Did you know? 70% of federal taxes are paid by the top 20% of the workforce, the same group responsible for 86% of income taxes. And, the bottom 50 percent of income earners pay almost no income taxes and the poor and middle-income earners benefit greatly from the tax code. See: http://www.heritage.org/Research/taxes/bg2306.cfm
Quote of the Day: Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI): “Climate change is very real. Global warming creates volatility and I feel it when I’m flying. The storms are more volatile.”
1) The Health Care Bill: What HR 3200, ‘‘America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009,” Says
According to John David Lewis’ analysis
A. Will the plan ration medical care? (Section 1151):
1. This section amends the Social Security Act
2. The government has the power to determine what constitutes an “applicable [medical] condition.”
3. The government has the power to determine who is allowed readmission into a hospital.
4. This determination will be made by statistics: when enough people have been discharged for the same condition, an individual may be readmitted.
5. This is government rationing, pure, simple, and straight up.
6. There can be no judicial review of decisions made here. The Secretary is above the courts.
7. The plan also allows the government to prohibit hospitals from expanding without federal permission: page 317-318.
B. Will the plan punish Americans who try to opt out? (Section 401)
1. This section amends the Internal Revenue Code.
2. Anyone caught without acceptable coverage and not in the government plan will pay a special tax.
3. The IRS will be a major enforcement mechanism for the plan.
C. What constitutes “acceptable” coverage? (Section 122)
1. The bill defines “acceptable coverage” and leaves no room for choice in this regard.
2. By setting a minimum 70% actuarial value of benefits, the bill makes health plans in which individuals pay for routine services, but carry insurance only for catastrophic events, (such as Health Savings Accounts) illegal.
D. Will the PLAN destroy private health insurance? (Section 313)
1. The bill does not prohibit a person from buying private insurance.
2. Small businesses—with say 8-10 employees—will either have to provide insurance to federal standards, or pay an 8% payroll tax. Business costs for health care are higher than this, especially considering administrative costs. Any competitive business that tries to stay with a private plan will face a payroll disadvantage against competitors who go with the government “option.”
3. The pressure for business owners to terminate the private plans will be enormous.
4. With employers ending plans, millions of Americans will lose their private coverage, and fewer companies will offer it.
5. The Commissioner (meaning, always, the bureaucrats) will determine whether a particular network of physicians, hospitals and insurance is acceptable.
6. With private insurance starved, many people enrolled in the government “option” will have no place else to go.
E. Does THE PLAN ALLOW THE GOVERNMENT TO set FEES FOR SERVICES? (Section 223)
1. The government’s authority to set payments is basically unlimited.
2. The official will decide what constitutes “excessive,” “deficient,” and “efficient” payments and services.
And there’s so much more! See: http://www.classicalideals.com/HR3200.htm
1a) Morning Bell: Obamacare Pep Rally Fact Check
Comforted knowing he was surrounded by a room full of die-hard supporters, President Obama then want on to make a number of misleading and outright false statements about the health care legislation still working it’s way through Congress. Here are just seven:
1) “I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter.” This is directly contradicted by candidate Barack Obama’s own website. (And see page 16 of HR3200...it not allow any insurance companies to add new members after the bill is passed. And if you lose your job, you are required to sign up for the public plan; comment mine).
2) “Under the reform we’re proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” This statement is also plainly false. Again, as demonstrated above, the true purpose of Obama’s public option is to move Americans out of their private coverage and into government run health care.
3) “That’s what the health exchange is all about, is that you — just like a member of Congress — can go and choose the plan that’s right for you.” This statement isn’t false, but it is misleading. Members of Congress do purchase their health care through a health exchange: the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Through the FEHBP 283 private plans compete for federal employees’ health care dollars. The Heritage Foundation has long been a supporter of health reform that empowers consumers to utilize a FEHBP like system. But Obamacare is nothing like the FEHBP system.
4) “We have the AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.” This is just plain false. The AARP released a statement late yesterday directly contradicting the President. (Even ABC news reported this. See: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/08/president-obamas-senior-moment.html).
5) “I just want to be clear, again: Seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your benefits. This is not money going to you to pay for your benefits; this is money that is subsidizing folks who don’t need it.” Under the current system, more and more seniors are discovering that it is becoming harder and harder to find and keep doctors who will accept Medicare patients. A 2008 survey found that 29% of the Medicare beneficiaries it surveyed who were looking for a primary care doctor had a problem finding one to treat them. Obamacare will only make this problem worse by cutting $313 billion in Medicare reimbursements to health care providers
6) “I said I won’t sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid for.” The reality is that the Senate still has not figured out how to pay for their bill and the House bill would increase the budget deficit by $239 billion over the next ten years.
7) “My belief is, is that [Obamacare] should not burden people who make $250,000 a year or less.” Both the House and Senate bills partially pay for Obamacare by imposing “employer mandates” or “pay or play” provisions that require employers to pay higher taxes if (a) they do not offer health insurance, or (b) they offer it but have employees who decline it and instead use the government system. Multiple studies have shown that such provisions cause both lower wages and lost jobs for low-income workers.
1b) Jam-packed crowds press Grassley on health care
PANORA, Iowa – Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican who is a key bargainer on health care reform, played to packed crowds across the state who left little doubt that they are not happy with what's on the table.
The questions were tough but respectful, and there was little of the shouting that has dominated similar meetings in other parts of the country.
…Other meetings were less combative. In Kansas, Republican Rep. Lynn Jenkins faced a friendly crowd of more than 200 people, drawing applause as she listed flaws she sees in the legislation before Congress.
Several audience members at Topeka's Holiday Inn Holidome said they believe Jenkins is listening to them — when the Democrats controlling Congress are not.
…In Iowa, nearly 500 people jammed a sweltering community center meeting room to see Grassley, with virtually all describing health reform as a government takeover of the nation's health care system that's a prescription for disaster.
See: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090813/ap_on_re_us/us_health_care_protests
More on the above: DES MOINES, Iowa - Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, says only people who are in the country legally should be covered by a government funded health care program.
He also says he's opposed to any plan that "determines when you're going to pull the plug on grandma."
Grassley kicked off a series of town hall meetings on proposed health care legislation Wednesday with a stop in Winterset. People were vocal but the meeting lacked the disruptions seen at others across the country.
That’s because Grassley is actually listening to her constituent’s concerns, instead of telling them fabrications about what is and what is not in the bill…
See: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-ia-grassley-healthca%2C0%2C4923468.story
1c) Townhall Downfall: The Real Astroturfers Exposed
At an August 5th press conference, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) called the protests at this summer’s townhall’s “phony” and held up a swatch of Astroturf to illustrate his point. But as the hundreds of videos from around the country demonstrate, there is nothing fake about opposition to Obamacare. The same can’t be said of Obamacare supporters as this news report from WMUR in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, clearly shows. (Obama supporters were bussed in).
See: http://blog.heritage.org/2009/08/12/townhall-downfall-the-real-astroturfers-exposed/
1d) Did Democrats Plant Swastikas?
Democrats have been tarring and feathering conservatives (or trying to) for my whole career with this. I fired back in kind, and so I get up last night or this morning and I'm diligently doing show prep. As I always do, I go to Drudge page and say, "Whoa! Congressman David Scott's sign outside the office has a swastika painted on it. Ha-ha-ha. How convenient! How absolutely convenient." I don't know in this case, but we do know that a swastika sign at a Dingell town hall was made and paraded around by a Dingell supporter. It has been proven. It has been established.
…RUSH: I'm sorry, folks, I don't buy this. This is too politically convenient. We know that Obama staged an event yesterday. The Democrats are staging events. It's what they do. They don't deal in reality. They don't tell the truth. I'm not buying that this happened with an angry, anti-health care person putting the swastika. I think the Democrats are doing this themselves trying to make it an issue, because they know that dummkopfs like this infobabe are going to blame it on me.
See: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_081209/content/01125106.guest.html
1e) Even Obama Supporters are complaining about his handling of health care…
Obama's Euthanasia Mistake: “The Republicans carping about limitations on end-of-life care have a point….Make no mistake about it. Determining which treatments are “cost effective” at the end of a person’s life and which are not is one of Obama’s priorities. It’s one of the principal ways he counts on saving money and making universal healthcare affordable…This is the Big Brother nightmare of oppressive government that the shrewd propagandists on the right are always blathering on about. Except that this time, they could not be more right. See: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-08-11/obamas-euthanasia-mistake/?cid=hp:beastoriginalsL1
Obama's healthcare horror: “But who would have thought that the sober, deliberative Barack Obama would have nothing to propose but vague and slippery promises -- or that he would so easily cede the leadership clout of the executive branch to a chaotic, rapacious, solipsistic Congress? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom I used to admire for her smooth aplomb under pressure, has clearly gone off the deep end with her bizarre rants about legitimate town-hall protests by American citizens. She is doing grievous damage to the party and should immediately step down.” See: http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/08/12/town_halls/
2) US official gropes to explain Clinton's outburst: Hillary’s losin’ it…
WASHINGTON (AP) - The State Department struggled Tuesday to explain Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's face-off with a Congolese student and suggested that the questioner's nervousness sparked the outburst with the mention of her husband's name.
Clinton snapped at the university student in Kinshasa on Monday when he asked what her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and Congo native and former NBA star Dikembe Mutombo thought about an international financial matter. Mutombo was appearing with her at the university.
"Wait. You want me to tell you what my husband thinks?" Clinton asked in response. "My husband is not the secretary of state; I am. So you ask my opinion, I will tell you my opinion. I'm not going to be channeling my husband."
…The French-speaking student later said he had meant to say President Barack Obama, according to U.S. officials traveling with Clinton. It was unclear whether that meant he misspoke or the translator erred.
See: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090812/D9A1AHFO0.html
No comments:
Post a Comment