Archive for Health Care Bill

Harry Reid Reads Health Care Bill, Decides He Doesn’t Like It Any More | The New Ledger

Posted in Harry Reid, Health Care, Pelosi with tags , , , , , , , on August 10, 2010 by saynsumthn

H/T New Ledger

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Harry Reid Reads Health Care Bill, Decides He D…, posted with vodpod

John Graham of the Pacific Research Institute details a few fun facts in this video about HealthCare.gov, but the one that sticks out is this, a letter from Majority Leader Harry Reid to HHS Sec. Kathleen Sebelius sent on July 21st. The letter seems to indicate that Reid has finally read the health care bill, and after discovering it hurts Nevada hospitals more than it helps them, is complaining to the administration. You can read the full Reid letter here:

In a July 21 letter to U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Service Kathleen Sebelius, the Senate Majority Leader complains that ObamaCare’s cuts to Medicare will “result in a net reduction in payment to Nevada’s hospitals when they are unable to absorb such a cut.” Furthermore, he questions the method used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to calculate the payments to hospitals, and is “very concerned about potential effects on beneficiary access if this regulation is finalized without adjustment.”

But that’s the entire point of the measure you worked so hard to pass, Sen. Reid! Roughly half of the estimated cost of Obamacare is, according to the Congressional Budget Office, paid for by making approximately $455 billion in cutbacks to payments to Medicare providers — read, hospitals and doctors. That’s what it means to control for cost through government mandates. Did you miss a meeting?

Incidents like this illustrate why this ludicrous bill, supported by well-intentioned fools whose inability to understand economics is only matched by their inability to understand human nature, is politically unsustainable. Already politicians like Reid are working to game the system, to exempt their states from the cutbacks made necessary by their own policy decisions, as they do with any government-run industry. Get ready — there’s no end in sight.

A week after Senator Reid wrote his letter, the Government Accountability Office confirmed that 70 percent of Federally Qualified Health Centers already had costs that were higher than their reimbursements in 2004, a share that had been climbing since 1997.

Thomas More Law Center Files Court Challenge Moments After Obama Health Care Signed Into Law

Posted in Abortion, Civil Rights, Constitution, Health Care, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , , , on March 23, 2010 by saynsumthn

From Thomas More Law Center
March 23, 2010

ANN ARBOR, MI – Moments after President Obama signed the so-called health care reform bill into law in a televised White House ceremony, the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor Michigan, filed a federal lawsuit challenging its constitutionality in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

The purpose of the lawsuit is to permanently enjoin enforcement of the new health care legislation.

Assisting the Law Center as co-counsel in the lawsuit is attorney David Yerushalmi.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Law Center itself, and four individuals from the Southeastern Michigan area. None of the individuals have private health care insurance; all object to being forced to purchase health care coverage; and all object to being forced to pay for abortions, which is contrary to their religious beliefs.
Named as defendants in the lawsuit are President Obama, Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services; Eric H. Holder, Jr., U.S. Attorney General; and Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Department of Treasury. All the defendants were sued in their official capacity.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Law Center, commented, “This Act is a product of political corruption and the exercise of unconstitutional power. Our Founding Fathers envisioned a limited form of government. The purpose of our Constitution and this lawsuit is to insure it stays that way.”

Continued Thompson, “Let’s face it, if Congress has the power to force individuals to purchase health insurance coverage or pay a federal penalty merely because they live in America, then it has the unconstrained power to mandate that every American family buy a General Motors vehicle to help the economy or pay a federal penalty.”
Robert Muise, the Law Center’s Senior Trial Counsel, and David Yerushalmi prepared the lawsuit. According to the lawsuit, the health care reform law imposes unprecedented governmental mandates that trample upon the personal and economic freedoms of Americans in violation of their constitutional rights. [Read copy of Complaint].

Among the allegations of the lawsuit are the claims that Congress had no authority under the Commerce Clause to pass the law; that by usurping the power reserved for the states and the people, Congress violated the Tenth Amendment; and that by forcing private citizens to fund abortion, contrary to their rights of conscience and the free exercise of religion, Congress violated the First Amendment.

Thompson concluded, “Americans agree that our health care system needs reform. But they don’t want a federal takeover of the system in the process. And they don’t want reform by trampling on our Constitution.”

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at http://www.thomasmore.org.

Complaint:
http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/
TMLCFilesCourtChallengeMomentsAfterObamaHealt.pdf

Abortion and the Health Bill

Posted in Abortion, Anti-abortion, Harry Reid, Health Care, Obama, Pelosi, Planned Parenthood, Politics, Population Control, pro-choice, Pro-Life with tags , , , , , , , , , on March 5, 2010 by saynsumthn

There is no middle ground. Either taxpayers will fund it or they won’t.
By CHARMAINE YOEST

It’s now becoming clear that Barack Obama is willing to put everything on the table in order to be the president who passes health-care reform. Everything, that is, except a ban on federal funding for abortion.

Last September, the president promised that “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.” Yet the legislation most likely to move forward in Congress would be the single greatest expansion of abortion since the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

The White House knows how to turn Mr. Obama’s September commitment into legislative action. I met with senior White House officials and told them that only adding a so-called Hyde Amendment to the health-care reform bills would fulfill the president’s promise to protect Americans from subsidizing abortion.

The Hyde Amendment dates back to the 1970s, when congressional leaders discovered that Medicaid was paying for nearly 300,000 abortions a year. This had not been an intended outcome of the Medicaid program, which was created in 1965 with strong bipartisan support. So in 1976 Rep. Henry Hyde introduced an amendment to the Health and Human Services appropriations bill prohibiting taxpayer funds from paying for abortions.

Similar amendments have been added to health-care bills ever since. Without specific language prohibiting the practice, history has shown that the courts or administrative agencies end up directing government dollars to pay for abortions.

For example, in the 1996 case Planned Parenthood v. Engler, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals found that “under Medicaid, certain categories of medical care are mandatory.” The court then found that abortion “fits within many of the mandatory care categories, including ‘family planning,’ ‘outpatient services,’ ‘inpatient services,’ and ‘physician services.'” In short, the court created a mandate for funded abortions through Medicaid if the Hyde Amendment is ever eliminated.

Over the past year, language similar to the Hyde Amendment was crafted by Reps. Bart Stupak (D., Mich.) and Joe Pitts (R., Pa.) and inserted into the health-care bill that passed the House. When asked about the Stupak-Pitts Amendment in November, Mr. Obama talked around the issue. He said that “there is a balance to be achieved that is consistent with the Hyde Amendment.” When asked if Stupak-Pitts struck this “balance,” the president replied “not yet.”

That’s an odd reply. The question of abortion funding doesn’t have any Zen to it: The funding is either prohibited or it’s not.

In November, presidential adviser David Axelrod, on CNN’s “State of the Union,” also talked around the Hyde Amendment, saying that the president “doesn’t believe this bill should change the status quo as it relates to the issue of abortion.” But then Mr. Axelrod claimed that “this shouldn’t be a debate about abortion” before concluding that there were discussions in Congress about “how to adjust [the abortion language bill] accordingly.”

Apparently, his definition of “adjust” means opening up the spigot for the abortion lobby. The president’s latest proposal mirrors legislation that has passed the Senate, which doesn’t include a Hyde Amendment, and would inevitably establish abortion as a fundamental health-care service for the following reasons:

• It would change existing law by allowing federally subsidized health-care plans to pay for abortions and could require private health-insurance plans to cover abortion.

• It would impose a first-ever abortion tax—a separate premium payment that will be used to pay for elective abortions—on enrollees in insurance plans that covers abortions through newly created government health-care exchanges.

• And it would fail to protect the rights of health-care providers to refuse to participate in abortions.

The president’s plan goes further than the Senate bill on abortion by calling for spending $11 billion over five years on “community health centers,” which include Planned Parenthood clinics that provide abortions.

The bottom line is that the president wants to deploy words that sound soothing like “balance” and “adjust.” Meanwhile, the courts are rendering precedent with stark words like “mandatory.”

When confronted by House Minority Leader John Boehner about abortion funding during the health-care summit last week, the president dropped his head and looked down at the table. How revealing.

Ms. Yoest is president and CEO of Americans United for Life.

Jan 20: Breaking News : Obama says Seat Senator Brown before Health Care Vote

Posted in Health Care, Obama, Outrage, Politics with tags , , , , , , , , , on January 20, 2010 by saynsumthn

Just in on Fox News: While waiting for White House Press Secretary Gibbs, the newswires are stating that President Obama told the Senate to seat Senator Scott Brown before “Cramming” the Health Care Bill Through.

Just Posted by USA Today:

President Obama just told ABC News that Congress should not “jam” through a health care bill until newly elected Sen. Scott Brown is seated.

“Here’s one thing I know and I just want to make sure that this is off the table: The Senate certainly shouldn’t try to jam anything through until Scott Brown is seated,” Obama said. “The people of Massachusetts spoke. He’s got to be part of that process.”

In his first public comments since the special Senate election, Obama said voters swept Brown into office Tuesday for the same reason they elected him president in 2008.

“People are angry; they are frustrated,” Obama told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos. “Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

Back to Press Conference:

Press Secretary Gibbs called the vote last night ” Anger” by the voters.

Gibbs noted that the “Anger and Frustration” of the American People are what brought Obama to Washington (BLAH BLAH BLAH) But he vows that the President will continue to move forward with the same agenda ! ( Obama – Can’t you hear us now? )

Gibbs, “The President was not expecting to loose that Senate race – we certainly weren’t expecting that” (DUH? Weren’t you listening? Oh Yeah- to busy calling Tea Parties and Town Halls Racist and having them investigated by Homeland Security !)

Gibbs, “Obama will address the results and what they mean in the State of the Union”

Gibbs, “We certainly have a lot of work to do to get our economy back on track”

Gibbs, “We’ve got as a lot of work to do…”

Gibbs, ” The President works each and every day on making our economy stronger…” ( Wow)

Gibbs, “That anger is rightly focused on us [ Democrats] because we’re in charge”

Reporters are asking Gibbs why Obama expressed so much concern for the economic standard of the American People in 2009 during election campaign- but them focused so much on Health Care Takeover during the last year ! ( YOU GOT IT !)

Health Care Bill: Future Congresses Cannot Repeal Parts of Reid Bill – Unconstitutional?

Posted in Abortion, Constitution, Health Care with tags , , , , , , on December 23, 2009 by saynsumthn

Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) pointed out some rather astounding language in the Senate health care bill -he pointed out that the Reid bill declares on page 1020 that the Independent Medicare Advisory Board cannot be repealed by future Congresses:
there’s one provision that i found particularly troubling and it’s under section c, titled “limitations on changes to this subsection.
and i quote — “it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.”

Late Term Abortion Supporter, Kathleen Sebelius supports Senate pro-abortion lingo

Posted in Abortion, Health Care with tags , , , , , on December 23, 2009 by saynsumthn

Here is the HHS Secretary with a Late Term Wichita , Kansas Abortion Doctor ; George Tiller

SEBELIUS: And I would say that the Senate language, which was negotiated by Senators Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray, who are very strong defenders of women’s health services and choices for women, take a big step forward from where the House left it with the Stupak amendment, and I think do a good job making sure there are choices for women, making sure there are going to be some plan options, and making sure that while public funds aren’t used, we are not isolating, discriminating against, or invading the privacy rights of women. That would be an accounting procedure, but everybody in the exchange would do the same thing, whether you’re male or female, whether you’re 75 or 25, you would all set aside a portion of your premium that would go into a fund, and it would not be earmarked for anything, it would be a separate account that everyone in the exchange would pay.

BLOGHER: It’s a bit confusing, but …

SEBELIUS: Okay. It is a bit confusing, but it’s really an accounting that would apply across the board and not just to women, and certainly not just to women who want to choose abortion coverage.

BLOGHER: Oh, that’s good, that’s good.

In April 2007, Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius threw a lavish private party for George and Jeanne Tiller and his staff. The party was hosted at Cedar Crest (the Governor’s Mansion) to thank Tiller for the large contributions he’s given to her and other Democrat campaigns. Click here to read more.

Sebelius comments about the rights of the unborn in The Wichita Eagle, October 29, 1989

What’s the BIG DEAL? Health Care back door payoffs !

Posted in Abortion, Health Care, Obama with tags , , , , , , , , , , on December 22, 2009 by saynsumthn

What Did Senators Get For Their Health Care Votes?
by Connie Hair (more by this author) / Human Events
Posted 12/21/2009 ET

At 1:01 a.m., the Senate cleared the first hurdle to pass its own version of the government takeover of health care, holding a vote for cloture on what’s known as the Manager’s Amendment. The vote on the last-minute amendment that held multi-million dollar deals to buy key votes from Senators passed 60-40, a straight party line vote.

What did Senators get for their votes?

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) claimed to be holding out for language in the bill that would guarantee federal funding would not be used to pay for elective abortion on demand. Nelson threw the pro-life community under the bus, agreeing to language that every major pro-life group says still allows the use of taxpayer funds to pay for abortions.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops supports the underlying bill but rejects this abortion language formulation: “This legislation should not move forward in its current form. It should be opposed unless and until such serious concerns have been addressed. … Despite repeated claims to the contrary, it does not comply with longstanding Hyde restrictions on federal funding of elective abortions and health plans that include them.”

Other pro-life leaders and groups agreed that the protections offered in the House-passed Stupak-Pitts Amendment barred the federal funding of abortion but the new formulation Nelson agreed to in the Senate does not do the job.

“While I appreciate the efforts of all the parties involved, especially Senator Ben Nelson, the Senate abortion language is not acceptable,” Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), the co-author of the House amendment said. “A review of the Senate language indicates a dramatic shift in federal policy that would allow the federal government to subsidize insurance policies with abortion coverage.”

NEBRASKA RIGHT TO LIFE: “Senator Nelson had a chance to ensure that the longstanding principle of the Hyde Amendment against federal funding of abortion with narrow exceptions, would be placed in the Senate healthcare legislation. He dashed any hope of that with his late-night agreement with Senators Reid, Boxer and Schumer on unacceptable language that he claimed would address pro-life concerns.”

NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE COMMITTEE: “The manager’s amendment is light years removed from the Stupak-Pitts Amendment that was approved by the House of Representatives on November 8 by a bipartisan vote of 240-194. The new abortion language solves none of the fundamental abortion-related problems with the Senate bill, and it actually creates some new abortion-related problems.”

FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: “This so-called ‘compromise’ includes the accounting gimmicks that we have seen previously proposed. The new language also does nothing to protect individual consciences. Every purchaser of insurance will be forced to pay for other people’s abortions in a more direct manner than ever before.”

But was abortion really the issue for Nelson?

The deal Hill staffers called the “Full Nelson” (not sure whether that’s a reference to the strangling wrestling hold or the full frontal exposure made famous in the film “Full Monty”), Ben Nelson got a deal that purports to pay for millions of dollars of Nebraska’s new Medicaid bills that will be imposed by the very expansion of Medicaid included in the bill he voted for. Ahem.

Yet Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) told Fox News Sunday that no future Congress would be bound to make these payments to Nebraska or any other state to cover their Medicaid payments. So the big Medicaid sellout is a shell?

On Saturday, Politico reported, “In addition to the Medicaid carve out, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) negotiated an exemption from the insurance tax for non-profit insurers based in his state. The language was written in a way that only Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company, as well as Blue Cross Blue Shield non-profit plans in Nebraska and Michigan, would qualify, according to a Democratic aide.”

And as HUMAN EVENTS reported Saturday, the insurance trade underwriter Property & Casualty posted this breaking news item on their website on Friday which informed insurance industry insiders that Nelson had been successful in having their anti-trust language barred from inclusion in the Senate bill.

If Nelson were actually concerned over federal funding of abortion, he would have insisted on the strong Stupak-Pitts language. Instead Nelson, the former state insurance commissioner and insurance company executive, appears to have sold out the pro-life community to gain high dollar items for the insurance industry.

The future certainly looks bright for Ben Nelson in the insurance industry when his Senate career is over.

More Senate Deals

Given the Senate bill drastically expands the sub-standard Medicaid programs for low-income people, the massive hidden cost in the bill is transferred to state budgets in an unfunded mandate. Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) negotiated $250 million in Medicaid payments for their state.

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) in her own high-profile sellout negotiated $300 million in non-guaranteed Medicaid payouts in what has been called the New Louisiana Purchase.

Months earlier, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) negotiated his own Medicare payment carve out for his home state of Nevada.

Currently, less than 50 percent of doctors will see new Medicaid patients due to severe underpayments and non-payments that can bankrupt their medical practice. The program expansion is expected to be an unmitigated disaster to state budgets that will likely cause drastic state tax increases.

In another payoff deal to a mystery senator, Reid’s Manager’s Amendment allotted $100,000,000 for an as yet to be disclosed “Health Care Facility” at a “public research university in the United States that contains a state’s sole public academic medical and dental school.”

In the Manager’s Amendment to H.R. 3590, Pg. 328:

“(a) APPROPRIATION.—There are authorized to be appropriated, and there are appropriated to the Department of Health and Human Services, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, to remain available for obligation until September 30, 2011, to be used for debt service on, or direct construction or renovation of, a health care facility that provides research, inpatient tertiary care, or outpatient clinical services. Such facility shall be affiliated with an academic health center at a public research university in the United States that contains a State’s sole public academic medical and dental school.”

“This process is not legislation, this process is corruption,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-Okla.). “It’s a shame the only way we can come to a consensus in this country is to buy votes.”

There are two more cloture motions requiring 60 votes for passage this week before the simple majority vote on the final bill Christmas Eve night. Failure to reach 60 votes at any point in the process would kill the bill in the Senate.

Should the Senate pass the bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) could send the bill straight to the president’s desk for signature by offering a Motion to Concur with the Senate Amendment and a simple House majority passes. The House would need to hold their far-left radical “Progressive Caucus” vote and the pro-life Stupak vote together for that simple majority vote, which could get sticky.

If the House changes one dot or tittle of the bill, the Senate would have to pass a Motion to Concur with the House. That would require 60 votes to reach cloture and end debate on the Motion to Concur.

Or Pelosi could take the House and Senate bills to conference, which would be a much longer process that would attempt to merge the House and Senate versions of the bill.

Story Here: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34930