Tag Archives: obamacare

12 Obamacare Quotes Showing US Healthcare Headed For Disaster

Published by:

Michael Snyder, Contributor
Activist Post

You might as well stick a fork in the U.S. healthcare system because it is done. Even before Obamacare, Americans paid far more for healthcare than anyone else in the world.

Now thanks to Obamacare we will be faced with much higher health insurance premiums, much higher taxes, much longer waits to see doctors and more government bureaucrats involved in our lives than ever before.


As I have written about previously, the U.S. healthcare industry is a horrible mess, and now Obamacare is going to take the entire system directly into the toilet. All over America today, families are going broke because of outrageous health insurance costs and suffocating medical debt, doctors are going broke and leaving the profession because they can’t make a living, and sick people are dying because they cannot get the care that they need.


So what solution does Obama give us? A nearly 3,000 page monstrosity that will destroy what is left of our crumbling healthcare system and that will unleash 16,000 new IRS agents to hunt down the millions of Americans that do not currently have health insurance. For those that love Big Brother socialist totalitarianism, Obamacare is a dream come true. For the rest of us it is a total nightmare.

Read More Here

Facts on Healthcare System

Published by:




NOTE: The facts below draw a distinction between healthcare spending, prices, and costs based upon the following definitions:

• “Spending” refers to what is spent on healthcare in general. Thus, if people use more healthcare services, this causes spending to increase even if prices remain the same.


• “Prices” refer to what healthcare providers charge for particular services and products.


• “Costs” refer to what healthcare providers spend in order to provide particular healthcare services and products to patients. This is equivalent to prices minus profits or losses.

* Between 1960 and 2009, healthcare spending in the United States increased

• from a yearly average of $147 per person to $8,086 (by 55 times).


• from a yearly average of $1,082 per person in inflation-adjusted 2010 dollars to $8,218 (by 7.6 times).


• from 5.2% of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) to 17.8% (by 3.4 times).[1]

Read More Here

Obamacare Repeal Fails

Published by:

The Senate on Wednesday defeated a Republican-led effort to repeal the entire national health-care overhaul, with lawmakers voting strictly along party lines. The decision underscores the hurdle that the GOP faces in that Democratic-majority chamber as it tries to overturn the law.

All 50 Senate Democrats present and one independent voted against the repeal, while all 47 Republicans voted in favor. Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and Mark Warner (D-Va.) were not present. The measure was proposed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).

Republicans needed the support of 13 Democrats for the measure to move forward because of a Democratic-led procedural move that set up a 60-vote hurdle.

Democrats’ unanimous opposition to the repeal came even though several vulnerable lawmakers up for re-election in 2012, including Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Claire McCaskill (Mo.), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Ben Nelson (Neb.), had come under pressure to support repeal.

While the full repeal measure fell short, a separate health-care amendment offered by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) sailed through the Senate with bipartisan support. The Stabenow proposal, which would repeal an unpopular tax-reporting provision of the law that opponents say overburdens small businesses, passed on an 81-to-17 vote. The House has not yet considered that proposal.

View Source Article

Health care reform: House marches toward repeal vote

Published by:

After promising a new era of openness and fiscal restraint, House Republicans veered from that standard on the first big vote of the new Congress: the repeal of health-care reform.

The powerful Rules Committee on Thursday vetted dozens of amendments, mainly from Democrats, but rejected all but one on party-line votes, eliminating the possibility of changes to legislation on the floor and leaving Democrats crying foul. [Editor’s note: This paragraph has been changed from the original to account for an accepted amendment.]

GOP leaders also rejected calls to offset the cost of repeal, estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to be $230 billion over the next 10 years – more than double the spending cuts that the new GOP majority aims to pare from spending bills for fiscal year 2011. The CBO’s preliminary estimate of the cost of repeal, released Thursday, also projects that repeal would leave 32 million more Americans uninsured.

The full House on Friday accepted that rule, setting the terms for next week’s floor debate and ensuring the final vote will be a straight up or down one. The Friday vote in favor of those terms was 236 to 181, falling mainly along partisan lines.

Responding to criticism that this rule violates a key GOP pledge, Rep. David Drier (R) of California, who chairs the Rules Committee, said: “There is nothing to amend to the repeal bill. Either we’re going to wipe the slate clean and start fresh or we’re not.”

“Once that slate is completely wiped clean, we will be ready for this open and collaborative process to develop the real solutions we promised,” he added in Friday’s floor debate on the rule.

In a break with past practice, the entire meeting was televised – fulfilling a GOP pledge to make all committee proceedings more accessible to the public.

“I promised a more open process. I didn’t promise that every single bill was going to be an open bill,” said Speaker John Boehner in his first press briefing on Thursday. “We went through a whole Congress, two years without one – without one open rule. As I said yesterday, there will be many open rules in this Congress, and just watch.”

Democrats had hoped to force repeal proponents to take recorded votes on the most popular aspects of the new law, thus providing grist for campaign ads in the 2012 elections. These include ending the new ban on insurance companies discriminating on the basis of preexisting conditions, taking away the option for young adults up to the age of 26 to be covered by their parents’ health insurance, and free annual wellness visits, tax breaks to help employers pay for coverage for employees, and a ban on lifetime caps on coverage.

Read More Here

Anti-Healthcare = Pro-Slavery

Published by:

Posted by Vladimir (Profile)

Monday, December 20th at 5:49PM EST

Scaling new heights of moonbattery , Huffington Post columnist Manisha Sinha posits that arguments against Obamacare and other Federal intrusions on states’ rights have their roots in the pro-slavery movement, ca. 1840-60:

Long before Tea Party activists and other sundry conservatives detected the ghost of socialism in health care reform and financial regulation legislation, proslavery theorists argued that abolition was akin to socialism. Even though the Lincoln administration would preside over the largest uncompensated confiscation of property in American history, four million slaves valued at around three billion dollars, the Republican party of the Civil War era was as far from socialism as the Obama administration is today.

Not only do contemporary accusations of a drift towards socialism have historical roots in the debates over secession but the alleged rights of the states to nullify or veto federal laws and secede from the Union are also enjoying a newfound popularity. {Emphasis added.](This is the nullification process that many “tea-party-ers” are exploring right now)

A few observations:

  • Ms. Sinha makes me feel silly and delusional for accusing self-described socialists of having socialist tendencies.
  • I really don’t feel like researching it, but I could swear that HuffPo’s position has generally been “Of Course Obamacare is Socialist; Get Over It!”
  • How doubly silly of people to read the 10th Amendment, and then expect it to mean something: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
  • It’s just a guess, but I’d bet that John C. Calhoun never once made reference to Marx and Engels in debating slavery.
  • Detecting the “ghost of socialism” in HCR is a lot like detecting “the ghost of a football player” in DeSean Jackson.

View Source Article

Federal Judge Upholds Obamacare

Published by:

A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed Liberty University’s lawsuit challenging the Obama administration’s new federal health care law, declaring that a provision requiring most individuals to obtain insurance is constitutional.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Norman K. Moon in Lynchburg is the second court decision upholding the law, following one in Michigan in October. University law school dean Mathew Staver said in a telephone interview that he will promptly appeal the ruling to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond.

Attorneys general from several states have filed another lawsuit in Florida, and a separate challenge by Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli is pending in federal court in Richmond. Both sides expect the issue to ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

“In the weeks ahead, there will be additional court cases examining this matter and the health reform law,” Stephanie Cutter, assistant to the president for special projects, wrote in a White House blog post. “We can’t predict the outcome of each case, but we are confident that we will ultimately prevail in court and continue to deliver the benefits of reform to the American people.”

U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson has said he expects to rule in Cuccinelli’s lawsuit by the end of the year. Liberty claimed in its suit that the requirement that individuals buy health insurance or pay a penalty is not a proper exercise of congressional authority under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. The university argued that a decision not to buy insurance is not economic activity that can be regulated by Congress.

Moon disagreed, writing in his 53-page opinion that “there is a rational basis for Congress to conclude that individuals’ decisions about how and when to pay for health care are activities that in the aggregate substantially affect the interstate health care market.”

Staver said he was not discouraged.

“The court’s ruling on the Commerce Clause, while wrong, puts us on the fast track to the federal court of appeals,” he said.

The conservative Christian university founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell also claimed the law violates its religious rights by forcing it to subsidize coverage for abortions, but again the judge disagreed.
View Source Article

Obama is “Extraordinarily Proud” of Healthcare

Published by:

President Barack Obama, in a wide-ranging, reflective interview with Barbara Walters, staunchly defended his controversial policies — including sweeping health care reforms and the massive economic stimulus package — as bold but necessary steps to help transform an economy that was at the brink of collapse to one that is “growing.” ”The notion that somehow you can only do one thing at once is simply not true,” Obama told Walters in the interview, which aired on ABC Friday evening. “The fact is, that we stabilized the financial system … we turned an economy that was contracting to one that was growing. We have added a million jobs over the last year to the economy.”

 And despite the intense criticism and political costs, the president said the health care overhaul will be “a lasting legacy that I am extraordinarily proud of.”

 The interview covered an array of topics, from North Korea, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the 2010 midterm elections, family life inside the White House, and outrage over the Transportation Security Administration’s new enhanced airport screening procedures.

Obama said the system — in which passengers must pass through bomb-detection scanners that penetrate clothing, or undergo aggressive pat-downs that some have compared to sexual assault — is “gonna be something that evolves.

“We are gonna have to work on it,” the president said. “I understand people’s frustrations with it, but I also know that if there was an explosion in the air that killed a couple of hundred people … and it turned out that we could have prevented it, possibly … that would be something that would be pretty upsetting to most of us — including me.”

Of his sagging approval ratings, Obama told Walters, “First of all, I’m not so unpopular,” pointing out that his poll numbers are “a little higher” than Bill Clinton’s and Ronald Reagan’s at comparable points in their presidencies.

 The president said he understands that unemployment numbers are “frustrating to people,” and that he isn’t making “any excuses.”

 Still, he said, “We’ve been through tougher times before as a country, and we’ve always come up on top.”

Obama told Walters that in the coming months, he would like to focus on education, research and development, and reducing the deficit.

Obama said he’s looking forward to meeting with Republican leaders next week to discuss a tax-cut extension and is eager to “hear what their ideas are.”

“We need to get this resolved,” he said. “I expect that I don’t end up getting everything I want. I think hopefully they come to the table understanding they’re not going to get everything they want.”

Turning to North Korea, Obama called this week’s incident “one more provocative incident in a series that we’ve seen over the last several months.”

“We want to make sure all the parties in the region recognize that this is a serious and ongoing threat that this has to be dealt with,” he said. “South Korea is our ally. It has been since the Korean War, and we strongly affirm our commitment to defend South Korea as part of that alliance.”

He said he would not speculate on the possibility of military action yet but said the tensions represent “the cornerstone of U.S. security in the Pacific region.”

On ex-Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who lambasted Obama and the media after she was criticized for confusing South Korea and North Korea in an interview, Obama said: “I don’t speculate on what’s going to happen two years from now … What I’m saying is that I don’t think of Sarah Palin.”

The president appeared in the interview with first lady Michelle Obama, who revealed to Walters that she told her husband “let’s get to work” after the so-called “shellacking” Democrats took in the midterm elections.

“I said, ‘Let’s, let’s get to work. There is a lot to do.’ … I think for, for us, it’s always the focus on what we need to get done, the work ahead,” the first lady said in the interview, which was taped on Tuesday at the White House.

Obama said the advice from his wife came after election night — because the first lady had gone to sleep before all the results had come in.

“She goes to sleep early,” he said.

“I go to bed early,” the first lady said with a laugh. ” I can’t stay awake for the returns … I gotta get up, work out. I figured … it was going to be whatever it was going to be the next day. So I did, I did go to sleep.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/45612.html#ixzz16VzynP6f

Republicans and Obamacare — Will They Repeal Or Not?

Published by:

I have told you this before and I will tell you this again. Unless you elect Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Ken Buck, Ron Johnson, Rand Paul, Mike Lee, Sharron Angle, and Joe Miller, we will never see Obamacare repealed.

Senator Judd Gregg is up today saying that repeal is not recommended.

Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.), the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, said that repealing the new healthcare reform law — or looking to defund it — were not good options.

“I don’t think starving or repealing is probably the best approach here,” Gregg said on the Fox Business Network. “You basically go in and restructure it.”

Here’s the thing — Senate leadership staff will say this is just Judd Gregg, who is retiring, and not reflective of the Senate GOP leadership. There is a problem though.

In the past several weeks, there have been several closed door, off the record meetings of high dollar donors getting briefings from various elected officials, including several Senators. In each case the donors have been “reassured” by the Senators present that they have no intention of repealing Obamacare, just restructuring it.

The Senators seemed to think the high dollar donors were not kooks like those tea party activists and would understand the practical need to just “restructure” instead of “repeal.” Unfortunately, the Senators have badly misread the donors.

In any event, you can be sure that Judd Gregg is not speaking out of turn and is not a lone wolf on this issue. His view reflects that of the Senate GOP leadership despite their protestations to the contrary.

Again, if you haven’t sent money to Joe Miller, Sharron Angle, Ken Buck, Pat Toomey, Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, and Marco Rubio, you better. Repeal of Obamacare depends on them.

UPDATED: It is worth noting that neither Mitch McConnell nor Lamar Alexander have signed on as co-sponsors to Jim DeMint’s legislation that would repeal Obamacare.

Washington DC — Today’s Major Events

Published by:

The House has 24 votes on bills on suspension today.
One report states that conservatives are Six Months Closer to Repeal on ObamaCare, on this, the six month anniversary of the passing of the Health Bill.

Anyone who has been following the news since Obamacare’s passage already knows why the law is so unpopular: billion dollar employer losses, exploding spending estimates, higher health care costs, fewer doctors, fewer choices, fewer jobs, etc

Michael Cannon of CATO wrote for the Washington Times today that ObamaCare is hurting patients and the idea of affordable health care.

Six months ago today, President Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. The intervening six months have shown that this health care law offers neither patient protection nor affordable health care – in fact, quite the opposite. Obamacare’s greatest selling point was that it would guarantee health insurance coverage to people with pre-existing conditions, starting with children, through government price controls that would prohibit insurers from charging higher premiums to those patients. Unfortunately, the only thing price controls guarantee is misery.

ObamaCare has been a disaster for consumers and things are only expected to get worse. The repeal ObamaCare effort spearheaded by Congressman Steve King (R-Iowa) has picked up steam and we can expect elements of repeal to commence in 2011.

View Source Article

ObamaCare Promise of No Rationing Broken by FDA

Published by:

Posted by Brian Darling

Until recently, the implications of ObamaCare were debated in a vacuum. There were allegations and responses, but no results to support either side. Now that we have entered the implementation phase of ObamaCare, things are becoming more clear. Many of the bold promises that were offered to sell ObamaCare to the American public were not based in reality.

Taxes increases hit Americans next year and, in many states, they are already seeing health insurance rates increase as a result of ObamaCare. In addition to the Obama Administration promising that insurance rates would not go up, they have also promised that rationing of care would not happen. But bad things seems to be happening sooner than expected and contrary to explicit promises of this Administration.

This past August, an advisory panel for the Food and Drug Administration recommended that the late stage cancer drug Avastin be “de-labeled” because of cost considerations. It is critical to note, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not propose denying cancer victims the right to the drug because of the safety of the drug, but because of a formula containing cost as factor.

Senator David Vitter (R-LA) has taken a leadership position on the issue and has written letters to the FDA and expressing concern about “cost rationing.” Senator Vitter is worried that the Avastin case will be the beginning of ObamaCare rationing for drugs that may extend life. Rationing for seriously ill patients based on cost.

Should the FDA agree with the advisory panel’s recommendation, private insurers and Medicare will drop coverage for the drug for breast cancer patients, despite the fact that the drug extends life for an average of six months. This is a classic example of why many conservatives are concerned about government run health care.

By using cost as a factor in their decision-making, the FDA has begun the implementation of ObamaCare and breast cancer patients may be its first victim. Politically, this is another disaster for those who voted for health care reform. If this drug, or any other, is denied because of cost, they will be forced to defend the decision.

The FDA has put off a final decision for another 90 days on the future of the drug according to the AP.

Drugmaker Roche said Friday that U.S. health regulators will take more time to review its drug Avastin for breast cancer, a use that has generated vigorous debate among cancer specialists and patients. The company said in a statement that the Food and Drug Administration extended its review of the drug by 90 days, or until Dec. 17.

This kicks the decision until after the fall Congressional elections. It will be much easier for the FDA to make a difficult decision after the election removing pressure from Americans who oppose government rationed care. The American people do not want rationed care and drugs for the seriously ill.

The senior advocacy group 60 Plus released the findings of a new poll that asks people about the FDA basing cancer decisions on cost. Let’s just say, the argument about ObamaCare is no longer theoretical — denial of care will impact lives and the American people know it.

Key findings of the poll include:

*56% of registered American voters believe the new healthcare reform law will lead to so-called “rationing” of care;
*82% believe that cost-effectiveness is not a justification for rationing;
*78% “worry” that the FDA’s revocation represents the “start of healthcare rationing;” and
*71% of registered American voters report they would be less likely to vote for any member of Congress who supported the FDA decision on drugs like Avastin. 49% would be “much less likely.”

Will someone have the guts to ask an ObamaCare supporter if breast cancer patients should be denied insurance coverage for Avastinor other life extending drugs? Will others join Senator Vitter in his fight to protect cancer patients? With Members of Congress running away from ObamaCare, even members of the President’s party, they are sure to run away from the FDA’s potential decision to deny patients access to a drug that extends the life of seriously ill cancer patients. This situation is yet another example of why ObamaCare needs to be repealed.
View Source Article