The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

Archive for the ‘Health Law’ Category

Banner Page Post

Posted by iusbvision on November 4, 2010

** The Banner Page Post is stickied to the top of the page. Be sure to scroll down for the newest posts! **

Video: Economic Freedom Countries vs Social Justice Ones.


Moody’s to USA: Change Course on Deficit Spending By Mid-July or Else… – UPDATE AAA is history…

Obama Administration Lawyer to Federal Court: If a citizen does not want to buy the forced ObamaCare mandate, all they have to do is eliminate their income and go into poverty to not qualify…

See our Israel post HERE – UPDATED!

Obama on Shovel Ready Jobs 2 Years Later

BreakingOver Half of All ObamaCare Waivers given to Unions

Breaking –  Republicans Find Multi-Billion Dollar Slush Funds Hidden in ObamaCare Bill – UPDATE: PolitiFact, FactCheck, WashPo Fact Checker, Heritage All Confirm

Speaker Boehner on the discovery of multi-billion dollar slush funds hidden in ObamaCare:


Please examine our “Summer of Recovery” and “ObamaCare” roundup posts! Who is it that’s Extreme?

Video: Tea Party Philosophy vs Progressivism

Salon Publishes MULTIPLE Calls for Torture, Murder of Sarah Palin

***If you are looking for our Wisconsin/Indiana Roundup Posts the original is HERE and the new one beginning with the aftermath is HERE.

November 1, 2010 It has happened: ObamaCare results in local lay-offs

Economic News Roundup II – Obama Reverses on Outsourcing!


UPDATEAARP and Many Others Hiking Premiums or Dumping Coverage Because of ObamaCare

Dr. Drew Pinsky on ObamaCare: ‘You will see a massive flight of physicians from the field’

111 companies and organizations get ObamaCare waivers from White House

700,000 Seniors Forced out of Medicare Advantage Plans – Cavuto: Was this the plan all along?

New poll says nearly half of all doctors will retire or make significant changes to practice due to ObamaCare

222 companies and unions get ObamaCare waivers from White House

The ObamaCare Waiver List – LINK – Now list over 700 OVER 1040 and growing…

Gallup: New record Low People getting health care through employer – LINK

Video: Gov. Mitch Daniels with John Stossel on how ObamaCare impacts Indiana – LINK.

A comprehensive list of tax hikes in ObamaCare – LINK

Sebelius Cracks! Admits the Obamacare Books Were Cooked! Admits to Double Counting Half Trillion Dollars! – LINK.

Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Violence | Leave a Comment »

Hey Joe Donnelly: It’s too late to apologize

Posted by iusbvision on November 1, 2010

Hey Joe, it was one thing when it was theory or it was somebody else, but now you have impacted and hurt our neighbors, so now its personal.

It has happened: ObamaCare results in local lay-offsWNDU: Memorial Hospital cites Obama Health Care Reform on hospital layoffs

Get ready for this: 

It’s too late to apologize:

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

It has happened: ObamaCare results in local lay-offs

Posted by iusbvision on November 1, 2010

It is just as we stated, just as we predicted, just as we have explained for months; now it isn’t far away places. It’s here.

WNDU:

Memorial Hospital cites Obama Health Care Reform on hospital layoffs
South Bend, Ind.
With St. Joseph County’s unemployment rate still sitting above ten percent, things could be getting worse thanks to cuts at Memorial Hospital.

Reporter: Kevin Lewis

With St. Joseph County’s unemployment rate still sitting above ten percent, things could be getting worse thanks to cuts at Memorial Hospital. Those cuts began back in June and hospital leaders say there’s no end in sight.

While hospital leaders admit the economy sparked this problem, it says the Obama Health Care Reform Act gave the hospital a one-two punch. While more people may soon get more health coverage, Obama’s plan cuts reimbursement dollars for hospitals at a time administrators say they could use them most.

If you roll up a chair and type your way to Memorial Hospital’s web site, you can click your way through 45 active job openings. Pay the hospital a visit and you’ll see it’s still getting patients and paying for construction improvements. So why would it cut nearly fifty jobs in just five months?

“No more discriminating against children with pre-existing conditions. No more retroactively dropping someone’s policy when they get sick, those days are over,” President Obama said at a June press conference.

Hospital leaders say the days of high-priced insurance may be over, but add that the days of cuts are here. In a statement the hospital said:

“Health care reform in its current state has already started to cut reimbursement rates to hospitals across the region and the country and we expect that reality to get worse moving forward.”

It’s too late to apologize:

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

Sarah Palin: Lies, Damned Lies – Obamacare 6 Months Later

Posted by iusbvision on September 24, 2010

This is a great post by former Governor Sarah Palin. She covers most of the pertinent facts we have been bringing you for a year in our health care round-up posts and our Health Law category, and all in one very well articulated note.

Sarah Palin:

It’s now six months since President Obama took control of one-sixth of the private sector economy with his health care “reform,” and the first changes to our health care system come into effect today. Despite overwhelming public dislike of the bill, we were told that D.C. knows best, and there was nothing to worry about, and we’d be better off swallowing the pill called Obamacare; so, in defiance of the will of the people, the President and his party rammed through this mother of all unfunded mandates. Nancy Pelosi said Congress had to pass the bill so that Americans could “find out what is in it.” We found out that it’s even worse than we feared.

Remember when the president said, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor”? Not true. In Texas alone a record number of doctors are leaving the Medicare system because of the cuts in reimbursements forced on them by Obamacare! The president of the Texas Medical Association, Dr. Susan Bailey, warns that “the Medicare system is beginning to implode.”

Remember the Obama administration’s promise that Obamacare would cut a typical family’s premium “by up to $2500 a year”? Not true. In fact, fueled by reports that insurers expect premiums to rise by as much as 25 percent as a result of Obamacare, Senate Democrats are contemplating the introduction of price controls.

Remember when the president said in his address to Congress that “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions”? That turned out to be yet another one of those “You lie!” moments. We found out that Obamacare-mandated high risk insurance pools set up in states like Pennsylvania and New Mexico will fund abortions after all.

Remember the promise that Obamacare would “strengthen small businesses”? Not true either. The net result of Obamacare is that small businesses will face higher health care costs, new Medicare taxes, and higher regulation compliance costs, while the much-hyped health care tax credit for small businesses turns out to be almost impossible to obtain.

Remember the president’s promise that his bill would ensure “everyone [has] some basic security”? False again. Besides the great uncertainty that Obamacare hampers businesses with, companies now find it is actually cheaper to pay the $2000 per employee fine imposed by Obamacare than to keep insuring their workforce. This leaves millions of American workers at risk of losing their employer-provided health insurance.

And remember when the Obama administration said they would not be “rationing care” in the future? That ol’ “death panels” thing I wrote about last year? That was before Obamacare was passed. Once it passed, they admitted there was going to be rationing after all. There has to be. The reality of Obamacare is that it enshrines what the New York Times called “The Power of No” – the government’s power to say no to your request for treatment of the people you love. The fact that the president used a recess appointment to push through the nomination of Dr. Donald Berwick as head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services tells you all you need to know about this administration’s intentions. After all, Berwick is the man who said, “The decision is not whether we will ration care – the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

By the way, when the administration was talking about that independent board that has the statutory power to decide which categories of treatment are worthy of funding based on efficiency calculations (that, again, sounded to me like a panel of faceless bureaucrats making life and death decisions about your loved ones – which, again, is what I referred to as a “death panel”), it was another opportunity for Americans to hear the truth about Obamacare’s intentions.

So, yes, those rationing “death panels” are there, and so are the tax increases that the president also promised were “absolutely not” in his bill. (Aren’t you tiring of the untruths coming from this White House and the liberals in Congress?) When the state of Florida filed a challenge to Obamacare on the basis that the mandates in the bill are unconstitutional, the Obama Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss the suit by citing the Anti-Injunction Act, which blocks courts from interfering with the federal government’s ability to collect taxes. Yes, taxes! Once the bill was passed it was no longer politically inconvenient for the Obama administration to admit that it makes no difference whether the payment is a tax or a penalty because it’s “assessed and collected in the same manner.” The National Taxpayer Advocate has already warnedthat “Congress must provide sufficient funding” to allow the IRS to collect this new tax. Pretty soon we’ll be paying taxes just to make it possible for the IRS to collect all the additional taxes under Obamacare! Seems as if this is another surprise that the public found out about after the bill was rammed through.

But perhaps the most ridiculous promise of all was the president’s assurance that Obamacare will lead to “bending the curve” on health care spending. Yes, rationing is a part of the new system, and yes, Obamacare does raise taxes. But because the new government managed system is so incredibly complicated and expensive to run, health care spending will actually rise instead of fall. Don’t believe me? Then take a look at the Congressional Budget Office’s admittance that the CBO’s original estimate of the total costs of the bill were off by around $115 billion. Its new estimate is now above $1 trillion, and even that may be way too low. A more realistic figure calculated by the Pacific Research Institute puts the number at $2.5 to $3 trillion over the next 10 years! This is probably what President Obama was referring to when he admitted recently that he had known all along that “at the margins” his proposals were going to drive up costs. Give us a break! Only in this administration would they refer to a $3 trillion spending increase as “marginal.” Next time he comes to us with another one of his harebrained proposals for a budget-busting federal power grab, let’s make sure we remember the president’s admission that he was lying all along when he told us his health care plan was going to cut costs. He is increasing costs. He admits it now. Period.

Higher costs and worse care – is it any wonder why people are overwhelmingly in favor of repealing and replacing Obamacare? Politicians who have vacillated on this issue need to be fired. Candidates who don’t support “repeal and replace” don’t deserve your support. No amount of money spent on Washington’s “government-wide apolitical public information campaign” (otherwise known as “propaganda”) will convince Americans that this awful legislation is anything other than a debt-driven big government train wreck. We need to repeal and replace it, and that can only happen if we elect a new Congress that will make scrapping Obamacare one of its top priorities. We can replace it with pro-private sector, patient-oriented reform that the GOP has proposed.

On March 23, when Obamacare was signed into law, I launched my “Take back the 20” campaign, focusing on 20 congressional districts that John McCain and I carried in 2008 which are or were represented by members of Congress who voted in favor of Obamacare. They need to be held accountable for those votes. They voted for Obamacare. Now we can vote against them. We need to replace them with representatives who will respect the will of the people.

That’s why today I’m launching a new Take Back the 20 website atwww.takebackthe20.com!

TakeBackthe20.com provides information about the candidates in these 20 districts who are committed to repealing and replacing Obamacare. It has links to their personal websites and their donation pages. It allows you to read up on them, and then support them in their race to defeat those who gave us this terrible bill.

We have to send Washington a message that it’s not acceptable to disregard the will of the people. We have to tell them enough is enough. No more defying the Constitution. No more driving us off a financial cliff. We must repeal and replace Obamacare with patient-centered, results-driven, free market reform that provides solutions to people of all income levels without bankrupting our country.

It’s time to make a stand! Let’s take back the 20!

– Sarah Palin

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Palin Truth Squad | 1 Comment »

Michael Barone: Gangster government stifles criticism of ObamaCare – UPDATED!

Posted by iusbvision on September 18, 2010

Previous:

OPPRESSION: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SAYS “SHUT UP” – THREATENS HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR POLITICAL FREE SPEECH!

THUGOCRACY – OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THREATENS INSURANCE COMPANIES TO KEEP QUIET ABOUT RISING HEALTH CARE COSTS DUE TO LEGISLATION….OR ELSE

 

Barone:

“There will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases.”

That sounds like a stern headmistress dressing down some sophomores who have been misbehaving. But it’s actually from a letter sent Thursday from Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to Karen Ignagni, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans — the chief lobbyist for private health insurance companies.

Secretary Sebelius objects to claims by health insurers that they are raising premiums because of increased costs imposed by the Obamacare law passed by Congress last March.

She acknowledges that many of the law’s “key protections” take effect later this month and does not deny that these impose additional costs on insurers. But she says that “according to our analysis and those of some industry and academic experts, any potential premium impact . . . will be minimal.”

Well, that’s reassuring. Er, except that if that’s the conclusion of “some” industry and academic experts, it’s presumably not the conclusion of all industry and academic experts, or the secretary would have said so.

Sebelius also argues that “any premium increases will be moderated by out-of-pocket savings resulting from the law.” But she’s pretty vague about the numbers — “up to $1 billion in 2013.” Anyone who watches TV ads knows that “up to” can mean zero.

As Time magazine’s Karen Pickert points out, Sebelius ignores the fact that individual insurance plans cover different types of populations. So that government and “some” industry and academic experts think the new law will justify increases averaging 1 or 2 percent, they could justify much larger increases for certain plans.

Or as Ignagni, the recipient of the letter, says, “It’s a basic law of economics that additional benefits incur additional costs.”

But Sebelius has “zero tolerance” for that kind of thing. She promises to issue regulations to require “state or federal review of all potentially unreasonable rate increases” (which would presumably mean all rate increases).

And there’s a threat. “We will also keep track of insurers with a record of unjustified rate increases: Those plans may be excluded from health insurance Exchanges in 2014.”

That’s a significant date, the first year in which state insurance exchanges are slated to get a monopoly on the issuance of individual health insurance policies. Sebelius is threatening to put health insurers out of business in a substantial portion of the market if they state that Obamacare is boosting their costs.

“Congress shall make no law,” reads the First Amendment, “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

Sebelius’ approach is different: “zero tolerance” for dissent.

The threat to use government regulation to destroy or harm someone’s business because they disagree with government officials is thuggery. Like the Obama administration’s transfer of money from Chrysler bondholders to its political allies in the United Auto Workers, it is a form of gangster government.

“The rule of law, or the rule of men (women)?” economist Tyler Cowen asks on his marginalrevolution.com blog. As he notes, “Nowhere is it stated that these rate hikes are against the law (even if you think they should be), nor can this ‘misinformation’ be against the law.”

According to Politico, not a single Democratic candidate for Congress has run an ad since last April that makes any positive reference to Obamacare. The First Amendment gives candidates the right to talk — or not talk — about any issue they want.

But that is not enough for Sebelius and the Obama administration. They want to stamp out negative speech about Obamacare. “Zero tolerance” means they are ready to use the powers of government to threaten economic harm on those who dissent.

The closing paragraph of Sebelius’ letter to AHIP’s Karen Ignagni gives the game away. “We worked hard to change the system to help consumers.” This is a reminder that the administration alternatively collaborated with and criticized Ignagni’s organization. We roughed you up a little but we eventually made a deal.

The secretary goes on: “It is my hope we can work together to stop misinformation and misleading marketing from the start.” In other words, shut your members up and play team ball — or my guys with the baseball bats and tommy guns are going to get busy. As Tyler Cowen puts it, “worse than I had been expecting.”

Michael Barone,The Examiner’s senior political analyst, can be contacted at mbarone@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Wednesday and Sunday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

 

UPDATEBarone continues:

A few days before my Examiner column accusing Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius of thuggery and gangster government for her threats against health insurers who contradict the administration line on the costs of Obamacare, my friend John Hoff, who worked on health care policy in the Bush administration, published a piece on the Heritage website describing some of the things the administration might be able to do under Obamacare. Including de facto price controls without explicit authority. Sounds like a primer on gangster government—taking away people’s property without due process of law. All the more reason to repeal this appallingly bad legislation.

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration, Violence | Leave a Comment »

THUGOCRACY – OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THREATENS INSURANCE COMPANIES TO KEEP QUIET ABOUT RISING HEALTH CARE COSTS DUE TO LEGISLATION….OR ELSE

Posted by iusbvision on September 10, 2010

By the way this isn’t the first time – previous: OPPRESSION: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SAYS “SHUT UP” – THREATENS HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR POLITICAL FREE SPEECH!

UPDATE –  Michael Barone: Gangster government stifles criticism of ObamaCare

 

This is an abuse of power and an impeachable offense. No citizen should tolerate government behaving this way.

Yahoo News/Associated Press:

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama’s top health official on Thursday warned the insurance industry that the administration won’t tolerate blaming premium hikes on the new health overhaul law.

“There will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a letter to the insurance lobby.

“Simply stated, we will not stand idly by as insurers blame their premium hikes and increased profits on the requirement that they provide consumers with basic protections,” Sebelius said. She warned that bad actors may be excluded from new health insurance markets that will open in 2014 under the law. They’d lose out on a big pool of customers, as many as 30 million people nationwide.

 

Obama’s own medicare team said that the legislation will raise costs and raise expenses to insurance companies. See the proof HERE and scroll down to Update IX.

UPDATE IX – Insurance Companies report that premiums will rise up to 9% as a direct result of the ObamaCare legislation

Wall Street Journal:

The health-care overhaul enacted last spring won’t significantly change national health spending over the next decade compared with projections before the law was passed, according to government figures released Thursday.

The report by federal number-crunchers casts fresh doubt on Democrats’ argument that the health-care law would curb the sharp increase in costs over the long term, the second setback this week for one of the party’s biggest legislative achievements.

The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that insurance companies have proposed rate increases ranging from 1% to 9% nationwide that they attribute specifically to new health-law coverage mandates.

Democrats signaled they would ratchet up pressure on the companies. “Insurers are using the consumer protections in health reform as a cover for their own greed,” said Rep. Pete Stark (D., Calif.), chairman of the House Ways and Means health subcommittee.

Michigan Rep. Dave Camp, the top Republican on that committee, said the rate increases underscore why lawmakers should repeal the legislation and replace it with changes that make care more affordable.

Regardless of the health law, national health spending has been rising in recent years and economists expect that to continue. In February, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projected that overall national health spending would increase an average of 6.1% a year over the next decade.

Note the source of the graph – this is the Obama Administrations own Medicare and Medicaid team’s (and likely best case scenario) numbers.

First graph, overall health costs go up.

Second graph – aggregate out-of-pocket costs will go down (because the law allows those without insurance will be able to buy coverage and walk into a hospital and when the care is complete they will be able to drop the insurance. So why carry insurance all the time? This leads us to what happens in graph 3).

Third graph – insurance companies will have to pay more for your care because of the new taxes and to cover the expense of people gaming the system (see graph 2 explanation above) which will result in raised rates for all those playing fair.

4th graph – a phony number because the ObamaCare bill looked better on paper by pushing reimbursements to doctors down, but in reality this would result in many doctors not accepting Medicare. Everyone knows that Congress will have to pass what is called “the doc fix” which will then send this number much higher. Another reason why this number went down is because ObamaCare shifts more of the burden off the federal government and onto state Medicaid programs with new unfunded mandates….. which leads us to graph five.

5th Graph – One of the ways ObamaCare was made to look better on paper is that it shifted part of the health cost burden to the states with unfunded mandates forcing states to raise your taxes to cover it. The State of Indiana hired the consulting firm Milliman Inc. to provide the state with an estimate of what the new ObamaCare mandates on the state will be and how it may impact the Indiana budget. The result is not pretty. Milliman estimates that the new mandates will cost the Indiana $3.6 billion over ten years and will result in approximately 1 in 4 Hoosiers will in some way be subsidized by the program. Imagine what that will do to the state budget and to things such as education funding. But hey, why raise taxes when the feds can pass unfunded mandates on the states and force them to raise taxes to pay for it.

So much for the Democrats and Obama’s repeated promises that the bill would lower your costs and premiums. As we have stated since we read the bill it was designed to make private health care more expensive and as Nancy Pelosi stated so “they will cry out for a public option” (see the video at the link).

[Note – Be sure to see our previous health care news archive posts HERE and HERE.]

Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Leftist Hate in Action, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 3 Comments »

North Carolina Sheriffs want lists of patients using painkillers

Posted by iusbvision on September 10, 2010

Does the Sheriffs Association have any idea what 4th Amendment reasonable expectation of privacy means? (…on a side note the way public schools teach civics and the Constitution they probably don’t)

In order to do this, and trust me if it happens it most certainly will go to court, we will see two opposing rulings form the courts go face to face. The supreme court (foolishly) ruled that you has no reasonable expectation of privacy in third party communications (emails, credit cards, phone records, GPS tracking on your cell phone etc), but will they be so outrageous to say that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to your medical status and medical records because you used a third party such as a drug store?

Well appearently we just learned what the North Carolina Sheriffs Association thinks of that argument.

A note to our friends in North Carolina. When he/she runs for election get them to promise on the record not to support this outrageous request.

NC News Observer:

Sheriffs in North Carolina want access to state computer records identifying anyone with prescriptions for powerful painkillers and other controlled substances.

The state sheriff’s association pushed the idea Tuesday, saying the move would help them make drug arrests and curb a growing problem of prescription drug abuse. But patient advocates say opening up people’s medicine cabinets to law enforcement would deal a devastating blow to privacy rights.

Allowing sheriffs’ offices and other law enforcement officials to use the state’s computerized list would vastly widen the circle of people with access to information on prescriptions written for millions of people. As it stands now, doctors and pharmacists are the main users.

Nearly 30 percent of state residents received at least one prescription for a controlled substance, anything from Ambien to OxyContin, in the first six months of this year, according to the state Department of Health and Human Services. Nearly 2.5 million people filled prescriptions in that time for more than 375 million doses. The database has about 53.5 million prescriptions in it.

Sheriffs made their pitch Tuesday to a legislative health care committee looking for ways to confront prescription drug abuse. Local sheriffs said that more people in their counties die of accidental overdoses than from homicides.

For years, sheriffs have been trying to convince legislators that the state’s prescription records should be open to them.

“We can better go after those who are abusing the system,” said Lee County Sheriff Tracy L. Carter.

Others say opening up patients’ medicine cabinets to law enforcement is a terrible idea.

“I am very concerned about the potential privacy issues for people with pain,” said Candy Pitcher of Cary, who volunteers for the nonprofit American Pain Foundation. “I don’t feel that I should have to sign away my privacy rights just because I take an opioid under doctor’s care.” Pitcher is receiving treatment for a broken back.

The ACLU opposed a bill in 2007 that would have opened the list to law enforcement officials, said ACLU lobbyist Sarah Preston. The organization would likely object to the new proposal.

“What really did concern us is the privacy aspect,” she said. Opening the record to more users could deter someone from getting necessary medicine because of the fear that others would find out, she said, “particularly in small towns where everybody knows everybody.”

The state started collecting the information in 2007 to help doctors identify patients who go from doctor to doctor looking for prescription drugs they may not need, and to keep pharmacists from supplying patients with too many pills. But only about 20 percent of the state’s doctors have registered to use the information, and only 10 percent of the pharmacies are registered.

Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law | 1 Comment »

Health Care Roundup Part III – It Begins: Premiums Rising, Tax Payer Funded Abortions, Government Reverses and Now Claims “its a tax”, Government Announces That Yes It Really Can Turn You Down for Care… – UPDATE VII: Doctor Group Pushes For Repeal! – UPDATE IX: Insurance companies report that premiums will rise up to 9% as a direct result of the ObamaCare legislation

Posted by iusbvision on July 21, 2010

This thread will be updated continually and is stickied to the top of the page for now. Be sure to scroll down for updates and check this post for updates as well. – Editor

BREAKING STORY: THUGOCRACY – OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THREATENS INSURANCE COMPANIES TO KEEP QUIET ABOUT RISING HEALTH CARE COSTS DUE TO LEGISLATION….OR ELSE

 

Scroll down to seee Update VII – Doctor group pushes for repeal saying Obamacare forces bureaucrats to get between doctor and patient

 

The elite media covers these stories online, but where is the TV pounding?

ABC News – Individual Health Insurance Premiums Jump:

Kaiser Foundation Survey Finds Steep Jump in Individual Health Insurance premiums

By TOM MURPHY

The Associated Press

People who buy their own health insurance have been hit lately with premium hikes that far exceed increases in premiums for employer-sponsored coverage, according to a new survey from the Kaiser Family Foundation.

The nonprofit foundation, which is separate from health insurer Kaiser Permanente, said recent premium hikes requested by insurers for individual coverage averaged 20 percent. Some customers were able to switch plans and pay less, so people paying on their own actually wound up paying 13 percent more on average.

That tops last year’s average 5 percent annual increase for employer-sponsored family coverage and almost unchanged premiums for employer-sponsored single coverage, though foundation Vice President Gary Claxton said the comparisons come with qualifications.

The individual insurance survey asked respondents for their most recent premium increases, and those can happen more or less frequently than the annual increases mostly seen in the group market, he noted.

In the online poll, Kaiser queried 1,038 randomly selected people who pay for their own coverage.

The Hill – Health Law Allows Government To Turn Away Sick

The Obama administration has not ruled out turning sick people away from an insurance program created by the new healthcare law to provide coverage for the uninsured.

Critics of the $5 billion high-risk pool program insist it will run out of money before Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the program sunsets and health plans can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.

Administration officials insist they can make changes to the program to ensure it lasts until 2014, and that it may not have to turn away sick people. Officials said the administration could also consider reducing benefits under the program, or redistributing funds between state pools. But they acknowledged turning some people away was also a possibility.

“There’s a certain amount of money authorized in the statute, and we will do our best to make sure that amount of money insures as many people as possible and does as much good as possible,” said Jay Angoff, director of the Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). “I think it’s premature to say [what happens] when it’s gone.”

Heritage Video – Government Health Care Impact on Doctors and Patients:

Just how bad is it getting?

Congress Daily at National Journal – CBO says “Doc Fix” will cost 33% higher than previously reported.

The Democratic Leadership promised the AMA this “Doc Fix” legislation to increase Medicare reimbursements in exchange for their support for ObamaCare [Note – the AMA is now so politically polarizing that it only represents 18% of doctors as of last year – Editor]:

The debate over what to do about Medicare payments to doctors continues. physicians have been lobbying ”to repeal the Sustainable Growth Rate formula, which triggers automatic Medicare payment cuts if spending rises above a certain level,” CongressDaily reports. Those cuts have been put off for years.

On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office said that just freezing current Medicare payment rates to doctors would likely cost nearly $276 billion through 2020, a 33 percent increase from legislation that would “accomplish that goal introduced late last year by Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., estimated to cost $207 billion at the time” according to CongressDaily. ”Aides on both sides of the aisle attributed the cost increase to assumptions of an improved economy, which tends to add more to the cost of health services, as well as demographic changes that foresee increased numbers of retirees in 2020 over the previous year.”

Karl Rove in WSJ – ObamaCare’s Ever-Rising Price Tag:

For starters, Mr. Foster  [Medicare Actuary Richard Foster] estimated Americans would pay $120 billion in fines for not having adequate insurance coverage and that 14 million people would lose their coverage as rising costs led companies to dump it. Those effects are not in keeping with Mr. Obama’s promises that if people liked the health insurance they had they could keep it, and that the reforms would provide universal coverage.

Finding it hard to cover costs under the bill’s formulas, according to Mr. Foster’s analysis, doctors would refuse new patients and one out of every six hospitals and nursing homes could start operating in the red. And while Medicaid would cover 16 million more people, there might not be enough doctors to treat them.

Because of new taxes, Mr. Foster rightly claimed that sick people would face “high drug and device prices” and everyone would pay higher premiums—again, exactly the opposite of what Mr. Obama said.

Drug and medical device companies are already making provisions for the new taxes that kick in next year. This means less investment in plants and equipment and smaller R&D budgets. Big layoffs, especially in the pharmaceutical industry, will result as companies confront this expensive new reality.

All of this represents a great political challenge to the administration and the Democratic Party this fall. Doctors, nurses and hospital workers impacted by health-care reform’s adverse effects will speak more often to more people and with greater passion and credibility than will the president and his allies. So too will the millions of people who work for insurance companies, drug companies, device manufacturers and other health-care providers.

Then there are employers and their workers. According to a survey by Towers Watson, a human resources consulting firm, 88% of companies plan to pass on increased health-care benefit costs to employees, 74% plan to reduce benefits, and up to 12% will drop all coverage for employees. Retirees won’t fare well either: 43% of employers that now provide retiree medical benefits are likely to reduce or eliminate them thanks to the new health legislation.

Employers will not wait until the last moment to spring changes on their workers. They understand it is ihttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2Kevz_9lsw&feature=relatedn their best interest to fully educate employees about the ramifications of the new health-care bill. Many have already begun helping employees understand why companies are being forced to make inevitable changes.

Much more to come tomorrow – Obama’s reversal on tax payer funded abortions for convenience and wait till we introduce you to who we can only call “Dr. Death Panel” now working for the administration…

UPDATE I –

Obama Recess Appoints In Your Face Marxist Donald Berwick to Run Center for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS)

As you will soon see this man is clear in his advocacy for “death panels”, directly calls for total government rationing, and speaks in openly marxist terms.  Obama recess appointed this man even though his party owns the Senate because this man is so radical that he could not withstand the confirmation process.

The good stuff is right at the end of this speech where he praises Britain’s system which has become a national disgrace with people in long waiting lists, death from cancer on the rise and patients starving and neglected in their beds as we have been reporting HERE.  

Here are some quotes from Berwick’s speeches via the Wall Street Journal:

“I cannot believe that the individual health care consumer can enforce through choice the proper configurations of a system as massive and complex as health care. That is for leaders to do.”  [Translation – You and your doctor are too stupid to make your health care choices and you need a bureaucrat to make them for you]

“You cap your health care budget, and you make the political and economic choices you need to make to keep affordability within reach.” [Translation -With all the government waste we will have to cap spending  so sorry government can’t afford your hip replacement surgery this year]

“Please don’t put your faith in market forces. It’s a popular idea: that Adam Smith’s invisible hand would do a better job of designing care than leaders with plans can.” [Staple of Marxist theory]

“Indeed, the Holy Grail of universal coverage in the United States may remain out of reach unless, through rational collective action overriding some individual self-interest, we can reduce per capita costs.” [Translation – Government rationing – sorry your too old for this pacemaker. Would you like a pain pill?]

“It may therefore be necessary to set a legislative target for the growth of spending at 1.5 percentage points below currently projected increases and to grant the federal government the authority to reduce updates in Medicare fees if the target is exceeded.” [Translation – Lower the pay for doctors so there will be less of them and fewer of them taking government insurance even though we will raise the demand by telling people health care is “free”]

“A progressive policy regime will control and rationalize financing—control supply.” [Translation – leftists who have bankrupted social security, medicare etc  will be in control! What could go wrong?]

“The unaided human mind, and the acts of the individual, cannot assure excellence. Health care is a system, and its performance is a systemic property.” [Translation – Yet another Marxist staple that there is no such thing as individual excellence – it is not the individual that matters it is the system. … think about that one for a moment]

“Health care is a common good—single payer, speaking and buying for the common good.” [Translation – unless your too old, too young or that new wonder drug is too expensive]

“Hence, those working in health care delivery may be faced with situations in which it seems that the best course is to manipulate the flawed system for the benefit of a specific patient or segment of the population, rather than to work to improve the delivery of care for all. Such manipulation produces more flaws, and the downward spiral continues.” [Translation – Don’t go that extra mile in taking care of the patient]

“For-profit, entrepreneurial providers of medical imaging, renal dialysis, and outpatient surgery, for example, may find their business opportunities constrained.” [Translation – we are going to start legislating you out of business as we start nationalizing health care]

“I would place a commitment to excellence—standardization to the best-known method—above clinician autonomy as a rule for care.” [Translation – doctors will follow government guidelines – no you mat NOT have that mammogram before age 50 – your doctor cannot make exceptions for you]

“Young doctors and nurses should emerge from training understanding the values of standardization and the risks of too great an emphasis on individual autonomy.” [Translation – no translation needed for that one… this man advocates everything that the Democrats and Obama said would not happen, while at the same time they blocked Republican amendments to the bill to put in safeguards for the old and sick]

“Political leaders in the Labour Government have become more enamored of the use of market forces and choice as an engine for change, rather than planned, centrally coordinated technical support.”

“The U.K has people in charge of its health care—people with the clear duty and much of the authority to take on the challenge of changing the system as a whole. The U.S. does not.”

Here is a little common sense rebuttal to Berwick’s marxist nonsense –

Related:

Amendments the Democrats shot down to protect seniors and the sick – LINK

Anti-rationing amendments were defeated by Democrats in both the House and Senate.  More – LINK.

Senator Brownback on Death Panels

Cornell Law Professor: Palin is right about “Death Panels” for ObamaCare – UPDATED!

Dick Morris: Reform at Seniors’ Expense

OREGON STATE HEALTH CARE TELLS 64 YEAR OLD CITIZEN IT WILL NOT PAY FOR THE DRUG TO HELP SAVE HER BUT WILL PAY FOR EUTHANASIA! UPDATE – Local News Video Added

How ObamaCare has built in disincentives for doctors to aid the very young, very sick and elderly.

Ten Questions to Ask at a Townhall Meeting About ObamaCare

New Republican Ad on “Senior’s Bill of Rights”

OPPRESSION: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SAYS “SHUT UP” – THREATENS HEALTH INSURANCE COMPANIES FOR POLITICAL FREE SPEECH!

Palin Reduced Medicaid Backlog 83% In Two Years

More to come – Tax payer funding of abortions and Obama Reverses himself on “It’s a tax”…

UPDATE II- Obama Reverses on Public Funding of Abortions – Said That Those Who Said It Would Happen Are “Bearing False Witness…”

Obama also promised to sign an executive order preventing it from happening to get so-called “pro-life Democrats” like Bart Stupak and Joe Donnelly. Of course an executive order cannot change the text of legislation. All a ruse?

Glenn Beck has the video – (If Bush was caught in lies this big imagine the media feeding frenzy) 

Obama – 8/19/2009 : There are some folks out there who are frankly, bearing false witness, but I want everyone to know what health insurance reform is all about… you’ve heard that this is all going to mean government funding of abortion. Not True. This is all – these are all fabrications that have been put out there in order to discourage people from meeting what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation.

AP – New Mexico: Elective Abortion Covered in ObamaCare

WASHINGTON (AP) – Abortion opponents are raising questions about a critical new insurance program under President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law.

Federal officials say elective abortion is barred under the Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan. It offers coverage to people turned down by private insurers because of medical problems, at rates comparable to what the healthy pay.

But at least one state – New Mexico – initially listed elective abortion as a covered benefit, reversing course after The Associated Press inquired on Wednesday.

National Right to Life and other abortion opponents say rules for the program have not been clearly spelled out, and that could open the way for taxpayer-subsidized coverage of elective abortion. Federal law bars paying for abortion with government money, except in cases of rape or incest or to save the mother’s life.

“We don’t think this is just a problem of vagueness, we see a pattern of the Obama administration trying to expand abortion any time they can get away with it,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life.

A spokeswoman for the federal Health and Human Services Department said that’s totally wrong, and insisted there was no intention of allowing abortion coverage under the new program, also known as PCIP.

So New Mexico pulls the document from the web site but is this an explicit full reversal?

National Review:

ObamaCare Covers Abortion in Pennsylvania — and in New Mexico, Too

Yesterday, we visited the Pennsylvania high-risk health-care insurance program and its abortion funding.

In New Mexico, the new $37 million high-risk pool began enrolling individuals on July 1. They will start receiving benefits in August, including elective-abortion services, according to the state insurance department’s website. Once a deductible is paid, 80 percent of the elective abortion is covered.

Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee tells me: “HHS has been hiding most of these high-risk plans, including the plan that HHS will administer directly in 21 states. Of the four state plans we’ve managed to ferret out, two provided coverage of all essentially all abortions — Pennsylvania and New Mexico. This is part of a pattern, under this administration, of making ‘soft’ rhetorical statements on abortion policy, but consistently promoting and expanding abortion through low-visibility administrative decisions. The administration’s heavy funding of groups pushing a proposed new pro-abortion constitution in Kenya is another example.”

CNS News is reporting that GOP House leader John Boehner has sent a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius asking for the clear guidelines that prohibit taxpayer funding of abortion and has received no response. Health and Human Services says that its guidelines prohibit taxpayer funding of elective abortions, but this is the oldest one in the book because as any pro-life group will tell you, such administrative language is slippery easy to get around because the abolitionist just says “it is necessary for the health of the mother” because “health” can mean almost anything. Many states have been through the wringer of the courts on this one.

What is most interesting is the low-key “administrative denial” coming from HHS. If all of these news outlets and others have this totally wrong this would be a great opportunity for the White House to use this to pound their political enemies, especially Glenn Beck. But doing so would be a message to the states and bureaucrats “hey you better not try to include taxpayer funding of abortions”.

Related:

The Myth of the Pro-Life Democrat in Congress

Stupak’s “Pro-Life” Caucus $4.7 Billion in Earmark Funds after Voting for Public Funding of Abortion

SHOCK: Speaker Pelosi’s Government-Run Health Plan Will Require a Monthly Abortion Premium (This part of the bill was removed eventually but this really gives insight to their mindset)

Candidate Obama vs. President Obama

Mother of all political lies: Obama promised that all health care negotiations would be on C-Span

More to come – Obama lectures George Stephanopoulos of ABC/DNC on “Hey ObamaCare isn’t a tax”… but guess what they are saying today… tune in tomorrow…

UPDATE III – Obama: It’s not a tax, oh Wait it is a tax…….

OK so it is not tomorrow, apologies as I had to cover for people at my other job, but here is this important update

Remember this? 

OBAMA: No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase.

People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I’m not covering all the costs.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it may be fair, it may be good public policy…

OBAMA: No, but — but, George, you — you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase. Any…

STEPHANOPOULOS: Here’s the…

OBAMA: What — what — if I — if I say that right now your premiums are going to be going up by 5 or 8 or 10 percent next year and you say well, that’s not a tax increase; but, on the other hand, if I say that I don’t want to have to pay for you not carrying coverage even after I give you tax credits that make it affordable, then…

STEPHANOPOULOS: I — I don’t think I’m making it up. Merriam Webster’s Dictionary: Tax — “a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.”

OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition.

April 29th Wall Street Journal – thats right folks, April…this means that they have had this in mind for a long time so you betcha Obama is lying to Stephanapoulos:

A”tell” in poker is a subtle but detectable change in a player’s behavior or demeanor that reveals clues about the player’s assessment of his hand. Something similar has happened with regard to the insurance mandate at the core of last month’s health reform legislation. Congress justified its authority to enact the mandate on the grounds that it is a regulation of commerce. But as this justification came under heavy constitutional fire, the mandate’s defenders changed the argument—now claiming constitutional authority under Congress’s power to tax.

This switch in constitutional theories is a tell: Defenders of the bill lack confidence in their commerce power theory. The switch also comes too late. When the mandate’s constitutionality comes up for review as part of the state attorneys general lawsuit, the Supreme Court will not consider the penalty enforcing the mandate to be a tax because, in the provision that actually defines and imposes the mandate and penalty, Congress did not call it a tax and did not treat it as a tax. [Read more at the link as it goes on to explain some of the legal nuances of the argument – Editor]

Obama promised not to raise taxes one dime over those who make under $250,00 a year. This is a tax pledge that has been broken a dozen times already, but on this one at least some of the elite media is paying attention. As the mandate, which most certainly is a tax in spite of the rhetorical gymnastics, would hit everybody.

Even the New York Times (July 18) is reporting on this:

When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”

And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.

Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.

Related:

Here come the new taxes with ObamaCare – UPDATED!

Health Care Bill Expands IRS

DNC Talking Point that 95% of Americans Got a “Tax Cut” is Bogus

Its Starting Already – John Deere: We will take $150 million hit from healthcare reform; Caterpillar: We will take $100 million hit just this year. UPDATE AT&T says ObamaCare bill will cost $1 billion per year! – UPDATED!

Caterpillar: Health care bill would cost it $100M

IBD: 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

UPDATE IV – Some Insurance Companies Stop Writing New Policies for Children

Just as we predicted….

(Associated Press) WASHINGTON — Some major health insurance companies have stopped issuing certain types of policies for children, an unintended consequence of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law, state officials said Friday.

Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty said in his state UnitedHealthcare and Blue Cross Blue Shield have stopped issuing new policies that cover children individually. Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner Kim Holland said a couple of local insurers in her state have done likewise.

Starting later this year, the health care overhaul law requires insurers to accept children regardless of medical problems. Insurers are worried that parents will wait until kids get sick to sign them up, saddling the companies with unpredictable costs.

The major types of coverage for children — employer plans and government programs — are not be affected by the disruption. But a subset of policies — those that cover children as individuals — may run into problems. Even so, insurers are not canceling children’s coverage already issued, but refusing to write new policies.

Industry officials estimate that children’s policies account for 8 percent of single coverage plans sold directly to consumers.

“Our plans are very concerned about this,” said Alissa Fox, a top Washington lobbyist for the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association. “If the law says that insurers have to take you any time, any place, some people will see that as an opportunity to wait until their children get sick to buy coverage.”

There is nothing in the law that would stop a hospital from buying a policy for a uninsured child who came into the emergency room, she added.

 

UPDATE V – More Doctors Dropping Medicare

This one is really simple, as the government/ObamaCare try to drive prices down by slashing what doctors and hospitals get paid it becomes unprofitable to take those patients. Many more doctors limit the numbers of Medicare patients they can see because they care about their patients but can only afford to take so much loss. This is made worse by the fact that ObamaCare has introduced a host of new taxes into the system such as the tax on medical devices (see above links).

This is made worse again by the fact that the Democrats seem intent on letting the Bush Era tax cuts expire.

Democrats have paid lip service to a “doc fix” but as we reported earlier the “doc fix” is now projected to cost much more than previously expected. An election is coming and the Tea Party and Independents are hot about the deficits right now.

USA Today:

WASHINGTON — The number of doctors refusing new Medicare patients because of low government payment rates is setting a new high, just six months before millions of Baby Boomers begin enrolling in the government health care program.

Recent surveys by national and state medical societies have found more doctors limiting Medicare patients, partly because Congress has failed to stop an automatic 21% cut in payments that doctors already regard as too low. The cut went into effect Friday, even as the Senate approved a six-month reprieve. The House has approved a different bill.

• The American Academy of Family Physicians says 13% of respondents didn’t participate in Medicare last year, up from 8% in 2008 and 6% in 2004.

• The American Osteopathic Association says 15% of its members don’t participate in Medicare and 19% don’t accept new Medicare patients. If the cut is not reversed, it says, the numbers will double.

• The American Medical Association says 17% of more than 9,000 doctors surveyed restrict the number of Medicare patients in their practice. Among primary care physicians, the rate is 31%.

The federal health insurance program for seniors paid doctors on average 78% of what private insurers paid in 2008.

“Physicians are saying, ‘I can’t afford to keep losing money,’ ” says Lori Heim, president of the family doctors’ group.

More ~

States are starting to see a flight from Medicare:

•In Illinois, 18% of doctors restrict the number of Medicare patients in their practice, according to a medical society survey.

•In North Carolina, 117 doctors have opted out of Medicare since January, the state’s medical society says.

•In New York, about 1,100 doctors have left Medicare. Even the medical society president isn’t taking new Medicare patients.

“I’m making a statement,” says Leah McCormack, a New York City dermatologist. “Many physicians are really being forced out of private practice.”

 

UPDATE VI – ObamaCare Encourages Employers to Drop Insurance Coverage for Employees

This sobering column by Karl Rove shows the consequences of bad legislation. Just because Rove is a partisan you should not just dismiss what he says here as his analysis, unfortunately, is absolutely correct.

Wall Street Journal:

In his brilliant exposition of why sweeping policy changes often have unintended consequences, the late sociologist Robert K. Merton wrote that leaders get things wrong when their “paramount concern with the foreseen immediate consequences excludes the consideration of further or other consequences” of their proposals. This leads policy makers to assert things that are false, wishing them to be true.

Which brings us to President Obama’s many claims about his health-care reform. Take his oft-expressed statement that if you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. That sounds good—but perverse incentives in his new law will cause most Americans to lose their existing insurance.

This was brought home to me when I asked the CEO of a major restaurant chain about health reform’s effect on his company, which now spends $25 million a year on employee health insurance. That will jump to at least $90 million a year once the new law is phased in. It will be cheaper, he told me, for the company to dump its coverage and pay a fine—$2,000 for each full-time worker—and make sure that no part-time employee accidentally worked 31 hours and thereby incurred the fine.

This reality is settling in at businesses across America. A Midwestern contractor told me he pays $588,000 for health insurance for 70 employees, contributing up to $8,400 a year for a family’s coverage. If he stops providing health insurance, he’ll pay $2,000 per employee in fines, and the first 40 employees are exempt from fines altogether.

It’s also dawning on employees that they will lose their coverage. Some will blame management; many more will blame those who wrote this terrible legislation.

Employees who lose coverage get to select a policy from a government-sponsored insurance marketplace called the “exchange.” This will be subsidized by taxpayers. Depending on his income, a worker will have to pay between 8% and 9.8% of the cost.

But there are a few hitches. Employers now pay for employee health plans with pre-tax dollars, but workers who buy into one on the exchange pay with after-tax dollars. Families making less than $30,000 and individuals making less than $15,000 a year will be dumped into Medicaid, widely viewed as second-class health care.

Either Mr. Obama was stunningly blind to these perverse effects when he promised people could keep their coverage, or he felt that admitting his plan would collapse employer-provided health coverage could keep it from passing. Either way—self-deception or deliberate deceit—health reform is going to turn out far differently than was promised. And because more workers will be dumped into subsidized coverage, taxpayers are likely to pay much more than the $1 trillion-plus price tag claimed by ObamaCare advocates for its first 10 years.

 

UPDATE VII – Docs4PatientCare: Obamacare forces bureaucrats to get between doctor and patient so it must be repealed

Dr. Hal Scherz in  the Wall Street Journal:

My colleagues and I at Docs4PatientCare are enlisting thousands of doctors in an unorthodox and unprecedented action. Our patients have always expected a certain standard of care from their doctors, which includes providing them with pertinent information that may affect their quality of life. Because the issue this election is so stark—literally life and death for millions of Americans in the years ahead—we are this week posting a “Dear Patient” letter in our waiting rooms.

The LETTER states in unambiguous language what the new law means:

“Dear Patient: Section 1311 of the new health care legislation gives the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and her appointees the power to establish care guidelines that your doctor must abide by or face penalties and fines. In making doctors answerable in the federal bureaucracy this bill effectively makes them government employees and means that you and your doctor are no longer in charge of your health care decisions. This new law politicizes medicine and in my opinion destroys the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship that makes the American health care system the best in the world.”

Our doctor’s letter points out that, in addition to “badly exacerbating the current doctor shortage,” ObamaCare will bring “major cost increases, rising insurance premiums, higher taxes, a decline in new medical techniques, a fall-off in the development of miracle drugs as well as rationing by government panels and by bureaucrats like passionate rationing advocate Donald Berwick that will force delays of months or sometimes years for hospitalization or surgery.”

We cite the brute facts of ObamaCare’s passage:

“Despite countless protests by doctors and overwhelming public opposition—up to 60% of Americans opposed this bill—the current party in control of Congress pushed this bill through with legal bribes and Chicago style threats and is determined now to resist any ‘repeal and replace’ efforts. This doctor’s office is non-partisan—always has been, always will be. But the fact is that every Republican voted against this bad bill while the Democratic Party leadership and the White House completely dismissed the will of the people in ruthlessly pushing through this legislation.”

Then we address the Democrats’ evasive campaign maneuver:

“In the face of voter anger some Democratic candidates are now trying to make a cosmetic retreat, calling for minor modifications or pretending they are opposed to government-run medicine. Once the election is over, however, they will vote with their party bosses against repealing this bill.”

The letter’s final lines are the most important:

“Please remember when you vote this November that unless the Democratic Party receives a strong negative message about this power grab our health care system will never be fixed and the doctor patient relationship will be ruined forever.”

This message is going out to an electorate that is already frustrated over what they see happening to health care. Missouri voters rejected ObamaCare overwhelmingly in August, voting by a margin of 71%-29% to reject the federal requirement that all individuals purchase health insurance. Democratic pollster Douglas Schoen has assessed that ObamaCare is “a disaster” for Democrats. And around the country many little-noticed primaries have reflected voter rage—including the Republican primary victory of surgeon, political newcomer, and advocate of repeal Daniel Benishek in Michigan’s first district.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration’s damage-control efforts have fallen flat. The latest round of pro-ObamaCare television spots targeting the elderly and starring veteran actor Andy Griffith have not only failed to move the polling numbers. They have caused five U.S. Senators to ask for an investigation of the ads as a violation of federal laws barring the use of tax dollars ($750,000) for campaign purposes.

America’s doctors have millions of personal interactions each week with patients. We have political power. And we intend to use it by working to defeat those who have disrupted and gravely endangered the best health-care system in the world.

Dr. Scherz, a pediatric urological surgeon at Georgia Urology and Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta, serves on the faculty of Emory University Medical School and is president and cofounder of Docs4PatientCare.

 

UPDATE VIII – More Vindication of Sarah Palin on “Death Panels”

Avok Roy writes about the British National Health Service, which Obama’s Medicare boss Donald Berwick (See Update I)  as the gem of the world. Roy tells the story of how Britain didn’t intend to have Death Panels but how it quickly devolved to use them because individual excellence in care was never the goal; instead preservation of the system and lowering costs was the goal.

A Non-Demagogic Disquisition on Death Panels by Avik Roy

Go read this as it is crucial to understand how socialized health care works. An excerpt:

  • NHS doctors routinely conceal from patients information about innovative new therapies that the NHS doesn’t pay for, so as to not “distress, upset or confuse” them.
  • Terminally ill patients are incorrectly classified as “close to death” so as to allow the withdrawal of expensive life support.
  • NHS expert guidelines on the management of high cholesterol are intentionally out-of-date, putting patients at serious risk, in order to save money.
  • When the government approved an innovative new treatment for elderly blindness, the NHS initially decided to reimburse for the treatment only after patients were already blind in one eye—using the logic that a person blind in one eye can still see, and is therefore not that badly off.
  • While most NHS patients expect to wait five months for a hip operation or knee surgery, leaving them immobile and disabled in the meantime, the actual waiting times are even worse: 11 months for hips and 12 months for knees.
  • One in four Britons with cancer are denied treatment with the latest drugs proven to extend life.
  • Those who seek to pay for such drugs on their own are expelled from the NHS system, for making the government look bad, and are forced to pay for the entirety of their own care for the rest of their lives.
  • Britons diagnosed with cancer or heart attacks are more likely to die, and more quickly, than those of most other developed nations. Britain’s survival rates for these diseases are “little better than [those] of former Communist countries.”
  • The attack on Sarah Palin has been: “Palin is lying. There is nothing in this bill that is a death panel” (death panel being defined as a panel of bureaucrats who decides whether or not you can continue receiving care). But this is exactly what happens in Britain. Those who are in their last years of lives are expected to do their part for the national budget, which is to die inexpensively. That is to say, if Palin had been born 60 years earlier, and made the same criticisms of the NHS at its founding, she would have disparaged as a paranoid lunatic demagogue. “Sarah, old girl, there’s no death pansies, or panzers, or panels around here. The bill clearly states: ‘Her Majesty’s funds shall not be used to ration care for the sick.’ After the war, we’re done with all that rationing nonsense!”

    However, Britain discovered that it wasn’t that simple. In the decades after the war, health care costs continued to rise, and inexorably, the government had to step in and do something about it.  After all, in Britain, the government owns all the hospitals, the clinics, and the insurers. So in 1999 they came up with a rationing board whose sole purpose was to identify those treatments that were medically cost-effective, and agree to reimburse for those. (Law D solving the problems originally caused by Law A.)

    The Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY) methodology that the British use is precisely oriented at reducing care for the elderly, and steering it to younger patients, for whom effective therapies will lead to a longer, fuller life. For those in their 80s, in Britain, the NHS offers little. Recent studies have shown that Britons have the worst survival rates in the developed world after being diagnosed with a disease, like cancer, or a chronic condition, like heart disease.

     

    Conservatives for Palin linked to this video about the NYT lefty economist Paul Krugman talking about “Death Panels”

    Call it a “Death Panel” mea culpa if you will but Krugman is still wrong. Britain and Canada ration care as described above and still the costs spun out of control which is why they are now implementing reforms. The simple truth is that while it is true that Death Panels and other rationing will save money, the corrupt and inefficient nature of a unionized government system combined with the near unlimited demand from younger patients (its free!)  still sends costs spiraling into the stratosphere. Once again Dr. Paul Krugman shows his inability to understand concepts that I learned in macro-economics 103.

    UPDATE IX – Insurance Companies report that premiums will rise up to 9% as a direct result of the ObamaCare legislation

    Wall Street Journal:

    The health-care overhaul enacted last spring won’t significantly change national health spending over the next decade compared with projections before the law was passed, according to government figures released Thursday.

    The report by federal number-crunchers casts fresh doubt on Democrats’ argument that the health-care law would curb the sharp increase in costs over the long term, the second setback this week for one of the party’s biggest legislative achievements.

    The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday that insurance companies have proposed rate increases ranging from 1% to 9% nationwide that they attribute specifically to new health-law coverage mandates.

    Democrats signaled they would ratchet up pressure on the companies. “Insurers are using the consumer protections in health reform as a cover for their own greed,” said Rep. Pete Stark (D., Calif.), chairman of the House Ways and Means health subcommittee.

    Michigan Rep. Dave Camp, the top Republican on that committee, said the rate increases underscore why lawmakers should repeal the legislation and replace it with changes that make care more affordable.

    Regardless of the health law, national health spending has been rising in recent years and economists expect that to continue. In February, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services projected that overall national health spending would increase an average of 6.1% a year over the next decade.

    Note the source of the graph – this is the Obama Administrations own Medicare and Medicaid team’s (and likely best case scenario) numbers.

    First graph, overall health costs go up.

    Second graph – aggregate out-of-pocket costs will go down (because the law allows those without insurance will be able to buy coverage and walk into a hospital and when the care is complete they will be able to drop the insurance. So why carry insurance all the time? This leads us to what happens in graph 3).

    Third graph – insurance companies will have to pay more for your care because of the new taxes and to cover the expense of people gaming the system (see graph 2 explanation above) which will result in raised rates for all those playing fair.

    4th graph – a phony number because the ObamaCare bill looked better on paper by pushing reimbursements to doctors down, but in reality this would result in many doctors not accepting Medicare. Everyone knows that Congress will have to pass what is called “the doc fix” which will then send this number much higher. Another reason why this number went down is because ObamaCare shifts more of the burden off the federal government and onto state Medicaid programs with new unfunded mandates….. which leads us to graph five.

    5th Graph  – One of the ways ObamaCare was made to look better on paper is that it shifted part of the health cost burden to the states with unfunded mandates forcing states to raise your taxes to cover it.  The State of Indiana hired the consulting firm Milliman Inc. to provide the state with an estimate of what the new ObamaCare mandates on the state will be and how it may impact the Indiana budget. The result is not pretty. Milliman estimates that the new mandates will cost the Indiana $3.6 billion over ten years and will result in approximately 1 in 4 Hoosiers will in some way be subsidized by the program. Imagine what that will do to the state budget and to things such as education funding. But hey, why raise taxes when the feds can pass unfunded mandates on the states and force them to raise taxes to pay for it.

    So much for the Democrats and Obama’s repeated promises that the bill would lower your costs and premiums. As we have stated since we read the bill it was designed to make private health care more expensive and as Nancy Pelosi stated so “they will cry out for a public option” (see the video at the link).

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

    Barack’s Broken Promises

    Posted by iusbvision on July 7, 2010

    Posted in 2012, Campaign 2008, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Why the Senate should pass the unemployment benefits extension.

    Posted by iusbvision on June 26, 2010

    I know all the arguments for cutting off the benefits and under a normal recession under normal circumstances I would agree. This recession is different and for now the old rules do not apply and I will explain why.

    While it is true that most people find jobs shortly before their benefits expire this recession is so different that this rule doesn’t really apply.

    While it is true that deficit spending is at an all time high, cuts should be made in government to pay for this

    So what is different?

    First of all this recession is all but entirely government orchestrated.

    It was government that abused the CRA to pressure banks to make bad loans.

    It was the Federal Reserve who kept interest rates artificially low for political purposes.

    It was government who enforced that idiotic mark to market rule.

    It was government who put all of those corrupt Democratic appointees in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    It was Fannie and Freddie who bought every lobbying firm in DC to keep it from being opposed.

    It was Fannie and Freddie who bought up bad loans as many as they could find and issued government backed mortgage securities on those bad loans.

    It was government who started nationalizing business, made war on bond holders, engaged in Chicago style regulation , started bribing members of Congress with our money and passed bills like ObamaCare that put a huge tax on every employee hired.

    It is government that destroys confidence and raises fears of regulatory uncertainty with the ridiculous new financial regulation bill, cap and tax etc etc.

    It is government who blocked mortgage reform in the Senate time and time again (Democrats).

    It was government who destroyed confidence with the stimulus package failure.

    It is government that is arbitrarily trying to stop offshore drilling.

    It is government that is actively preventing states and foreign countries from helping with the oil spill.

    It is government that is threatening to let old tax cuts expire; undermining confidence.

    It is the cost of government that is sending wealth and production overseas.

    It is government who has employers and investors scared to death. Investors don’t want to invest here and employers are afraid to hire and when jobs do open many more people apply for them than can ever be hired.

    It is government employees who make between 30-300% more than their private sector counterparts so that government has been largely shielded from the recession.

    As sure as BP must pay the bill for the oil cleanup it is government that must pay for causing this financial crisis. Not enough jobs are being created to keep up with people entering the economy now.

    Confidence is not going to even start trickling back in till the GOP has the Congress so that it can stop Obama and the Democrat leadership cold. Unemployment benefits are going to have to be extended at least until that time. Confidence and thus hiring, production and investment cannot begin in earnest until the world knows that the agenda of this administration and Nancy Pelosi is effectively stopped.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Mortgage Crisis, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Companies hoarding cash and not hiring because of regulatory uncertainty and lack of confidence.

    Posted by iusbvision on June 13, 2010

    Translation – they are paralyzed over what the Democrats are doing in Washington. Little things like that $2000 tax per employee might have something to do with it. This is what IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton has said for over a year.

    FBN’s Charlie Gasparino and Liz MacDonald break down a recent study on companies hoarding $1.8 trillion in reserve funds.

    More:
     
    Neil Cavuto sounds off on why companies are growing their cash reserves and not hiring.

    More:

    Rep. Charles Djou, (R-Hawaii), on the governments decision to squander billions despite the growing national debt.

    More: Now there are news reports saying that the debt may hit 100% of GDP by 2013. To those of you who know the history of economics knows what that would mean.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Small Businesses Hit Hard by ObamaCare Taxes – Tax Incentives So Targeted that Only 12% Qualify

    Posted by iusbvision on May 25, 2010

    It is like we have always said, if a leftist tells you about targeted tax cuts it means you don’t get it. 

    The  Congressional Budget Office estimated that 88 percent of small businesses will not qualify for the tax credits under the Democrats’ legislation. 

    John Boehner from the 8th District of Ohio

    This week I was honored to have two small business operators from the district, Todd Wilber of West Chester and Tyeis Baker-Baumann of Greenville, join me to talk about the destructive effect President Obama’s health care law is having on small business’ ability to create new jobs and help get our economy moving again. 

    Todd operates a number of Taco Bell and UNOs franchises in the northern Cincinnati area with his wife Becky.  At a time when Ohio’s unemployment rate is 11 percent, Todd offers hundreds of local Ohio workers the chance to prove themselves, and work their way up the ladder in the restaurant business – just like he did when he was a young adult. 

    But Todd says he is very concerned about the impact that the president’s new health care law will have on his ability to retain and hire new employees.  Todd estimates his business will likely be facing at least $250,000 in new taxes as a result of ObamaCare, costs that may force Todd and Becky and hundreds of employers like them across Ohio to make job cuts instead of hiring additional workers. 

    Tyeis shared a similarly concerning story about how the president’s health care law will affect her small steel fabrication and millwright business.  The new law will be a ‘logistical nightmare’ for small businesses like hers, she said, and the small business tax credit touted by the Obama Administration is of little to no use to small businesses like hers – a notion recently confirmed by an Associated Press story, which quoted one small business owner from Illinois as saying the fine print in the law that excludes many small businesses from a credit is nothing less than a ‘bait and switch.’ 

    A proud member of the National Federation of Independent Business, Tyeis also talked about her support for the courageous efforts by American small businesses and 20 states to overturn the president’s health care law on the grounds that it is unconstitutional and will hurt small business job creation at a time when one out of every 10 Americans in the workforce is out of a job. 

      

    These are the hoops that a small business must jump through to see if they qualify for some assistance. Of course since the assistance is less than the new costs it is like the government ordering you to buy a Pontiac while claiming it has given you the biggest tax cut in history because it did not require you to pay full price for a Mercedes. 

    Ways and Means Committee Ranking Republican Dave Camp (R-MI) and Health Subcommittee Ranking Member Wally Herger (R-CA) released this road map [By the way, be sure to read what the grey box on the lower left hand side of the graph says – Editor]: 

    ObamaCare Small Business Tax Credit Road Map *Click to Enlarge

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    National Federation of Independent Business president on organization’s decision to join 20 states in ObamaCare lawsuit

    Posted by iusbvision on May 16, 2010

    The NFIB is the largest organization that represents small business in America.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    More hidden costs and mandates discovered in ObamaCare…

    Posted by iusbvision on May 13, 2010

    1. First the CBO said that ObamaCare would raise insurance costs per family by $2100 a year, then the Oliver Wyman study said it would raise rates by up to 54%. So what happened? The Administration and the elite media said that bloggers like me were liars and they called us all sorts of names and accused us of spreading disinformation.

    2. Business both large and small started issuing reports on how much ObamaCare mandates were going to cost them and some of them told us how it would have an impact on jobs.

    3. Then all of the sudden the elite media largely went silent on the issue (for a while till…).

    4. The New York Time starts running a series of articles admitting many of the problems and costs with ObamaCare legislation as if they had discovered them anew. The NYT basically admitted that blogs like this one were right all along; without giving us credit of course.

    5. The Medicare Actuary of the HHS published a report that the administration had managed to delay in its release till after the final vote admitting that the costs were much more than the Democrats admitted and they knew it. The House Ways & Means Republican Staff published a report with the new taxes that came with the legislation and the CBO published another report stating that the Obamacare tax increases would very much impact those who make less than $200,000 a year – LINK.

    6. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius admitted that the administration  has no clue how much the ObamaCare ‘High Risk Pools’ will actually cost – VIDEO

    7. The Cato Institute reported on a little known,  burdensome and expensive reporting mandate in the new ObamaCare bill. Every company that spends more than $600 to vendors and suppliers will now have to submit to them and the IRS a 1099 form every year:

    Most people know about the individual mandate in the new health care bill, but the bill contained another mandate that could be far more costly.

    A few wording changes to the tax code’s section 6041 regarding 1099 reporting were slipped into the 2000-page health legislation. The changes will force millions of businesses to issue hundreds of millions, perhaps billions, of additional IRS Form 1099s every year. It appears to be a costly, anti-business nightmare.

    Under current law, businesses are required to issue 1099s in a limited set of situations, such as when paying outside consultants. The health care bill includes a vast expansion in this information reporting requirement in an attempt to raise revenue for an increasingly rapacious Congress.

    Basically, businesses will have to issue 1099s whenever they do more than $600 of business with another entity in a year. For the $14 trillion U.S. economy, that’s a hell of a lot of 1099s. When a business buys a $1,000 used car, it will have to gather information on the seller and mail 1099s to the seller and the IRS. When a small shop owner pays her rent, she will have to send a 1099 to the landlord and IRS. Recipients of the vast flood of these forms will have to match them with existing accounting records. There will be huge numbers of errors and mismatches, which will probably generate many costly battles with the IRS.

    Tax CPA Chris Hesse of LeMaster Daniels tells me:

    Under the health legislation, the IRS could be receiving billions of more documents. Under current law, businesses send Forms 1099 for payments of rent, interest, dividends, and non-employee services when such payments are to entities other than corporations. Under the new law, businesses will be required to send a 1099 to other businesses for virtually all purchases. And for the first time, 1099s are to be sent to corporations. This is a huge new imposition on American business, costing the private economy much more than any additional tax that the IRS might collect as a result.

    8. The CBO then tells us that Medicare Payment ‘Doc Fix’ will be more expensive than expected – LINK – which by the way conservatives predicted early on.

    9. The State of Indiana hired the consulting firm Milliman Inc. to provide the state with an estimate of what the new ObamaCare mandates on the state will be and how it may impact the Indiana budget. The result is not pretty. Milliman estimates that the new mandates will cost the Indiana $3.6 billion over ten years and will result in approximately 1 in 4 Hoosiers will in some way be subsidized by the program. Imagine what that will do to the state budget and to things such as education funding. But hey, why raise taxes when the feds can pass unfunded mandates on the states and force them to raise taxes to pay for it.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

    Democrats now telling the courts: Ummm that new illegal health insurance mandate is a tax.

    Posted by iusbvision on May 13, 2010

    Apparently the confidence that the Democrats had that the new health insurance mandate will pass constitutional muster was merely faux posturing.

    Originally their argument was that Congress could used the commerce clause to mandate that everyone buy government approved health insurance; essentially telling people that as a condition of citizenship one must engage in an expensive contract with a private party or pay a fine as punishment.

    The Democrat talking point argument was that if even the “most conservative of justices” such as Scalia is willing to rule that a man in California who grows marijuana in his basement and smokes it in his house is engaging in interstate commerce than the power of Congress to meddle in our lives is essentially unlimited and the idea of limited government is out the window.

    The argument above has a critical flaw; everyone knows that the Supreme Court is way more political than it should be. So of course Justice Scalia does not believe that such a man growing his plant in his basement is engaging in interstate commerce, rather Scalia did not want to be viewed as “pro-marijuana”.

    So where does this leave the court? This case leaves it with an opportunity to reign in the commerce clause which the court likely wants to do, and it falls in line with the court politically because the vast majority of people across the political spectrum oppose the mandate and almost half the states are suing to stop it. The court is likely to say something akin to, “If the government can mandate this it can mandate that you buy a GM car”. Such an argument would be correct.

    The brighter legal minds in the Democratic Party have realized this and are now trying to fool the court by saying that the new mandate is a tax. Constitutional law professor Randy Barnett says the court will see right through such a rouse and reminds us that the statute hands the court a ready-made argument to shoot the “its a tax” rouse down because the language makes it clear that Congress used the commerce power to justify the mandate.

    Wall Street Journal:

    A”tell” in poker is a subtle but detectable change in a player’s behavior or demeanor that reveals clues about the player’s assessment of his hand. Something similar has happened with regard to the insurance mandate at the core of last month’s health reform legislation. Congress justified its authority to enact the mandate on the grounds that it is a regulation of commerce. But as this justification came under heavy constitutional fire, the mandate’s defenders changed the argument—now claiming constitutional authority under Congress’s power to tax.

    This switch in constitutional theories is a tell: Defenders of the bill lack confidence in their commerce power theory. The switch also comes too late. When the mandate’s constitutionality comes up for review as part of the state attorneys general lawsuit, the Supreme Court will not consider the penalty enforcing the mandate to be a tax because, in the provision that actually defines and imposes the mandate and penalty, Congress did not call it a tax and did not treat it as a tax.

    The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka ObamaCare) includes what it calls an “individual responsibility requirement” that all persons buy health insurance from a private company. Congress justified this mandate under its power to regulate commerce among the several states: “The individual responsibility requirement provided for in this section,” the law says, “. . . is commercial and economic in nature, and substantially affects interstate commerce, as a result of the effects described in paragraph (2).” Paragraph (2) then begins: “The requirement regulates activity that is commercial and economic in nature: economic and financial decisions about how and when health care is paid for, and when health insurance is purchased.”

    ~

    This shift won’t work. The Supreme Court will not allow staffers and lawyers to change the statutory cards that Congress already dealt when it adopted the Senate language.

    Mr. Barnett is a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown and the author of “Restoring the Lost Constitution: The Presumption of Liberty” (Princeton, 2005).

    Bingo.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

    BROKEN PROMISES: CBO AND CMS CONFIRM HIGHER COSTS AND HIGHER TAXES FOR OBAMACARE!

    Posted by iusbvision on April 23, 2010

    And after the New York Times and the Dept of HHS confirmed that we conservatives were right all along…

    Via Paul Ryan:

    WASHINGTON – House Budget Committee Ranking Republican Paul Ryan (WI) highlighted the latest evidence that the recently enacted health care overhaul exacerbates the problems in health care and violates the President’s central promises.

    Yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office [CBO] released an analysis that estimates large tax increases will hit millions of Americans making well below $200,000. The CBO findings stand in stark contrast to President Obama’s promise not to tax any individual making less than $200,000 a year. According an analysis analysis by the House Ways and Means Committee Minority Staff, the President has already signed into law 14 separate violations of his tax pledge.

    Adding insult to injury, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services [CMS] issued another damaging blow to the President’s central case for health care reform: the need to get a grip on sky-rocketing costs. In a detailed analysis, the CMS Chief Actuary made clear that the new health care law will further drive costs upward, increasing national health expenditures by an additional $311 billion above projected costs. The new law would adversely impact Medicare providers and reduce Medicare Advantage enrollees by 50%, according the government report.

    Following the release of the CMS and CBO reports, Ranking Member Ryan issued the following statement:

    “As Washington is moving fast to takeover other sectors of our economy, we are learning more about the costly consequences of their most recent overreach on health care. President Obama reiterated a number of false promises throughout the partisan health care campaign, including a pledge that his overhaul would lower health care costs and would not increase taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year. This week’s double-whammy from CMS and CBO exposes the emptiness of the President’s rhetoric, confirming what Americans feared throughout the debate.”

    “Rather than fix what’s broken in health care, this deeply flawed law will exacerbate the problems in health care. Two independent, nonpartisan analyses make clear that the onslaught of mandates, controls, taxes, and entitlement spending will impose a heavier burden on American families, including those already struggling to make ends meet. We must begin anew to mitigate the disaster from this health care debacle: let’s repeal this costly misstep and replace it with patient-centered, fiscally-responsible reform.”

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Andrew Klavan Talking Crap II: This Time It’s Crap

    Posted by iusbvision on April 18, 2010

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Doctor: I feel like when I see a Medicare patient I have the Sword of Damocles hanging over my head.

    Posted by iusbvision on April 14, 2010

     
    By the way, did you hear about the lady with cancer that medicare cut off in the middle of treatment because she found  way to get a small amount of extra income?
     
     

    Smith had gone through six months of radiation and chemotherapy — one week out of every month. She is in remission and had a donor for a transplant; being in remission is a prerequisite for the transplant.

    But her hopes of receiving the transplant were dashed in March, when she says, the Social Security Administration contacted her –without her soliciting it — and told her that her three year-old son was entitled to receive Social Security disability payments. Even though she didn’t ask for it, she signed the form and received her son’s first check.

    In April, Medicaid canceled her universal health care policy because her income level had risen with her son’s payments – making her ineligible for the insurance program.

    The problem is Jackson Memorial Hospital could not provide the procedure because the risk is too high. The universal policy from Medicaid helps shield the hospital from liability in this kind of case. Without it, they are subject to liability issues.

    Even though Smith offered to cancel her son’s disability benefits, she was told it’s too late.

    Fortunately for Ms. Smith Rush Limbaugh himself interviened to get politicians to reverse the ruling. Can you imagine being a doctor put in this position. Would you want a government you can’t sue and can’t fight controlling your health care? If not for Rush Limbaugh and a few politicians, this woman very well may have died. Is anyone as cold and heartless and a government bureaucrat?

     

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

    Pinhead Quote of the Day: Congressman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) “There is no ObamaCare Mandate……”

    Posted by iusbvision on April 9, 2010

    Wow, this is totally priceless.

    Is there anything a politician will not say, any sugar-coated euphemistic deception they will not employ? Schultz was a major negotiator in the O-Care process and cannot claim ignorance. This just goes to show that conservatives are afraid that the people will not understand, leftists are afraid the people will understand.

    Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz:

    It’s pretty silly. The IRS is hiring 16,500 new people to enforce the ObamaCare mandate. If you don’t buy the insurance the IRS will fine you, they will confiscate your tax return etc and the IRS Chief even said so.

    Congressman Schultz saying that the mandate isn’t mandatory, “that it just puts you in a new tax status”, is like saying that there is no mandate against murder, but if you do it you will just be put in a new residency status… a federal penitentiary.

    Where is the elite media? What if Bush had said something as preposterous as this?

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

    Nancy Pelosi Hates This Video!

    Posted by iusbvision on April 8, 2010

    Which means you will love it ;)

    Posted in Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Video: Rachel Maddow and Elite Media Incite Violence and Hate to FreedomWorks

    Posted by iusbvision on April 7, 2010

    Content Warning: These are a small sample of voice mails to the public policy institute FreedomWorks from those who claim a monopoly on love and tolerance.

    FreedomWorks:

    Some money quotes:

    “Be careful what you wish for – the right to bear arms means that everyone can bear arms.”

    “We will be fighting you to the death.”

    “I’m so glad that I saw Rachel Maddow. She’s brilliant. She’s absolutely fantastic. And her diagnosis of the ills of the American right are so right on. I mean, basically, what you’re doing is just saying no. You’re like belligerent children. You have no concept of how hard people have worked to get this together, and to make sure that we win. We WILL win, and will continue. That’s why Obama got elected.”

    “We are now organized. We will show up at your town meetings, and your town halls, and trust me, it’s a force to be reckoned with.”

    Sounds pretty threatening to me… but will Rachel condemn this? I’m sure she won’t. How about any of these phone calls, posted back in August? 

    I’ll be the first to say that the calls to violence that are floating around both sides are inappropriate. It’s not productive, and makes everyone look bad. The media isn’t helping the situation by feeding stories that may or may not (and are most likely not) true from last weekend’s Tea Party rallies in Washington…

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Leftist Hate in Action, Violence | 1 Comment »

    Judge Napolitano: The Constitutional Case Against ObamaCare

    Posted by iusbvision on April 6, 2010

    Andrew P. Napolitano  is a former New Jersey Superior Court Judge. He is a graduate of Princeton University (where he was a founding member of the Concerned Alumni of Princeton) and Notre Dame Law School.

    Napolitano sat on the New Jersey bench from 1987 to 1995, becoming the state’s youngest life-tenured judge. He also served as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law for 11 years. Napolitano resigned his judgeship in 1995 to pursue his writing and television career.

    Posted in Chuck Norton, Government Gone Wild, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 2 Comments »

    IRS Chief: Buy health insurance or lose your tax refund

    Posted by iusbvision on April 6, 2010

    Daily Caller

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Are we on the verge of a great political awakening?

    Posted by iusbvision on April 5, 2010

    Today I witnessed something that I never thought I would ever see.

    I had a conversation with two black progressives and a feminist sociology major. One of the black progressives is a  billing and fund-raising administrator for a catholic hospital. The other I believe was a black studies major. The four of us spoke for almost an hour.

    We all agreed that the ObamaCare bill will not only raise the costs of insurance but wasn’t designed to lower them, that the bill amounts to a tax on small business, the producers and job givers, that the health advisory boards will interfere with doctors in some cases even their private insurance patients, and that the ObamaCare bill is not designed to empower us, or empower doctors, but rather will empower government.

    I was shocked. Not only that I found four self-proclaimed progressives who actually took the time to read up on the new law, but while admitting that they had an emotional attachment to Obama, they agreed that the facts were the facts, that this bill is bad for us and that Obama and the Democrats have been lying to us.

    We agreed that the bill may kill very successful health care programs such as the Indiana HIP program. We also agreed that the ObamaCare bill is a threat to public education because the new law became more deficit friendly on paper because it put a massive unfunded mandate on state Medicaid programs. This means less funding for state-run public universities. Education is the top budget item for most states. We all agreed that the four of us could produce a superior consortium based health reform plan.

    We discussed how we all now see the government as something that is becoming so big, greedy and corrupt that it is becoming a threat to our economic liberty and quality of life.

    I have never met a progressive who was willing to be this critical of Obama ever, and now I have found four on a left-wing college campus in a single day.

    Here on this blog we have reported that for the first time independents are polling farther towards the “right” than Republicans. By “Right” I mean our classic liberal/libertarian with restraint roots that the country was founded upon.

    We have reported that polls are showing that more Democrats and Independents are favoring the Tea Party movement. We have reported that on the generic congressional ballot the Tea Party has defeated both Republicans and Democrats. We have reported that only about 1 in 5 believes that the Federal Government is looking out for the people.

    All of this is unprecedented in the last 100 years.

    We have reported that even traditional Democrats who may favor larger role for government than Republicans or Libertarians, are still people who believe in traditional American concepts such as the rule of law and not the whims of a judge or a president, limited government, and by no means want to see the federal government turn in to a cradle to the grave leviathan state.

    This goes to show my friends that education is the key, there are many Democratic voters when given the honest facts are willing to stand up for traditional American philosophy.

    The fact that the Democratic party could lose these three self-proclaimed progressives is an indicator of a real political realignment that is coming.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

    New York Times Paul Krugman Admits: Death Panel “Advisory Boards” Will Be able to Deny Treatments; Will be a “Cost Saver”

    Posted by iusbvision on April 5, 2010

    The not so surprising reversal now that ObamaCare has passed, and this won’t be the last.

    Remember how I have told you how most economists are merely political whores who espouse politically motivated policies and call it “science” and “economics”? Well of all of them Paul Krugman is the worst. As I have stated before it amazes me how much basic economics Paul Krugman has to forget every week to write what he writes. He is a far left ideaologue with a very hateful streak.

    Here at IUSB when I took Macro Economics, the first professor who I was going to take the class from was using a textbook by Paul Krugman and when students voiced concern over that the professor’s response was “its ok Krugman won the Nobel Prize”… umm well so did Obama after being in office only 9 days. Needless to say I fired that foolish professor and signed up for the same class with a professor who was a real Milton Friedman trained economist.

    So after a year of the Democrats and the elite media calling Sarah Palin and others who examined these advisory boards liars; after saying over and over that it isn’t in the bill, after saying that no bureaucrat will ever come between you and your doctor, after saying there will be no rationing, the elite media king of these liars, Paul Krugman, finally admits some of the truth.

    More reversals will come you can be sure. Think about all the lies the elite media and the president’s allies told us in the passed year.

    Posted in Campus Freedom, Indoctrination & Censorship, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law | Leave a Comment »

    Glenn Harlan Reynolds: Progressives can’t get past the Knowledge Problem

    Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2010

    Economnics 101 – why central planning of the economy always ends up in corruption and a decline.

    The more the planners plans fail the more the planners plan – Ronald Reagan.

    By: Glenn Harlan Reynolds via Washington Examiner:April 4, 2010

    “If no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?” — President Reagan, Jan. 20, 1981.

    Economist Friedrich Hayek explained in 1945 why centrally controlled “command economies” were doomed to waste, inefficiency, and collapse: Insufficient knowledge. He won a Nobel Prize. But it turns out he was righter than he knew.

    Glenn Harlan Reynolds

    In his “The Use of Knowledge In Society,” Hayek explained that information about supply and demand, scarcity and abundance, wants and needs exists in no single place in any economy. The economy is simply too large and complicated for such information to be gathered together.

    Any economic planner who attempts to do so will wind up hopelessly uninformed and behind the times, reacting to economic changes in a clumsy, too-late fashion and then being forced to react again to fix the problems that the previous mistakes created, leading to new problems, and so on.

    Market mechanisms, like pricing, do a better job than planners because they incorporate what everyone knows indirectly through signals like price, without central planning.

    Thus, no matter how deceptively simple and appealing command economy programs are, they are sure to trip up their operators, because the operators can’t possibly be smart enough to make them work.

    Hayek’s insight into economics and regulation is often called “The Knowledge Problem,” and it is a very powerful notion. But recent events suggest that it’s not just the economy that regulators don’t understand well enough — it’s also their own regulations.

    This became apparent when various large businesses responded to the enactment of Obamacare by taking accounting steps to reflect tax changes brought about by the new health care legislation. The additional costs created by Obamacare, conveniently enough, weren’t going to strike until later, after the November elections.

    But both Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and Securities and Exchange Commission regulations require companies to account for these changes as soon as they learn about them. As the Atlantic’s Megan McArdle wrote:

    “What AT&T, Caterpillar, et al did was appropriate. It’s earnings season, and they offered guidance about , um, their earnings.”So once Obamacare passed, massive corporate write-downs were inevitable.

    They were also bad publicity for Obamacare, and they seem to have come as an unpleasant shock to House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who immediately scheduled congressional hearings for April 21, demanding that the chief executive officers of AT&T, John Deere, and Caterpillar, among others, come and explain themselves.

    Obamacare was supposed to provide unicorns and rainbows: How can it possibly be hurting companies and killing jobs? Surely there’s some sort of Republican conspiracy going on here!

    More like a confederacy of dunces. Waxman and his colleagues in Congress can’t possibly understand the health care market well enough to fix it. But what’s more striking is that Waxman’s outraged reaction revealed that they don’t even understand their own area of responsibility – regulation — well enough to predict the effect of changes in legislation.

    In drafting the Obamacare bill they tried to time things for maximum political advantage, only to be tripped up by the complexities of the regulatory environment they had already created. It’s like a second-order Knowledge Problem.

    Possibly this is simply because Waxman and his colleagues are dumb, and God knows there’s plenty of evidence that Congress isn’t a repository of rocket scientists. But it’s just as likely that adding 30 or 40 IQ points to the average congressman wouldn’t make much difference.

    The United States Code — containing federal statutory law — is more than 50,000 pages long and comprises 40 volumes. The Code of Federal Regulations, which indexes administrative rules, is 161,117pages long and composes226volumes.

    No one on Earth understands them all, and the potential interaction among all the different rules would choke a supercomputer. This means, of course, that when Congress changes the law, it not only can’t be aware of all the real-world complications it’s producing, it can’t even understand the legal and regulatory implications of what it’s doing.

    There’s good news and bad news in that. The bad news is obvious: We’re governed not just by people who do screw up constantly, but by people who can’t help but screw up constantly. So long as the government is this large and overweening, no amount of effort at securing smarter people or “better” rules will do any good: Incompetence is built into the system.

    The good news is less obvious, but just as important: While we rightly fear a too-powerful government, this regulatory knowledge problem will ensure plenty of public stumbles and embarrassments, helping to remind people that those who seek to rule us really don’t know what they’re doing.

    If that doesn’t encourage skepticism toward big government, it’s hard to imagine what will. 

    Examiner Contributor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, a law professor at the University of Tennessee.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

    Amity Shlaes: Obama’s Health Beast Squashes State Experiments (Including Indiana’s)

    Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2010

    We hear about Massachusetts’ “RomneyCare” all the time in the news because it is going broke and the cost overruns have been staggering. RomneyCare is similar in several ways to the new federal legislation.

    What you never hear about is Indiana’s experiment called “HIP” Healthy Indiana Plan, which has been a great success at gettring people care, keeping costs down and it is completely voluntary. In short, the incentives built into the plan are smart and it works. Of course since the plan was concieved by Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels the elite media doesn’t really want to talk about it.

    Amity Shlaes:

    State attorneys general are filing lawsuits seeking to prove President Barack Obama’s health-care plan is unconstitutional. The litigation takes the spotlight away from something else about the states that matters.

    It is that states can be laboratories where the country experiments to ascertain which mix of taxes, incentives and public administration works best when it comes to health care.

    Amity Shlaes

    Amity Shlaes

    Obamacare threatens such experiments by superseding them. In doing so, the new federal program deprives the country not only of the experiments themselves but also of evidence that might cast doubt on the promises of the new legislation.

    In few states is the change as dramatic as in Indiana. Several years ago Republican Governor Mitch Daniels and the legislature began wondering about the same questions that preoccupied the framers of Obama’s health-care plan: why so many of the uninsured mob hospital emergency rooms, why citizens turn their backs on preventive medicine, why health-care spending expands, and how you get Americans to be aware of health-care costs.

    In response, Daniels’s team created the Healthy Indiana Plan, known as HIP. It was billed as subsidized insurance for low- and middle-income Hoosiers: citizens who suffer from catastrophically expensive illnesses get coverage subsidized by state and federal dollars. The state doubled cigarette taxes to pay for it all. So far, so familiar.

    But Healthy Indiana features a few other interesting traits. Joining was voluntary. Participants pay a penalty co-pay if they use an emergency-room for routine health-care needs.

    Spending Accounts

    In addition, as part of HIP, the state created a health spending account of $1,100 per adult to be used for basic medical needs and preventive care. At the end of the year, patients can roll over what remains in the account. If they have a record of seeking appropriate preventive care, they may also get additional cash from the state for their health needs. Those who don’t get the preventive care do not get those funds.

    In its two-year life, Healthy Indiana has proven popular, with some 60,000 Hoosiers enrolling. Ninety nine percent said they would re-enroll.

    The preventive component seems to work: Adult HIP members use emergency rooms at a lower rate than adults on standard Indiana Medicaid. They use generic drugs more frequently than the commercially insured. The program hasn’t busted the budget. Some three-fourths of HIP enrollees say they are more likely to seek preventive services. In a state where one in four adults is obese, this is perhaps the most interesting news of all.
    Now Healthy Indiana will be overwhelmed by Obamacare, which will have little regard for individual budgeting and incentives. Perhaps Medicaid administrators will cut off the cash that has flowed to Healthy Indiana. Or perhaps the insurance that Obamacare offers will be more attractive and woo away HIP’s volunteers. Healthy Indiana may survive in name. But the experiment, isolating the effect of a certain incentive upon a certain problem, has been aborted.

    I happened to be in the Indiana state house the week that it became clear the president’s plan would become law. Unsure of future funding, Daniels was already freezing new enrollment for the plan. Daniels points out that the federal law will force tax increases at the state level in Indiana and elsewhere. That’s because the federal law effectively mandates expansion of Medicaid, whose costs the states help foot.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

    Amity Schlaes: How the CBO Works & How it is Easily Manipulated

    Posted by iusbvision on April 4, 2010

    Amity Schlaes is perhaps the greatest living economic historian.

    I like how Schlaes describes how the CBO works, they are asked to score what is placed in their box and that includes the assumptions they are asked to make in the request.

    For example Ann Coulter once made the following analogy. If Congress proposed a new “green energy bill” that assumed that there was a car that ran on grass and got 1000 miles per gallon of grass the CBO would tell us that our dependency on foreign oil would drop significantly.

    Bloomberg News Amity Schlaes:

    The question is how can lawmakers get away with their misrepresentation? One answer lies in the structure of the Congressional Budget Office, the government’s official accountant. Its job is to establish an honest price: to tell legislators and voters what a policy will cost in the short, medium and long terms. That CBO work is important because Americans rightly sense that the politicians’ math is rigged.

    Amity Shlaes

    Amity Shlaes

    “Nobody told me you were cheating.

    Aww, it’s just a feeling I had.”

    Flawed Assumptions

    The CBO’s rules make it hard for the group to fulfill its own mandate. You’d think, for example, that the CBO would use its own parameters when it crunches numbers. Instead, the CBO must use the same mathematical assumptions supplied by the very lawmakers who wrote the bill the group is evaluating. No matter how improbable those formulas are.

    Former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, writing in the New York Times, described the group’s process as “fantasy in, fantasy out.”

    CBO rules often preclude common sense. Its forecasters can’t take into account any other legislation when studying the price tag of a proposed bill. That enabled the forecasters costing out House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s bill to overlook this fact: Medicare spending increases will force tax increases, which in turn will hurt growth.

    Political Salesmen

    This dynamic is permitted because the answers the CBO supplies make it easier for politicians to sell their bills. They’re happy. And so, for the moment, are voters who are painfully aware that the U.S. federal budget can’t cover new entitlements, yet accept such legislation as a balm for that pain.

    “So if I’m right, you got to lie to me

    Then I won’t feel so bad.”

    The CBO’s structural failure benefits the Democrats this week. Indeed, Pelosi is teaching Republicans something: the bigger the misrepresentation, the greater the credibility with voters. Croon to them a tune about entitlement, and they forget that you’re clearing a path for a tripling of the tax on dividends.

    The CBO’s rules are bipartisan — they hold for whatever legislation lands in its in box. Congressman Paul Ryan, a Republican from Wisconsin, recently put forward a new blueprint for the federal budget. Ryan’s plan is less questionable than Pelosi’s because it’s relatively honest about costs. Ryan points out that the current unfunded part of the Medicare liability is in the trillions.

    Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Energy & Taxes, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

    More Businesses Reveal ObamaCare Impact

    Posted by iusbvision on April 3, 2010

    Via alineofsite.com:

    At President Obama’s infamous Summit on February 25, Nancy Pelosi boldly stated that ObamaCare would create “400,000 jobs almost immediately”, 4 million over the life of the bill.  If so, it’s off to a rocky start. 

    Prior to the passage of ObamaCare, many experts and organizations closer to the reality of the work place and the San Francisco Speaker of the House predicted serious negative economic consequences from the legislation.  The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) estimated 1.6 million in job loss from ObamaCare along with a $200 billion reduction in GDP.  The Heritage Foundation wasn’t as optimistic as they predicted 5.2 million jobs would be at risk of going away, and 10.2 million jobs would be at risk of slower wage growth and cuts in benefits.   

    Below is a partial list of the immediate economic damage report in only the first week in the life of ObamaCare:

    Zoll Medical Corp: This bill is a jobs killer,” said Ernie Whiton, chief financial officer of Chelmsford’s Zoll Medical Corp., which employs about 650 people in Massachusetts. Many of those employees work in Zoll’s local manufacturing facility making heart defibrillators.  “We could be forced to (move) manufacturing overseas if we can’t pass along these costs to our customers,” said Whiton. 

     “AT&T Inc. will take a $1 billion non-cash charge in the first quarter because of the health care overhaul and may cut benefits it offers to current and retired workers… The telecommunications company also said it is looking into changing the health care benefits it offers because of the new law. Analysts say retirees could lose the prescription drug coverage provided by their former employers as a result of the overhaul.
    Verizon: In an email titled “President Obama Signs Health Care Legislation” sent to all employees Tuesday night, the telecom giant warned that “we expect that Verizon’s costs will increase in the short term.” While executive vice president for human resources Marc Reed wrote that “it is difficult at this point to gauge the precise impact of this legislation,” and that ObamaCare does reflect some of the company’s policy priorities, the message to workers was clear: Expect changes for the worse to your health benefits as the direct result of this bill, and maybe as soon as this year.

     Valero Energy Corp, the largest independent U.S. refiner, said on Friday it expected to take a first-quarter charge of $15 million to $20 million due to the tax impact of a new healthcare law. “There will be further tax costs due to the legislation in the future, but we don’t have calculations on those yet,” Valero spokesman Bill Day said in a emailed statement. Valero shares were down about 1.3 percent at $19.62 in midday trading on Friday, bringing their loss this week to more than 3 percent.

     3M Company said today that it expects to record a one-time non-cash charge of $85 to $90 million after tax, or approximately 12 cents per share, in the first quarter of 2010, resulting from the recently enacted Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, including modifications made in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 passed by Congress on March 25, 2010. The charge is due to a reduction in the value of the company’s deferred tax asset as a result of a change to the tax treatment of Medicare Part D reimbursements.

     AK Steel Holding Corp., the third largest U.S. steelmaker by sales, said it will record a non-cash charge of about $31 million resulting from the health-care overhaul signed into law by President Barack Obama.

     Caterpillar Inc. said the health-care overhaul legislation being considered by the U.S. House of Representatives would increase the company’s health-care costs by more than $100 million in the first year alone. 

    Deere & Company, Iowa’s largest manufacturing employer, said in a statement this morning that the recently-passed health care legislation will cost the company $150 million after tax this year.

     Medtronic: Medical device maker Medtronic warned that new taxes on its products could force it to lay off a thousand workers. 

     Retiree Benefits: As many as 1.5 million to 2 million retirees could lose the drug benefits provided by their former employer because of the tax changes, according to a study by the Moran Company, a health care consulting firm.

     Massachusetts: “A Dire Warning From Bay State Medical-Device Companies That A New Sales Tax In The Federal Health-Care Law Could Force Their Plants – And Thousands Of Jobs – Out Of The Country Has Rattled Gov. Deval Patrick, a staunch backer of the law and pal President Obama.” 

     Colorado:  Steamboat Ski Area officials said Tuesday that the federal health care overhaul could cost their business as much as $2 million a year beginning in 2014.

    The health care overhaul includes a policy that would assess a fine, per employee, to large businesses that do not provide health care to full-time workers. The policy’s potential impact is ringing alarm bells with the Colorado ski industry, which has a large number of uninsured seasonal employees who work enough days to qualify as full-time workers. 

     New Hampshire: The state’s seasonal tourism industry is only now beginning to realize that it could get hammered by the new health care reform law. 

     Muncie, Indiana: Just to be clear, we’re not discussing the pros or cons of the health bill; it’s the Christmas tree ornaments that Congress hung off it to assure its passage.  The main one (at least that we know of so far; it takes time to wade through 2,409 pages of legislation) will expand the government’s Pell Grant programs at the expense of private student loan originators such as Sallie Mae.  The result: Under a worst-case scenario, Muncie might lose 700 jobs at its Sallie Mae call center on the city’s north side. A Star Press article on Tuesday said the company might have to cut its 8,600 total workforce by 2,500 workers and reduce its national locations from 25 to about six. It’s unknown how Muncie might fare if the company starts closing offices.

     Fishers, Indiana: Sallie Mae, a major student loan provider, has its largest office in Fishers, Ind…The effects of this portion of the health care bill have concerned several of the 35,000 people employed in the lending industry. Phillip Walsh, a senior director at Sallie Mae’s office in Fishers, said the company will lose approximately 2,500 of its 8,500 jobs.

     State Budget Impacts: Because of the new health care law, Arizona lawmakers must now find a way to maintain insurance coverage for 350,000 children and adults that they slashed just last week to help close a $2.6 billion budget deficit.  Louisiana officials say a reduction in federal money to hospitals that treat the uninsured under the bill could be a death knell for their state-run charity hospital system.  In California, policymakers estimate they will have to come up with an additional $500 million a year to make necessary increases in payments to Medicaid providers.  Across the country, state officials are wading through the minutiae of the health care overhaul to understand just how their governments will be affected. Even with much still to be digested, it is clear the law may be as much of a burden to some state budgets as it is a boon to uninsured consumers.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | 1 Comment »

    Solar-panel farm runs into bureaucratic roadblocks

    Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2010

    Government is just sooooo efficient isn’t it?

    USA Today (Hat Tip HotAir):

    The company proposed a 2,000-acre solar farm, named Beacon, on fallow agricultural land on the edge of California’s Mojave Desert. The site has the great desert sun but is on degraded land near a freeway, an auto test track and old buildings.

    The site “is exactly where solar should be,” says David Myers, head of conservation group Wildlands Conservancy.

    But two years later, NextEra still awaits permission to begin construction from the California Energy Commission, which grants permits on such projects after environmental reviews. Time is running short, not only for NextEra but for several dozen green-energy projects in California. Ground must be broken on them before year’s end to get federal stimulus funds worth 30% of the projects’ cost. …

    Yet the sheer number and size of the California projects, especially a dozen huge solar farms unlike anything regulators have reviewed in 20 years, is stressing agencies and stakeholders alike. No other state has so many huge solar projects in the pipeline. Billions of dollars in stimulus funds ride on whether the permitting process can be sped up without sacrificing California’s stringent environmental standards.

    No corners are being cut, regulators say. But some environmentalists fear that the tight deadlines will lead to projects that could’ve been better with more time. And companies say that some projects, like NextEra’s, have suffered delays born of inefficient permitting.

    Real nice huh… with efficiency like this maybe we should trust the government with our health care …

    Posted in Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Illinois Democrat on ObamaCare: I don’t worry about the Constitution

    Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2010

    Citizen journalists doing what Katie Couric isn’t competent enough to do….

    Via our friends at HotAir.com:

    All things considered, this clip’s more depressing than the already legendary Hank Johnson clip from last night. Like Madam Speaker, not only does he regard the novel and crucial constitutional issue involved to be beside the point, he almost seems irritated to be asked about it. Reason 8,293,511 why Americans now feel such utter contempt for their representatives.

    Oh, and he might be surprised to know that O-Care really doesn’t insure everyone. I didn’t realize that point was still in dispute, least of all for a guy who’s read the bill, ahem, three times.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Corporatism, Economics 101, Health Law, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Verizon: ObamaCare Bill Will Cost us $970 MIllion

    Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2010

    Congress in the mean time is trying to shut these companies up, far left blogs are giving the old “it’s those evil racist corporations trying to get Obama” nonsense. The truth  is that for these publically traded companies these expectation reports are mandated by law.

    Bloomberg News:

    April 2 (Bloomberg) — Verizon Communications Inc., the second-largest U.S. phone company, became the latest company to record a cost related to the U.S. health-care overhaul, saying it will incur a $970 million expense.

    The one-time, non-cash cost will be taken in the first quarter, New York-based Verizon said yesterday in a regulatory filing.

    Verizon follows AT&T Inc., the biggest U.S. carrier, Deere & Co., Caterpillar Inc. and other companies in disclosing similar expenses after losing a tax benefit for retiree plans. The costs may reduce corporate profits by as much as $14 billion as companies account for the impact of the health-care reforms, according to benefits consulting firm Towers Watson.

    “While it is a non-cash charge, it does reflect real value destruction, based on expected cash flows over the life of the company,” said Jonathan Schildkraut, an analyst at Jefferies & Co. in New York. Schildkraut, who anticipated Verizon would book an expense of about $750 million, advises investors to buy the company’s shares and doesn’t own any himself.

    AT&T said March 26 it would record $1 billion in costs in the first quarter related to the changes.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Brilliant Black Man: ObamaCare — You’re Entitled

    Posted by iusbvision on April 2, 2010

    As always, if you disagree or critique the brilliant black man in any way, it automatically means you are a racist.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Culture War, Economics 101, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Jackie Mason on the curruption in Congress

    Posted by iusbvision on April 1, 2010

    “The Ultimate Jew” speaks. You should listen.

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Health Law, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »

    Davanni’s Pizza: New ObamaCare taxes and mandates will cost us $200,000 a year. May have to close three locations to get around costly regs

    Posted by iusbvision on March 30, 2010

    The Daily Caller:

    UPDATEEd Morrissey interviews Davanni’s Pizza! –

    Posted in 2012, Chuck Norton, Economics 101, Health Law, Is the cost of government high enough yet?, Journalism Is Dead, Obama and Congress Post Inaugration | Leave a Comment »