Barthold explained that the bill contains a “tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage” and added that the goal of the IRS “is consistency, fairness and predicttabilty in administration of penalties”, also pointing out that the total number of convictions the government won in tax evasion cases was 666.
“if the government determined that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply” Barthold explained, adding that there is a religious conscience exemption in the bill as well.
“One of the reasons I have long supported the U.S. biotechnology industry is that it is a homegrown success story that has been an engine of job creation in this country.” This written statement by Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina on the health care bill was identical to one by Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer and used language suggested by lobbyists.
WASHINGTON — In the official record of the historic House debate on overhauling health care, the speeches of many lawmakers echo with similarities. Often, that was no accident.
Statements by more than a dozen lawmakers were ghostwritten, in whole or in part, by Washington lobbyists working for Genentech, one of the world’s largest biotechnology companies.
E-mail messages obtained by The New York Times show that the lobbyists drafted one statement for Democrats and another for Republicans.
The lobbyists, employed by Genentech and by two Washington law firms, were remarkably successful in getting the statements printed in the Congressional Record under the names of different members of Congress.
Genentech, a subsidiary of the Swiss drug giant Roche, estimates that 42 House members picked up some of its talking points — 22 Republicans and 20 Democrats, an unusual bipartisan coup for lobbyists.
A is for Aspartame – The magic powder that turns diet soda into brain poison.
B is for Bailout money – Because all we really need is another trillion dollars.
C is for Codex Alimentarius – Because we all need to be protected from dangerous vitamins, right?
D is for Dumbing Down – No matter how uneducated the kids are, there’s always a public school willing to compromise its standards just enough to let them pass.
E is for Environmental Policy – Because treating the rivers and waterways like America’s toilet makes for fascinating beach swimming.
F is for FDA (or Foreclosures) – Just what we need: A Big Pharma tyranny enforcement branch in Washington D.C.
G is for Genetically Modified Organisms – Because playing God with the food supply sounded like such a great idea, we just couldn’t resist.
H is for Health insurance (or lack thereof) – Just another financial scam to enslave Americans in a medical police state while denying them access to real health services.
And yes, we have the right and obligation to defend the constitution and our freedom against all enemies foreign and domestic!
Past and present members of Congress and cabinet members, have made it perfectly clear the U.S. Constitution means nothing. It is merely a prop and no longer of any concern to them. Here are but a few examples:
“The dirty little secret is that both houses of Congress are irrelevant…America’s domestic policy is now being run by Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve and America’s foreign policy is now being run by the International Monetary Fund [IMF].” And, “…when the president decides to go to war, he no longer needs a declaration of war from Congress.” Robert Reich, former Secretary of Labor under Marxist Bill Clinton, January 7, 1999, USA Today
At the time of Bush’s invasion of Iraq, CFR point dog in the House, Rep. Henry Hyde, [R-Il] stated that “declaring war is anachronistic, it isn’t done anymore…” During the same time period, darling of the deaf, dumb and blind “liberals,” Ranking Minority Member Tom Lantos, [D-Ca] called the declaration of war “frivolous and mischievous.”
Judge Andrew Napolitano, November 6, 2009 : “When I recently asked Congressman James Clyburn, the third ranking Democrat in the House, to tell me “Where in the Constitution the federal government is authorized to regulate everyone’s health care–, he replied that most of what Congress does is not authorized by the Constitution, but they do it anyway. There you have it. Congress recognizes no limits on its power. It doesn’t care about the Constitution, it doesn’t care about your inalienable rights, it doesn’t care about the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, it doesn’t even read the laws it writes.”
Marxist Pelosi’s office actually issued a press release that compares this illegal, grotesque no ‘reform’ health care as comparable to automobile insurance – which of course, is the domain of the states: “On the shared responsibility requirement in the House health insurance reform bill, which operates like auto insurance in most states, individuals must either purchase coverage (and non-exempt employers must purchase coverage for their workers) – or pay a modest penalty for not doing so. The bill uses the tax code to provide a strong incentive for Americans to have insurance coverage and not pass their emergency health costs onto other Americans – but it allows them a way to pay their way out of that obligation. There is no constitutional problem with these provisions.”
I’ve got news for Nancy Pelosi: There is a BIG constitutional problem. You people have crossed over to what can only be defined as treason. Open and in our face treason.
The outlaws in the House of Representatives who voted for the monstrous, grotesque no reform health care taxing scheme last week, just automatically assume (including Republicans) that we the people will do nothing except wring our hands and weep. That after the Senate passes some form of another junk bill, we the people will hold our nose and eat it.
Wrong. Just because the Outlaw Congress passes a bill and the usurper in the White House signs it, doesn’t mean it is constitutional:
“The highest law of the land is the Constitution of the United States. The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statue must be in agreement with it to be valid. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail over the other. The Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, (2nd ed., Section 256), states:
“The general rule is that an unconstitutional statue, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.” Stephen K. Huber, Professor of Law, University of Houston
The deal struck between the pharmaceutical lobby, the White House and Senate Democrats has drastically improved Big Pharma’s expected profits, a private industry report finds.
IMS Health, a company that supplies the pharmaceutical companies with sales data, predicts that new health reform legislation — combined with a projected upswing in the economy — will result in a net gain of more than $137 billion in total market sales over the next four years. The new assessment was contained in document obtained by the Huffington Post.
Back in March, that same firm projected a compound annual growth rate of -0.1 percent in the period of 2008 through 2013. In October, with the general outlines of health care reform clearly in place, it revised that number to a positive 3.5 percent for over the same period.
What happened in those seven months? The economy started looking up, for one, as did the overall prospects of health care reform. But the industry also won a major lobbying victory.
PhRMA, the lobby entity for the industry’s heavy hitters, reached a secret deal with the White House and the Senate Finance Committee in June. As detailed in a memo first published by The Huffington Post, the Obama administration agreed to oppose congressional efforts to use government leverage to bargain for lower drug prices. The White House also agreed not to shift some drugs from Medicare Part B to Medicare Part D, which would have cost the industry billions in reduced reimbursements. All this in exchange for $80 billion over ten years to help push for reform.
The Senate version of the healthcare bill still conforms to the deal (that the White House has still never officially confirmed). The House bill is in the same ballpark, although it would cost Big Pharma an extra $14 billion.
Interview with the President: Jail Time for Those without Health Care Insurance?
Added: November 09, 2009
President Obama said that penalties are appropriate for people who try to free ride the health care system but stopped short of endorsing the threat of jail time for those who refuse to pay a fine for not having insurance.
What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don’t, you’re subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it’s affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there’s a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are — are burdened by because of the fact that people don’t have health insurance, you know, there’s nothing wrong with a penalty.
Under the House bill those who can afford to buy insurance and dont pay a fine. If the refuse to pay that fine theres a threat as with a lot of tax fines of jail time. The Senate removed that provision in the Senate Finance Committee.
Mr. Obama said penalties have to be high enough for people to not game the system, but its also important to not be so punitive that people who are having a hard time find themselves suddenly worse off, thus why hardship exemptions have been built in the legislation.
Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) Confirms Failure to Comply with Democrats’ Mandate Can Lead to 5 Years in Jail
Pelosi Healthcare Bill: Buy Insurance or Go To Jail
Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
In response to the JCT letter, Camp said: “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing – buy what we tell you or go to jail. It is outrageous and it should be stopped immediately.”
Key excerpts from the JCT letter appear below:
“H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.” [page 1]
– – – – – – – – – –
“If the government determines that the taxpayer’s unpaid tax liability results from willful behavior, the following penalties could apply…” [page 2]
– – – – – – – – – –
“Criminal penalties
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]
When confronted with this same issue during its consideration of a similar individual mandate tax, the Senate Finance Committee worked on a bipartisan basis to include language in its bill that shielded Americans from civil and criminal penalties. The Pelosi bill, however, contains no similar language protecting American citizens from civil and criminal tax penalties that could include a $250,000 fine and five years in jail.
“The Senate Finance Committee had the good sense to eliminate the extreme penalty of incarceration. Speaker Pelosi’s decision to leave in the jail time provision is a threat to every family who cannot afford the $15,000 premium her plan creates. Fortunately, Republicans have an alternative that will lower health insurance costs without raising taxes or cutting Medicare,” said Camp.
According to the Congressional Budget Office the lowest cost family non-group plan under the Speaker’s bill would cost $15,000 in 2016.
“When a country embarks on deficit financing and inflationism you wipe out the middle class and wealth is transferred from the middle class and the poor to the rich.” – Ron Paul
Obama has tripled the budget deficit. Now you know who Obama is working for!
This elite puppet President is running America into the ground.
Bush was extremely horrible. Obama will be even worse.
Social Security was established in 1935 – they’ve had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 – they’ve had 44 years to get it right; they are both broke; and now our government dares to mention them as models for all US health care.
“Social security is a bigger Ponzi scheme and a bigger fraud than anything Bernie Madoff ever dreamed of and it’s broke.”
Change!
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, center, is joined by (L-R) House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Rep. George Miller, D-Calif. during a press conference at the U.S. Capitol, Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009 in Washington after the passage in the house of the health care reform bill. at the U.S. Capitol, Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009 in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
WASHINGTON — The Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed landmark health care reform legislation, handing President Barack Obama a hard won victory on his signature domestic priority.
Republicans were nearly unanimous in opposing the plan that would expand coverage to tens of millions of Americans who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry.
The 220-215 vote late Saturday cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.
A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi compared the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.
This video was broadcast by MSNBC on Friday, Oct. 30, 2009.
According to Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), the Democrats’ health reform legislation is basically a sham.
Appearing on MSNBC’s The Ed Show on Friday night, the House’s most unabashed progressive condemned Democratic leadership for removing his amendment that would allow states to create their own single-payer systems. Then he called the entire legislative package “a bailout for insurance companies.”
Under a single-payer system, like those in Canada and the United Kingdom, the government pools taxpayer funds to pay for citizens’ health care and fees are not collected by health care providers. The Kucinich amendment would allow individual states an opt-in to such a system.
The amendment is missing from health reform legislation unveiled Thursday by Democratic leadership.
“Representative Kucinich was livid when he found out that his provision to allow states to create a single payer system was stripped,” News Junkie Post noted. “Kucinich’s amendment passed the House Labor and Education Committee in July. ‘No one gave me any rational reason,’ Kucinich said. ‘I can only assume the insurance company interests brought pressure to take it out. Otherwise I would have heard from someone.'”
“The [committee] vote was 25 to 19, with support coming from an odd mix of liberal Democrats who support single-payer on its merits and conservative Republicans who want to preserve the rights of states to regulate themselves,” The Washington Independent noted at the time.
“The removal of the Kucinich amendment constitutes yet another capitulation to the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries who are already reaping billions of dollars from the bill,” reads a statement from the congressman’s office on Thursday.
Under the revised public option, “Pelosi and her team have proposed a plan that would not make payments for care based on Medicare rates …” CBS News’s John Nichols noted. “Rather, under the Pelosi plan, the rates be tied to those of the big insurance companies. That’s a big, big victory for the insurance industry, as it will undermine the ability of the public option to compete — and to create pressure for reduced costs.”
Speaking to liberal MSNBC anchor Ed Schultz on Friday, Kucinich continued his assault on the legislation.
“I think we need the support of the American people to say, look, you need that state single-payer amendment in the bill to make it credible,” the congressman said. “I mean, what are people giving up already? They’re being mandated to buy private insurance. If you read the bill, the people are going to end up paying — the insurance companies can raise rates 25 percent right off the bat, if you read the bill.”
Schultz encouraged Kucinich to repeat himself on that point.
“It’s on page 22 of the bill,” he replied. “Right here, it says that rates shall be set at a level that does not exceed 125 percent of the prevailing standard rate for comparable coverage in the individual market. Now … It’s very easy to understand what that means.”
“It’s not reform,” Schultz insisted.
“It means a 25 percent increase, they’ll have the ability to execute and since insurance companies have already raised rates for the last four years by double-digits, we can expect — based on the bill — another rate increase by the insurance companies.”
Schultz called the bill a “sellout” to insurers because the bill only allows 11 million people into a limited government-run health insurance option, and includes a mandate for Americans to buy private policies.
“Maybe instead of a sellout it’s a bailout,” Kucinich responded. “Maybe what we’re looking at here is another way that Wall Street’s speculative engine can be fueled, this time with the help of the premiums of tens of millions of Americans.”
President Barack Obama is actively discouraging Senate Democrats in their effort to include a public insurance option with a state opt-out clause as part of health care reform. In its place, say multiple Democratic sources, Obama has indicated a preference for an alternative policy, favored by the insurance industry, which would see a public plan “triggered” into effect in the future by a failure of the industry to meet certain benchmarks.
The administration retreat runs counter to the letter and the spirit of Obama’s presidential campaign. The man who ran on the “Audacity of Hope” has now taken a more conservative stand than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), leaving progressives with a mix of confusion and outrage. Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill have battled conservatives in their own party in an effort to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. Now tantalizingly close, they are calling for Obama to step up.
New York wants all health workers to get flu vaccines.
NEW YORK (CNN) — A New York state Supreme Court judge Friday granted a temporary restraining order against a requirement that all health care workers in the state get H1N1 flu vaccinations.
The state health commissioner had said the workers had to be vaccinated against both seasonal and H1N1 flu by November 30 or risk disciplinary action.
The Public Employees Federation filed suit, and Judge Thomas McNamara on Friday granted the restraining order, which will be in effect at least until the State Supreme Court can review the case during a hearing scheduled for October 30.
In a news release, federation President Kenneth Brynien called the decision “a big step in the right direction.”
Peter Banks, a council leader for the organization, added that its members “are not against the vaccination program; what we are against is the mandating, putting conditions of service over an unproven vaccine.”
“President Barack Obama wants to label me a criminal. He wants to fine me twenty-five thousand dollars and throw me in prison for one year for my refusal to pay money into a corrupt, broken sick care system.” – Mike Adams (Natural News)
(NaturalNews) There’s a popular video circulating on the ‘net right now about how to escape handcuffs without using a key. Americans are watching the video to bone up on essential skills that will soon be needed for health care reform, it seems, since the new laws that are about to be put in place call for Americans to be arrested and thrown in jail if they refuse to buy health insurance.
This has now been confirmed by Tom Barthold, the Chief of Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation. And it’s not merely about jail time; it’s also about the $25,000 fine that could be levied by the IRS against individuals who refuse to buy health insurance.
That this is even being considered just boggles the mind. If a person is too broke to afford health insurance right now, how are they supposed to be able to buy it after paying a $25,000 fine and spending a year in prison?
As Paul Craig Roberts brilliantly pointed out in a recent essay, this is like trying to solve the homeless problem by forcing homeless people to buy a home, then throwing them in prison when they can’t afford to.
There’s never enough money to pay for a nation full of sick people
The current health care disaster in America is not simply a problem of people refusing to buy health insurance; it’s an issue of people not being able to afford to buy health insurance. When the annual insurance premium for a family of four is something above $13,000, that’s a terrible financial burden that many Americans simply can’t afford to pay — especially when so many people have lost their jobs due to the faltering economy.
The brutal facts of the matter are inescapable: The American people are too broke to buy their own health insurance, and the American government is too broke to buy it for them. The whole nation is going bankrupt over runaway health care costs. And why? I hate to invoke the “I told you so” phrase in a crisis like this, but the reasons for all this have been apparent for many years, and we’ve been regularly reporting them on NaturalNews: Our national “health care” system is really a “sick care” system that pushes deadly chemicals and medically-unjustified surgical procedures instead of teaching people how to stay well.
As long as junk food companies and pharmaceutical companies are allowed to run advertisements on television, and as long as the FDA and FTC continue their campaigns of censorship against nutritional cures and natural remedies, we will always have a health care crisis. You know why? Because no nation in the world can afford to foot the bill for a country full of sick people.
Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.
Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it “Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold.”
The note was a follow-up to Ensign’s questioning at the markup.
Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) — Opponents of overhauling U.S. health care argue that Canada shows what happens when government gets involved in medicine, saying the country is plagued by inferior treatment, rationing and months-long queues.
The allegations are wrong by almost every measure, according to research by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and other independent studies published during the past five years. While delays do occur for non-emergency procedures, data indicate that Canada’s system of universal health coverage provides care as good as in the U.S., at a cost 47 percent less for each person.
“There is an image of Canadians flooding across the border to get care,” said Donald Berwick, a Harvard University health- policy specialist and pediatrician who heads the Boston-based nonprofit Institute for Healthcare Improvement. “That’s just not the case. The public in Canada is far more satisfied with the system than they are in the U.S. and health care is at least as good, with much more contained costs.”
Canadians live two to three years longer than Americans and are as likely to survive heart attacks, childhood leukemia, and breast and cervical cancer, according to the OECD, the Paris- based coalition of 30 industrialized nations.
Deaths considered preventable through health care are less frequent in Canada than in the U.S., according to a January 2008 report in the journal Health Affairs. In the study by British researchers, Canada placed sixth among 19 countries surveyed, with 77 deaths for every 100,000 people. That compared with the last-place finish of the U.S., with 110 deaths.
Infant Mortality
The Canadian mortality rate from asthma is one quarter of the U.S.’s, and the infant mortality rate is 34 percent lower, OECD data show. People in Canada are also 21 percent more apt to survive five years after a liver transplant.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. He has held numerous academic appointments, including the William E. Simon Chair, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Georgetown University, and Senior Research Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.
It is the War in Afghanistan Obama Declared a “Necessity,” Not Health Care
Paul Craig Roberts
The current health care “debate” shows how far gone representative government is in the United States. Members of Congress represent the powerful interest groups that fill their campaign coffers, not the people who vote for them.
The health care bill is not about health care. It is about protecting and increasing the profits of the insurance companies. The main feature of the health care bill is the “individual mandate,” which requires everyone in America to buy health insurance. Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont), a recipient of millions in contributions over his career from the insurance industry, proposes to impose up to a $3,800 fine on Americans who fail to purchase health insurance.
The determination of “our” elected representatives to serve the insurance industry is so compelling that Congress is incapable of recognizing the absurdity of these proposals.
The reason there is a health care crisis in the US is that the cumulative loss of jobs and benefits has swollen the uninsured to approximately 50 million Americans. They cannot afford health insurance any more than employers can afford to provide it.
It is absurd to mandate that people purchase what they cannot afford and to fine them for failing to do so. A person who cannot pay a health insurance premium cannot pay the fine.
These proposals are like solving the homeless problem by requiring the homeless to purchase a house.
Slowly people are waking up in America, realizing that Obama is just another puppet of the elite behind the scenes – like Bush. The problem is that it is almost too late now.
The greatest economic/financial collapse in world history is well on it’s way.
The only politician that I know of that could still make a difference is Dr. Ron Paul.
But he would be assassinated by the elite immediately. And even with Ron Paul as President there would be very hard times ahead, but with ‘Obamanomics’ (and ‘Obamacare’) it’s all over.
‘Parasite-in-chief’: The title given to the American President during the demonstrations on Saturday
‘Parasite-in-chief’
Tens of thousands of people converged on Capitol Hill on Saturday to protest against government spending
Up to two million people marched to the U.S. Capitol today, carrying signs with slogans such as “Obamacare makes me sick” as they protested the president’s health care plan and what they say is out-of-control spending.
The line of protesters spread across Pennsylvania Avenue for blocks, all the way to the capitol, according to the Washington Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency.
People were chanting “enough, enough” and “We the People.” Others yelled “You lie, you lie!” and “Pelosi has to go,” referring to California congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
Demonstrators waved U.S. flags and held signs reading “Go Green Recycle Congress” and “I’m Not Your ATM.” Men wore colonial costumes as they listened to speakers who warned of “judgment day” – Election Day 2010.
Richard Brigle, 57, a Vietnam War veteran and former Teamster, came from Michigan. He said health care needs to be reformed – but not according to President Barack Obama’s plan.
“My grandkids are going to be paying for this. It’s going to cost too much money that we don’t have,” he said while marching, bracing himself with a wooden cane as he walked.
FreedomWorks Foundation, a conservative organization led by former House of Representatives Majority Leader Dick Armey, organized several groups from across the country for what they billed as a “March on Washington.”
Organizers say they built on momentum from the April “tea party” demonstrations held nationwide to protest tax policies, along with growing resentment over the economic stimulus packages and bank bailouts.
US President Barack Obama sports a mustache famously worn by German dictator Adolf Hitler
Demonstrators hold up banners on Capitol Hill in Washington on Saturday
Many protesters said they paid their own way to the event – an ethic they believe should be applied to the government.
They say unchecked spending on things like a government-run health insurance option could increase inflation and lead to economic ruin.
National debt projections (approaching $10 trillion) have increased 400% in the last six months.
The U.S. Postal Service was established in 1775 – they’ve had 234 years to get it right; it is broke, and even though heavily subsidized, it can’t compete with private sector FedEx and UPS services.
Social Security was established in 1935 – they’ve had 74 years to get it right; it is broke.
Fannie Mae was established in 1938 – they’ve had 71 years to get it right; it is broke. Freddie Mac was established in 1970 – they’ve had 39 years to get it right; it is broke. Together Fannie and Freddie have now led the entire world into the worst economic collapse in 80 years.
The War on Poverty was started in 1964 – they’ve had 45 years to get it right; $1 trillion of our hard earned money is confiscated each year and transferred to “the poor”; it hasn’t worked.
Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 – they’ve had 44 years to get it right; they are both broke; and now our government dares to mention them as models for all US health care.
AMTRAK was established in 1970 – they’ve had 39 years to get it right; last year they bailed it out as it continues to run at a loss!
This year, a trillion dollars was committed in the massive political payoff called the Stimulus Bill of 2009; it shows NO sign of working; it’s been used to increase the size of governments across America, and raise government salaries while the rest of us suffer from economic hardships. It has yet to create a single new private sector job. Our national debt projections (approaching $10 trillion) have increased 400% in the last six months.
I, David William Hedrick, a member of the silent majority, decided that I was not going to be silent anymore. So, I let U.S. Congressman Brian Baird have it. I was one questioner out of 38, that was called at random from an audience that started at 3,000 earlier in the evening. Not expecting to be called on, I quickly scratched what I wanted to say on a borrowed piece of paper and with a pen that I borrowed from someone else in the audience minutes before I spoke. So much for the planned talking points of the right wing conspiracy.
A spokesman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry’s trade group, admitted in an article published Monday that as many as 50,000 industry employees are involved in an effort to fight back against aggressive healthcare reform.
The admission, published in the last sentence of a Wall Street Journalarticle, highlights the stakes of potential healthcare reform for the private health insurance industry. Insurers and investors alike are terrified at the prospect of a so-called “public option,” which would create a government-run health insurance program to compete with private insurers. Because the government plan wouldn’t have to earn a profit, the plan would be able to undercut the premiums of private firms, pressuring profit margins.
“The health-insurance industry is sending thousands of its employees to town-hall meetings and other forums during Congress’s August recess to try to counter a tide of criticism directed at the insurers and remain a player – and not an outsider – in the debate over the future of the health-care system,” the Journal‘s Vanessa Fuhrmans and Avery Johnson wrote Monday.
Employees of the health insurers have also been given talking points that encourage them to keep a low profile and avoid taking “the bait” when the industry is criticized in public, the reporters say. The industry’s trade group drafted a “Town Hall Tips” memo that instructs employees to stay calm and not to yell at members of Congress.
The industry’s staff have also been encouraged to write their local representatives.
Health insurers are trying to reshape the debate over the public option by fighting back against charges that they’re enjoying record profits at consumers’ expense. Most private insurers enjoy a four to six percent profit margin, which is less than many other industries, but, all told, amounts to billions and billions of dollars.
Karen Ignagni, America’s Health Insurance Plans’ chief lobbyist, says that town hall meetings are a chance for employees “to strongly push back against charges that we have very high profits.”
“It’s very important that our men and women… calmly provide the facts and for members of Congress to hear what these people do every day,” Ignagni added.
Obama’s overhaul fight is being won by the industry, experts say. The end result may be a financial ‘bonanza.’
Reporting from Washington – Lashed by liberals and threatened with more government regulation, the insurance industry nevertheless rallied its lobbying and grass-roots resources so successfully in the early stages of the healthcare overhaul deliberations that it is poised to reap a financial windfall.
The half-dozen leading overhaul proposals circulating in Congress would require all citizens to have health insurance, which would guarantee insurers tens of millions of new customers — many of whom would get government subsidies to help pay the companies’ premiums.
“It’s a bonanza,” said Robert Laszewski, a health insurance executive for 20 years who now tracks reform legislation as president of the consulting firm Health Policy and Strategy Associates Inc.
Some insurance company leaders continue to profess concern about the unpredictable course of President Obama’s massive healthcare initiative, and they vigorously oppose elements of his agenda. But Laszewski said the industry’s reaction to early negotiations boiled down to a single word: “Hallelujah!”
The insurers’ success so far can be explained in part by their lobbying efforts in the nation’s capital and the districts of key lawmakers.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRejectRead More https://infiniteunknown.net/dsgvo/
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
