that doesn’t fire you up, remember this:

Anticipation…It’s Makin’ Me Wait…

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Sitting here on a Sunday night, wondering what to write about, I realized that this is the week that could provide a double “death blow” to Obama’s sorry excuse of a presidency. And now, I probably won’t sleep a lick tonight.

The Washington Post reports that

The Supreme Court this week will conclude its term by handing down much-anticipated rulings on health careand immigration, President Obama’s remaining priorities before the justices. It is a finale that cannot come quickly enough for the administration, which has had a long year at the high court.

In a string of cases — as obscure as the federal government’s relationships with Indian tribes and as significant as enforcement of the Clean Water Act — the court rejected the administration’s legal arguments with lopsided votes and sometimes biting commentary.

The administration’s win-loss record will sting a lot less, of course, if the court upholds the constitutionality of Obama’s signature domestic achievement, the Affordable Care Act. That decision on health care, which will define the term, could come as early as Monday and almost certainly will be announced by Thursday.

The court also will decide the fate of Arizona’s tough law on illegal immigrants, which the Obama administration challenged in court before it could take effect. The government’s argument that the law conflicts with the federal authority to decide immigration policy got a sour reception from the justices, but the government hopes for at least a split decision on other aspects of the measure.

The administration’s ungainly portfolio at the Supreme Court this term has drawn attention from all points on the ideological spectrum.

Ilya Shapiro, a constitutional scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute, said the government is to blame for “outlandish claims of federal power” that the court was correct to reject.

Adam Winkler, a liberal law professor at UCLA, recently wrote that the court headed by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has been “unusually hostile to the Obama administration.”

His conclusion: “This is the year of the Supreme Court’s Obama smack down.”

It might also have something to do with the (bad) luck of the draw. It is the job of Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. to defend the actions of Congress and the executive. In some of the government’s high-profile losses in Verrilli’s inaugural term, the administration was defending decisions made long before Obama took office.

But whatever the reasons, the losses so far cannot be blamed on the conflict between an increasingly conservative court and a progressive administration. For instance, the authors of the Indian cases that went against the government last week were Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, Obama’s choices for the court.

At least so far, 5-to-4 decisions that have divided the court along ideological lines have split fairly evenly between wins for liberals and for conservatives. And there has been a string of high-profile losses in which the government has failed to win the vote of a single justice — liberal or conservative.

The New York Times has their own Liberal Spin on the fate of Obamacare…and it appears to this humble blooger that these Yankees are proving that denial is not just a river in Egypt.

Late on Tuesday, March 27, halfway around the world, President Obama began one of the most suspenseful waits in recent presidential history.

After a blur of nuclear security meetings in South Korea, Mr. Obama settled into the Air Force One conference room to read a summary aides had written of that day’s arguments before the Supreme Court back in Washington. The justices had asked deeply skeptical questions about his health care law.

Mr. Obama’s most profound policy achievement was at much higher risk of defeat than his aides had expected, vulnerable to being erased by the margin of a single justice’s vote.

Since then, Mr. Obama and the White House have put on brave faces, insisting that the law and the mandate at its center will be upheld when the court rules this month. In private conversations, they predict that the bulk of the law will survive even if the mandate requiring Americans to buy health insurance does not.

But even if the White House is a fortress of message discipline, it cannot disguise the potential heartbreak for Mr. Obama, who managed to achieve a decades-old Democratic dream despite long odds and at steep cost.

If he loses both his law and re-election, many will conclude “that he bet on his major reform, and the Supreme Court defeated it, and he lost his hold on the presidency,” Robert Dallek, the presidential historian, said in an interview.

On the day the ruling comes out, one Obama adviser joked, “I might have to clean out my sock drawer.”

In grappling with what the court may do, Mr. Obama and his advisers now appear to be far past the denial stage (when they dismissed constitutional challenges) but nowhere near acceptance (they still believe the law will be upheld.) Instead, they have quietly entered a surprising new state that might be called Learning to Live Without Universal Coverage.

Former advisers are emphasizing the many aspects of the bill that are not connected to the mandate, like the subsidies to buy insurance. Some aides even argue privately that losing the mandate could be a political boon, because it would rob Republicans of their core complaint against the law.

But that position is uncomfortable for a deeper reason, one that goes to the core of who Mr. Obama wanted to be as president. Earlier in his term, he refused every chance to settle for the more limited health care overhaul that the Supreme Court may now effectively deliver, making epic sacrifices to win something far broader.

Or, geniuses, they could toss out the whole cotton-pickin’ abomination…if we’re lucky.

The Supremes Can’t Hurry Love…errr…Obamacare

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

The eyes of America are fixed upon the Supreme Court today.  Will they uphold the Constitution, or will they pave the way for America to be remade into a European Democratic Socialist country?

Or, will they even issue a ruling at all, today?

Per the Los Angeles Times:

Television cameras will surround the Supreme Court on Thursday morning, as they did Monday, anticipating something that may, again, not happen.

The momentous healthcare decision could be announced Thursday. Or not. All we really know is that it is extremely likely to be handed down by the following Thursday, June 28, when the court is expected to end its current term.

The court works in secrecy as it prepares its opinions, and outsiders might be surprised to learn that some of its work is done at the last minute. The justices would have voted almost immediately after three days of oral arguments last March on whether President Obama’s healthcare overhaul is constitutional. Although that vote would normally have determined the outcome of the case, there is a lot of back and forth before the majority opinion and the dissents, if any, are finished.

Last Friday was the deadline for justices to hand in dissents. Then whoever is writing the majority opinion – the betting is on Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. – has the option of responding to any criticism of the ruling in his own opinion.

The decisions are printed inside the ornate 1935 Corinthian-style building, and handed out to reporters as the justice who authored the opinion announces the decision from the bench shortly after 10 a.m. By tradition the senior justice goes last, so healthcare is likely to be the last decision announced on the day it comes down.

Only a few times in modern history have the results leaked ahead of time, once reputedly from a comment by a justice to a reporter, another time from a talkative printer.

The court is not meeting Friday, so if the healthcare decision does not come Thursday, the next opportunity would be Monday.

So, why is America, including doctors, holding their breath every time SCOTUS is in session?

Heritage .org reports that

…a new survey shows that doctors have an even worse opinion [than the rest of the American public]. No one has a better grasp on the state of the health care system than physicians, and according to the Doctors Company survey, 60 percent of them believe that Obamacare will have a negative impact on overall patient care. This survey is consistent with the findings of another doctor survey taken in October 2010, which also showed doctors’ lack of confidence in Obamacare.

The survey was conducted to unveil physicians’ concerns about health care reform. The Doctors Company, which is the largest insurer of physician and surgeon medical liability in the nation, received more than 5,000 surveys, including all specialties and every region in the country. The results weren’t good for the President’s signature piece of legislation.

Not only do doctors believe that Obamacare will not improve the health care system, they also anticipate that it will worsen the current condition. According to the survey, nine out of 10 physicians are unwilling to recommend health care as a profession to a family member, and one primary care physician even commented, “I would not recommend becoming an M.D. to anyone.”

Obamacare doesn’t just discourage entrance into the medical profession; it encourages those who are already practicing to leave it. The survey states that “health care reform is motivating doctors to change their retirement timeline.” In fact, 43 percent of respondents said they are considering retiring within the next five years as a result of the law. A surgeon from Michigan wrote that under Obamacare, “We will be moving further away from humanity-based health care and more towards the patient as a commodity. This was not the way my father practiced—nor will I. Winding down to retire early.”

Currently, the United States is on the brink of a severe physician shortage. According to the American Association of Medical Colleges, by 2020, the nation will need an additional 91,500 doctors to meet medical demand. Dr. Donald J. Palmisano, former president of the American Medical Association, warns, “Today, we are perilously close to a true crisis as newly insured Americans enter the health care system and our population continues to age.” If current physicians leave the practice early because of the health law, the problem will be exacerbated even further.

Finally, the survey revealed concerns that the health law will compromise the doctor-patient relationship. Slightly more than half of doctors surveyed believe “that increased bureaucracy is reducing the personal interaction with patients essential for building a close relationship and understanding the nature of patient health.”

Governor Rick Perry of Texas put it succintly, when he said:

Obamacare has got everyone on edge. I mean, small business – men and women or big business are sitting out there saying we have no idea what this is going to cost, but we know it’s going to cost us and cost us a lot.

And Americans cannot afford Obama’s Affordable Healthcare Act. 

Obamacare Ruling Right Around the Corner

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

As all Americans know, the Supreme Court will issue a ruling shortly on the National Affordable Healthcare Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.

In reseaching stories for this post, I came upon several articles which were nothing but Liberal propaganda, including this little bit of pessimism from the New York Daily News:

Some are already anticipating the Supreme Court’s ruling on President Barack Obama’s health care law as the “decision of the century.” But the justices are unlikely to have the last word on America’s tangled efforts to address health care woes. The problems of high medical costs, widespread waste, and tens of millions of people without insurance will require Congress and the president to keep looking for answers, whether or not the Affordable Care Act passes the test of constitutionality.

With a decision by the court expected this month, here is a look at potential outcomes:

———

Q: What if the Supreme Court upholds the law and finds Congress was within its authority to require most people to have health insurance or pay a penalty?

A: That would settle the legal argument, but not the political battle.

The clear winners if the law is upheld and allowed to take full effect would be uninsured people in the United States, estimated at more than 50 million.

Starting in 2014, most could get coverage through a mix of private insurance and Medicaid, a safety-net program. Republican-led states that have resisted creating health insurance markets under the law would face a scramble to comply, but the U.S. would get closer to other economically advanced countries that guarantee medical care for their citizens.

Republicans would keep trying to block the law. They will try to elect presidential candidate Mitt Romney, backed by a GOP House and Senate, and repeal the law, although their chances of repeal would seem to be diminished by the court’s endorsement.

Obama would feel the glow of vindication for his hard-fought health overhaul, but it might not last long even if he’s re-elected.

The nation still faces huge problems with health care costs, requiring major changes to Medicare that neither party has explained squarely to voters. Some backers of Obama’s law acknowledge it was only a first installment: get most people covered, then deal with the harder problem of costs.

———

Q: On the other hand, what if the court strikes down the entire law?

A: Many people would applaud, polls suggest.

Taking down the law would kill a costly new federal entitlement before it has a chance to take root and develop a clamoring constituency, but that still would leave the problems of high costs, waste, and millions uninsured.

Some Republicans in Congress already are talking about passing anew the more popular pieces of the health law.

But the major GOP alternatives to Obama’s law would not cover nearly as many uninsured, and it’s unclear how much of a dent they would make in costs. Some liberals say Medicare-for-all, or government-run health insurance, will emerge as the only viable answer if Obama’s public-private approach fails.

It seems to me that the Daily News is ignoring the world around them.  Government Healthcare has been in place for years in countries such as Canada and Great Britain, and things are not as idyllic as Liberal writers would lead you to believe.

Back on June 7, 2010, Dick Morris and Eileen McGann wrote:

The leading Canadian newspaper, the Globe and Mail, reports that “critics say that the clinics are taking physicians away from the public system making it even harder…to find a family doctor.” David Eggen, executive director of a group that supports the Canadian socialized system, Friends of Medicare, said that it’s already hard to find a family physician in Canada and that clinics like these, springing up in several Canadian cities, could make it even harder.

It does not seem to have occurred to defenders of socialized medicine that the system itself is causing the doctor shortage. Cuts in medical fees, overcrowding of facilities, shortages of equipment and space, and bureaucratic oversight have all combined to drive men and women out of family medical practice. Now, with a critical shortage looming, those who can afford to pay for adequate care are opting out of the public system and, literally, taking their lives into their own hands.

But it is illegal to make patients “have to pay a fee to gain access to health services” that are provided free by the government system. So patients and doctors are forming membership-only groups to avoid the legal penalties that could potential stop them from getting or giving the care that they need.

This is where the United States is headed. Socialism dries up the supply of medical care and forces ever stricter rationing of the available resources. As Margaret Thatcher famously said, “Eventually socialism runs out of other peoples’ money.”

With the full implementation of Obamacare and its likely cuts in physician reimbursement, more and more doctors will choose to opt out of Medicare and charge their patients for their care. The elderly who need specialized care will have no choice but to take out insurance, not to fill gaps in Medicare coverage, but to overlay the system with private coverage so they can get the care Medicare now provides to all seniors. If you want to see a family doctor, it will be rough unless you are paying for the care privately. And to see a specialist, at the low reimbursement rates afforded by the program in the future, will be well nigh impossible.

Medical care for the elderly will become like public housing or public education in the inner city. Those who can afford to go elsewhere will. Those who can’t will be left to fend for themselves in overcrowded public facilities that will be, at least, free.

And then, as in Canada, liberal critics will rail, not against the system that dried up the resources in the first place or against the socialist rules that drove doctors out of medicine, but against the private clinics for resources from the public sector.

As someone who has worked in the Medical Industry, both in a Hospital System and in the Insurance Field, I have often wondered what Obama and the Dems’ purpose was in trying to destroy the greatest Healthcare System in the world.

My only conclusion is, that they despise American Exceptionalism, and they want our Healthcare System to be just as lousy as the other state-run ones.

They don’t care, as long as they, the Politboro, have life and death power over us, the unwashed Proletariat.

If SCOTUS does not strike down this unabashed, unconstitutional, government overreach, I would advise you to start picking out an ice floe to put Grandma on.