Category Archives: Health Law

AARP Making Mega-Millions on Corrupt ObamaCare “Easter Egg”

This is how some corrupt corporations make millions and scam the taxpayers. The AARP is supposed to be non profit. That means that they are not supposed to make hundreds of millions of dollars in profits, they are not supposed to be engaged in partisan politics and they are not supposed to be engaged in a huge conflict of interest. AARP has done all of this at the expense of their members and employees.

Related:

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

Corrupt AARP Health Care Deal Puts Seniors at Risk

CBO: Obama is wrong, cuts in Medicare will result in benefit cuts. The corrupt AARP angle. UPDATED!

Ethics You Can’t Believe In: Special Interests Dominate Fiscal Responsibility Summit

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

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 on my old college blog 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

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

Previously from my old college blog:

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.

Obama’s Cousin, Dr. Milton Wolf: ObamaCare does harm, rations care.

A not on the elite media, the only one who would publish Dr. Wolf’s editorial was The Washington Times…. This is a big story.

Being Obama’s cousin this means that Dr. Wolf is 12.5% pure hope!

Dr. Milton Wolf:

“Primum nil nocere.” First, do no harm. This guiding principle is a bedrock of medical care. Sadly, those politicians who would rewrite our health care laws do not live in the same universe as do the doctors and health care professionals who must practice it.

Imagine if, like physicians, politicians were personally held to the incredibly high level of scrutiny that includes civil and financial liability for any unintended consequence of their decisions. Imagine if they were forced to spend tens of thousands of dollars each year on malpractice insurance and still faced the threat of multimillion-dollar lawsuits with every single decision they made. If so, a government takeover of health care would be the furthest thing from their minds.

Obamacare proponents would have us believe that we will add 30 million patients to the system without adding providers, we will see no decline in the quality of care for the millions of Americans currently happy with the system, and – if you act now! – we will save money in the process. But why stop there? Why not promise it will no longer rain on weekends and every day will be a great hair day?

America has the finest health care delivery system in the world. Let’s not forget that and put it at risk in the name of reform. Desperate souls across the globe flock to our shores and cross our borders every day to seek our care. Why? Our system provides cures while the government-run systems from which they flee do not. Compare Europe’s common cancer mortality rates to America’s: breast cancer – 52 percent higher in Germany and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer – a staggering 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway; colon cancer – 40 percent higher in the United Kingdom.

Look closer at the United Kingdom. Britain’s higher cancer mortality rate results in 25,000 more cancer deaths per year compared to a similar population size in the United States. But because the U.S. population is roughly five times larger than the United Kingdom’s, that would translate into 125,000 unnecessary American cancer deaths every year. This is more than all the mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles, cousins and children in Topeka, Kan. And keep in mind, these numbers are for cancer alone. America also has better survival rates for other major killers, such as heart attacks and strokes. Whatever we do, let us not surrender the great gains we have made. First, do no harm. Lives are at stake.

Obamacare: Fixing price at any cost

The justification for Obamacare has been to control costs, but the problem is there is little in Obamacare that will do that. Instead, there are provisions that will ration care and artificially set price. This is a confusion of costs and price.

As one example, consider the implications of Obamacare’s financial penalty aimed at your doctor if he seeks the expert care he has determined you need. If your doctor is in the top 10 percent of primary care physicians who refer patients to specialists most frequently – no matter how valid the reasons – he will face a 5 percent penalty on all their Medicare reimbursements for the entire year. This scheme is specifically designed to deny you the chance to see a specialist. Each year, the insidious nature of that arbitrary 10 percent rule will make things even worse as 100 percent of doctors try to stay off that list. Many doctors will try to avoid the sickest patients, and others will simply refuse to accept Medicare. Already, 42 percent of doctors have chosen that route, and it will get worse. Your mother’s shiny government-issued Medicare health card is meaningless without doctors who will accept it.

Obamacare will further diminish access to health care by lowering reimbursements for medical care without regard to the costs of that care. Price controls have failed spectacularly wherever they’ve been tried. They have turned neighborhoods into slums and have caused supply chains to dry up when producers can no longer profit from providing their goods. Remember the Carter-era gas lines? Medical care is not immune from this economic reality. We cannot hope that our best and brightest will pursue a career in medicine, setting aside years of their lives – for me, 13 years of school and training – to enter a field that might not even pay for the student loans it took to get there.

Giving power back to people

I believe there is a better way. The problems in the American health care system are not caused by a shortage of government intrusion. They will not be solved by more government intrusion. In fact, our current problems were precisely, though unintentionally, created by government.

World War II-era wage-control measures – a form of price controls – ushered in a perverted system in which we turn to our employers for insurance and the government penalizes us if we choose to purchase insurance for ourselves. You are not given the opportunity to be a wise consumer of health care and compare prices as well as quality in any meaningful way. Worse still, your insurance company is not answerable to you because you are not its customer. It is answerable to your employer, whose interests differ from your own.

Insurance companies have been vilified for following the perverse rules that government has created for them. But it gets worse. The government, always knowing best, deploys insurance commissioners across the land to dictate what the insurance companies must provide, whether you want it or not, and each time, your premiums increase. Obamacare will make all of this worse, not better.

One of America’s founding principles is our trust in the people and their economic freedom to rule their own lives. We should decouple health insurance from employers and empower patients to be consumers once again. Allow them to determine the insurance plan that best meets their families’ needs and which company will provide it. This will unleash a wave of competition that will drive costs down in a way that price controls never have. Eliminate the artificial state boundary rules that protect insurance companies from true competition and watch as voters demand that their state insurance commissioners get the heck out of the way. Innovative companies will drive down costs similar to how Geico and Progressive have worked for automobile insurance. And it won’t cost taxpayers a trillion dollars in the process.

This free-market approach has worked for everything from high-definition TVs to breakfast cereals, but will it work for medicine? It already is. Take Lasik eye surgery, for example. Because patients are allowed to be informed consumers and can shop anywhere, doctors work hard for their business. Services, availability and expertise have all increased, and costs have decreased. Should consumers demand it, insurance companies – now answerable to you rather than your employer – would cover it.

Between Barack and a hard place

I have personally trained and practiced in both the government-run and free-market segments of American medicine. The difference is vast. Patients see this for themselves, and this may be why, according to a recent CNN poll, they oppose Obamacare nearly 3 to 1. I am with them. It is difficult for me to speak publicly against the president on his central issue, but too much is at stake.

I wish my cousin Barack the greatest of success in office. But I feel duty-bound to rise in opposition to Obamacare. I must take a stand for my patients, my profession and, ultimately, my country. The problems caused by government will not be solved by growing government. Now that this new era of big-government takeovers has spread to our health care system, it’s not just our freedoms or our wallets that are at stake. It’s our lives.

Senator Durbin: Of course premiums will still go up with ObamaCare

But they are still lying…

Via Ed Morrissey at Hotair:

Not exactly a shocker, but Dick Durbin gives the nuanced explanation that they’re looking to slow down the rate of increases, not stop increases altogether.  Unfortunately, that misrepresents what the CBO has already said about premiums under ObamaCare — and ignores what has already happened to premiums without it:

The truth is that premiums have gone up in part because of government intervention, not despite of it.  Further government intervention will make the problem worse — and the CBO agreed in November.

On my old college blog we also told you of this HERE and HERE.

George Will Takes Robert Reich to School on Insurance Companies and Progressivism

We love Robert Reich, one of the worst economists ever. He will say anything for political reasons and claim that it is economic science. The truth is that one has to forget a great deal of macro-economics to come up with the obvious nonsense he does. But why do we love him, because sometimes he just lets the truth slip like he did HERE and HERE. These two linked comments and the one below have a common theme, you the American people, are idiots who cannot get along in life without the direction of Robert Reich.

Via RadioVoice and NewsBusters:

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

It is just like I said back in my college blog days:

Real Clear Politics Confirms IUSB Vision Analysis: Latest Health Care Bill Designed to Wreck Private Insurance & Make People Cry Out for a Public Option

And stated again and again and again….

Wall Street Journal:

Seniors enrolling in private Medicare policies starting this week are finding fewer options, as health insurers close down certain types of plans due to legislative changes and looming cuts to federal funding.

Cigna Corp., Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, several Blue Cross Blue Shield plans and others aren’t renewing hundreds of Medicare Advantage plans, which are Medicare policies administered by private insurers. The moves will displace some 700,000 beneficiaries who must find new policies, according to Humana Inc., a large seller of Advantage plans.

For 2011, the Kaiser Family Foundation said there will be a 13% decline in the number of Medicare Advantage plans.

The pullback is largely due to a 2008 law that required the plans to have networks of preferred doctors, with the idea that managed care could be less costly and aggressive marketing could be curbed. Some providers of traditional fee-for-service policies decided to close the plans rather than invest in networks. But some insurers say the federal health-care overhaul, which includes $140 billion in cuts to reimbursements for Advantage plans over 10 years, is a factor as well.

Nancy Pelosi used IUSB Vision Editor Chuck Norton’s exact words “make them cry out for a public option” on C-Span. Video at bottom of post HERE.

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

Associated Press:

WASHINGTON – AARP’s endorsement helped secure passage of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul. Now the seniors’ lobby is telling its employees their insurance costs will rise partly as a result of the law.

In an e-mail to employees, AARP says health care premiums will increase by 8 percent to 13 percent next year because of rapidly rising medical costs.

And AARP adds that it’s changing copayments and deductibles to avoid a 40 percent tax on high-cost health plans that takes effect in 2018 under the law. Aerospace giant Boeing also has cited the tax in asking its workers to pay more. Shifting costs to employees lowers the value of a health care plan and acts like an escape hatch from the tax.

AARP raising premiums, citing ObamaCare, but said when they were pushing it that this wouldn’t happen…

White House on Health Care: ‘Nothing’ From Election Suggests People Want Repeal

IBD – 3M cites ObamaCare – Forced to drop care for 23,000 retirees:

Here’s a Post-it note for ObamaCare supporters and opponents: Over the weekend 3M (MMM), the maker of the ubiquitous sticky message pads, along with electronics, optics and more, decided to end its retirees’ access to its health care plan beginning in 2013. According to the Wall Street Journal:

“health care reform has made it more difficult for employers like 3M to provide a plan that will remain competitive,” (3M said in a) memo. The White House says retiree-only plans are largely exempt from new health insurance regulations under the law.

The company didn’t specify how many workers would be impacted. It currently has 23,000 U.S. retirees.

Americans become eligible for the Medicare insurance program at age 65. Starting in 2015, 3M retirees too young to qualify for Medicare will receive financial support through what the company called a “health reimbursement arrangement” and won’t be able to enroll in the company’s group insurance plan. The company described that as an account retirees can use to purchase individual insurance through exchanges that the health law will create in 2014. 3M didn’t provide details on the financial contributions. [Grats that taxpayer subsidized so WE pay for it – Editor]

Or, as opponents of ObamaCare predicted, they’re finding it cheaper to dump their retirees onto the exchange.

That comes on the heels of a report Thursday that McDonald’s was considering dropping its “mini-med” plan for its employees because those plans may run afoul of the forthcoming medical-loss ratio regulations.

Also on Thursday, the Principal Financial Group (PFG) announced it would stop selling health insurance, which means 840,000 employees who receive Principal coverage through their employers will have to look elsewhere. Just the day before, President Obama said, “So there’s nothing in the bill that says you have to change the health insurance that you’ve got right now.” And he’s right: the bill doesn’t say it; it just causes it.

Indeed, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care was giving the lie to Obama’s statement as he was making it. Harvard Pilgrim announced that it would end its Medicare Advantage plans at the end of the year, leaving its 22,000 Advantage customers scrambling for coverage.

A week before that, a number of health plans including Anthem (WLP), Aetna (AET), Cigna (CI), Humana (HUM), CoventryOne (CVH) and some Blue Cross Blue Shield companies decided that they would stop selling coverage in the child-only market. It makes sense, given that under the new ObamaCare regulations, no child can be denied health insurance for a pre-existing condition and insurers can no longer vary premiums based on health status. Thus, the cagey parent will now wait until his or her child is sick before getting insurance. This is known as adverse selection: The healthy drop out, and those remaining in the insurance pool tend to be sicker. As insurers found out when a number of states tried this in early 1990s, it doesn’t make for a very viable business plan.

Of course, the evidence of what happened when these reforms were tried on the state level was available in a short, easy-to-read format for all of the so-called reformers. But, as IBD has noted before, since when has health care reform been about evidence? It has always been about power — the power politicians have over insurance companies, doctors, hospitals and, ultimately, patients.

Remember we were told the bill would lower premiums?

The Promises

August 6, 2008

OBAMA: A system where we’re gonna work with your employers to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

October 4, 2008

OBAMA: We will start by reducing premiums by as much as $2,500 per family.

September 6, 2008

OBAMA: Here’s what change is saying to people who already have health insurance and the employers who are providing it: We’ll work to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

May 3, 2008

OBAMA: I also have a health care plan that would save the average family $2,500 on their premiums.

January 3, 2008

OBAMA: And if you already have health care, then we’re gonna reduce costs an average of $2,500 per family on premiums.

October 7, 2008

OBAMA: We’re gonna work with your employer to lower the costs of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.

Campaign Ad

OBAMA: And we’ll cut the costs of a typical family’s health care by up to $2,500 per year.

March 14, 2008

OBAMA: And if you’ve got health care, we’re gonna work with your employer to lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

February 23, 2008

OBAMA: And we will lower premiums for the typical family by $2,500 a year.

June 17, 2007

OBAMA: And cut the cost of health care by up to $2,500 per family.

August 17, 2008

OBAMA: And if you already have health care, then we’re gonna work with your employer to lower your premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

Campaign Ad

EVAN BAYH: Barack’s policies will provide health care cost reductions of about $2,500 for the typical family.

June 27, 2008

OBAMA: It’s time to bring down the typical family’s premium by about $2,500. And it’s time to bring down the costs for the entire country.

February 19, 2008

OBAMA: And if you already have health insurance, we will lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

April 22, 2008

OBAMA: We’re gonna work with your employer through a catastrophic reinsurance plan to lower premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

October 15, 2008

OBAMA: The only thing we’re gonna try to do is lower costs so that those cost savings are passed on to you. And we estimate we can cut the average family’s premium by about $2,500 a year.

March 1, 2008

OBAMA: We’ll work with your employer to lower your premiums by $2,500 per family per year.

Campaign Ad

NARRATOR: Barack Obama will provide rural America with affordable health care, and save the typical American family $2,500 a year.

May 30, 2008

OBAMA: And reduces every family’s premiums by as much as $2,500.

April 20, 2008

OBAMA: If your employer does offer you health care, then we’re gonna work with your employer to lower premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

March 13, 2008

OBAMA: And cut the cost of a typical family’s premiums by up to $2,500 per family per year.

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

It has been happening for a long time, I wrote this post in April 2010 on my old college blog…

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.”

Gallup: Number of people insured by their employer down 5.2%. Number insured by taxpayers up 3.5%

They told us that we would not lose our health insurance and that the cost of insurance is going down. We know as we have covered in our ObamaCare Round-Up posts of elite media coverage that neither is the case. Premiums are rising, companies are dumping their insurance plans, insurers are getting out of some markets and prices have gone up quickly with those who had to do so stating clearly that the new legislation is to blame.

Now we are seeing the effects of big government economics in the aggregate. Prices up and wealth being destroyed so employers and people cannot afford it. Unemployment, uncertainty, debt crisis, monetizing, the cap & trade threat, and ObamaCare all add up. The damage is even worse now as these numbers came out in December 2010.

Gallup:

In U.S., New Low of 44.8% Get Healthcare From Employer

Government healthcare up, employer-based care down in 2010 vs. 2009

by Elizabeth Mendes

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A new low of 44.8% of American adults report getting their health insurance through an employer in November, down from 50% in January 2008, when Gallup began tracking it. The percentage of Americans with government-based healthcare remains elevated, with the 26% who report having it last month similar to the high of 26.3% found in September.

mm

More Businesses Reveal ObamaCare Impact

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.

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

The latest talking point from the left is that 95% of Americans got a tax cut. No they didn’t; what they got was a temporary reduction in the tax withholding tables but the rate didn’t change, so come tax time you have to make up for it with a check to the IRS or a smaller return. Don’t believe me? Check HERE and then look right at the IRS web site HERE. I love this part:

If you wind up owing tax because too little was taken out of your paychecks during 2009, you may qualify for special relief on a penalty that sometimes applies.

This “Obama tax credit” is actually a tax increase for some. Why? Because more people will end up not having enough withholding taken out and will have to pay the penalty.

Charles Krauthammer responds to the latest deceptive DNC talking point:

Obama claims that he is the great tax cutter, but the Republican Staff of the House Ways & Means Committee reminded us of the record so far:

Click to Enlarge

Of course there are also the hidden taxes which we pay in the form of higher prices:

Here come the new taxes with ObamaCare – UPDATED!

CBO: Democrats Health Care Bill Will Raise Family Insurance Premiums by $2100 Per Year. IUSB Vision analysis proved correct again!

IBD: 20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms

Norton’s First Law in Action: How Philip Morris benefits from new tobacco regulation & taxes.

Cap & Trade broadbased energy tax is next on the agenda.

Previous Congress’ tax cuts to expire next year raising tax rates.

“Ask not for whom the tax bell tolls, it tolls for thee.”

Of course there is also the matter of the economic consequences of the government eating up credit – Just how out of control is government spending?

New York Times/CBS Poll shows that Tea Party participants are wealthier and more educated than the general public:

Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public, and are no more or less afraid of falling into a lower socioeconomic class, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.

Dr. Walter Williams: Government Lies

Dr. Walter Williams

President Obama and congressional supporters estimate that his health care plan will cost between $50 and $65 billion a year. Such cost estimates are lies whether they come from a Democratic president and Congress, or a Republican president and Congress. You say, “Williams, you don’t show much trust in the White House and Congress.” Let’s check out their past dishonesty.

At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee, along with President Johnson, estimated that Medicare would cost an inflation-adjusted $12 billion by 1990. In 1990, Medicare topped $107 billion. That’s nine times Congress’ prediction. Today’s Medicare tab comes to $420 billion with no signs of leveling off. How much confidence can we have in any cost estimates by the White House or Congress?

Another part of the Medicare lie is found in Section 1801 of the 1965 Medicare Act that reads: “Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize any federal officer or employee to exercise any supervision or control over the practice of medicine, or the manner in which medical services are provided, or over the selection, tenure, or compensation of any officer, or employee, or any institution, agency or person providing health care services.” Ask your doctor or hospital whether this is true.

Lies and deception are by no means restricted to modern times. During the legislative debate prior to ratification of the 16th Amendment, President Howard Taft and congressional supporters said that only the rich would ever pay federal income taxes. In 1916, only one-half of 1 percent of income earners paid income taxes. Those earning $250,000 a year in today’s dollars paid 1 percent, and those earning $6 million in today’s dollars paid 7 percent. The lie that only the rich would ever pay income taxes was simply a lie to exploit the politics of envy and dupe Americans into ratifying the 16th Amendment.

The proposed tax increases that the White House and Congress are proposing will probably pass. According to the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Foundation, during 2006, roughly 43.4 million tax returns, representing 91 million individuals, had no federal tax liability. That’s out of a total of 136 million federal tax returns. Adding to this figure are 15 million households and individuals who file no tax return at all. Roughly 121 million Americans — or 41 percent of the U.S. population — are completely outside the federal income tax system. These people represent a natural constituency for big-spending politicians. Since they have no federal income tax obligation, what do they care about higher taxes or tax cuts?

Another big congressional lie is Social Security. Here’s what a 1936 government pamphlet on Social Security said: “After the first 3 years — that is to say, beginning in 1940 — you will pay, and your employer will pay, 1.5 cents for each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year … beginning in 1943, you will pay 2 cents, and so will your employer, for every dollar you earn for the next 3 years. … And finally, beginning in 1949, twelve years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year.” Here’s Congress’s lying promise: “That is the most you will ever pay.” Let’s repeat that last sentence: “That is the most you will ever pay.” Compare that to today’s reality, including Medicare, which is 7.65 cents on each dollar that you earn up to nearly $107,000, which comes to $8,185.

The Social Security pamphlet closes with another lie: “Beginning November 24, 1936, the United States government will set up a Social Security account for you … The checks will come to you as a right.” First, there’s no Social Security account containing your money, but more importantly, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on two occasions that Americans have no legal right to Social Security payments.

We can thank public education for American gullibility.

More Lies