Obamacare to Herd Disabled Seniors to Bare-Bones Medicaid Plans

Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a former senior official at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the Bush administration, warns that under Obamacare disabled seniors who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid will receive inferior care, according to a report by the New York Post.

Gottlieb, an American Enterprise Institute resident fellow, says these low-income people who are elderly or have disabilities will be uprooted from the tried-and-true Medicare fold and “herded” into state-run Medicaid plans as another phase of Obamacare grips the nation.

“It’s hard to see how they’ll be better off in bare-bones, and sometimes poorly-run state Medicaid plans than by getting access to Medicare options they were entitled to before Obamacare,” Dr. Gottlieb lamented on Friday.

A so-called Obamacare “demonstration” program kicking-off in January will turn over management of such “dual-eligibles,” along with the money that the federal government was spending on their medical care to any state that wants to climb aboard the latest federal money wagon.

Some cash-strapped states are jumping at the chance to capture federal Medicare dollars for their Medicaid programs, according to Gottlieb.

Indeed, some anxious states have already committed to automatically placing these folks in existing Medicaid plans. Big problem lurking here, says Gottlieb: Such plans often aren’t equipped to serve an older, sicker group of patients. “That will mean big savings for the state and worse care for the vulnerable,” he concludes.

The doctor cites significant examples:

• New York is looking to shift 700,000 “dual-eligibles” into a capitated managed-care model or HMO-style care. The target: Corral most of the elderly poor and disabled by 2015.
• California plans to move up to 1.1 million duals into its state-run Medicaid managed-care system.

These examples are but the tip of a huge green iceberg of big cash.
According to the Post report, Wall Street figures the entire “dual eligible” market at $350 billion a year.

While this is good news on The Street where the stocks of Medicaid HMOs are being bid skyward, Gottlieb is not consoled. “Care is likely to suffer. Many of these elderly poor also suffer from a lot of chronic ailments like diabetes and lung disease. [T]hese people have diverse medical problems, and have been most successfully served by Medicare programs that tailored services to their specific needs.”

Gottlieb’s bottom line: The Obamacare demonstration looks like an effort to shore up Medicaid by subsidizing it with Medicare dollars. “It’s another case of how Obamacare is designed to serve the existing health-care system, rather than transforming it to meet the needs of individual patients.”

Source: Newsmax.com: Expert: Obamacare to Herd Disabled Seniors to Bare-Bones Medicaid Plans

Wow… two ObamaCare death panel target groups rolled into one, the disabled and seniors.  Time for some major apologies to Sarah Palin who was soooo right!

Related:

“People 70 and Over Will Not Be Treated Under ObamaCare”… and You Thought DEATH PANELS Were Gone – Updated

Obama Embraces ‘Death Panel’ Concept in Medicare Rule

Replacing ObamaCare: True Insurance

By Daniel Anderson on April 30, 2012 - FreedomWorks

Consider this: Why does your job offer health insurance, but not auto insurance? Certainly, you need to be healthy to come into work, but most Americans also need a car to get to work. For that matter, why doesn’t your job offer home or life insurance? What makes health insurance a common, nearly-ubiquitous benefit of employment in the United States?

The prevalence of employer group-based health insurance in America is a result of World War II. During the lead-up to the war in the Great Depression, there was an enormous surplus of labor relative to demand. However, as millions of Americans were sent overseas to fight in World War II, the labor pool shrunk dramatically. At the same time, the demand for labor skyrocketed as the federal government poured enormous resources into war production, creating a massive industry that desperately needed workers.

Given these conditions, businesses would normally raise wages in order to attract workers. However, the federal government also imposed wage controls on many American industries. In order to get around these wage controls, businesses began to offer health insurance to lure in prospective employees, along with other “fringe benefits.”

Following the war, Congress created a tax code that rewarded employer group-based health insurance. If businesses provided their employees with health insurance, that insurance benefit would not be taxed. However, if businesses simply raised their employees’ wages, the wages would be taxed. Understandably, most businesses decided to offer health insurance to their employees instead of raises.

In this way, the federal government largely created the employer group-based health insurance system. This system is unique to the United States. Every other developed country has some form of government health care, whether it’s truly socialized medicine such as in Britain, or a single-payer system like in Sweden. Our system is a result of both the unforeseen consequences of government involvement in business, and the natural American aversion to big government.

For most Americans, employer-based health care works. A March 28th Reason-Rupe poll found that:

• 87% of Americans are covered by health insurance

• 63% of Americans with health insurance are covered by employer group-based plans

• 23% of Americans with health insurance are covered by Medicare or Medicaid

• 58% of Americans are satisfied with their overall health care

• 23% of Americans are dissatisfied with their overall health care

So, the vast majority of Americans have health insurance coverage, a majority of Americans with health insurance receive it through their employer, and a majority of Americans are satisfied with things as they are.

What does this mean?

Simply put, there’s little reason to dramatically alter health insurance in America as things stand. Unfortunately, the provisions in ObamaCare will force a radical, fundamental shift in health care from employer group-based health insurance to health insurance exchanges controlled by the federal government. ObamaCare won’t destroy the employer group-based system, but it will change the basic dynamics of the health insurance market.

Still, while the polling numbers strongly support the continuation of the employer group-based system, not everyone is happy with it. After all, more than a tenth of Americans lack coverage, and nearly a quarter of Americans are dissatisfied with their overall health care.

What’s the best way to respond to those numbers? Congress could follow the ObamaCare route: mandating insurance and expanding federal control of health care through government health plans. For most Americans, this unconstitutional and expensive path toward addressing the problem is unacceptable.

The solution to helping people left behind by the employer group-based health insurance system isn’t an expansion of the government group-based health insurance system. Instead, we ought to encourage true, individual insurance.

What are some of the benefits of true insurance? The main benefit is portability. For most Americans, losing or leaving their jobs means losing their health insurance as well, since the two are connected. This increases the hardship of the unemployed, while simultaneously discouraging entrepreneurial Americans from leaving their jobs and their health insurance in order to start their own businesses.

But if you purchase health insurance separately from your job, like you purchase auto or homeowner’s insurance, that insurance now stays with you regardless of your employment status. The portability of true, individual insurance helps to calm some of the anxieties that come with unemployment while also freeing up America’s entrepreneurs to start businesses and to create jobs.

True insurance’s portability also helps to deal with the problem of pre-existing conditions in health care. The problem of pre-existing conditions should not be overstated, as it only afflicts about 1% of Americans. Still, it was a key impetus behind the push for ObamaCare, and all health care policy experts who hope to implement reform must address it. While by no means a silver bullet, the ability to keep the same insurance provider throughout several jobs, and possibly throughout your entire career, helps to alleviate the pre-existing conditions problem.

Most people acquire their “pre-existing condition” during their adult life, while in the workforce. When that happens, their insurance will most likely cover the new condition, similar to other ailments. But once these people change jobs, they now suddenly have a “pre-existing condition.” The portability and continuity of true insurance would do a great deal to reduce the number of Americans who have trouble accessing health care due to their pre-existing conditions.

Finally, true insurance provides Americans with greater choice and freedom with their health care. In a sense, when you apply for a job today, you’re also applying for that job’s health plan. Unfortunately, you don’t really know the details of the health plan until you’ve already taken the job and the plan.

What if you purchase true, individual insurance? You can pick a plan that the right premium and deductible. You can ensure that the plan covers the things you want covered. In short, you can get a plan that appeals to you, instead of being forced into your employer’s pre-packaged plan, which may or may not cost what you would prefer or cover what you want covered.

So, there are several major advantages to a true insurance system. How do we encourage its growth? The most important step to growing the true insurance market is to equalize tax treatment of the employer and true insurance systems. Full deductibility of all health care expenditures would help to level the playing field in the insurance market, thereby increasing patient choice.

The employer group-based health insurance system works for most Americans, but it’s not perfect. For those Americans who would prefer something different, we ought to forgo government group-based health insurance like in ObamaCare in favor of encouraging true, individual health insurance.

TAKE ACTION: Urge your Members of Congress to cosponsor the Patient OPTION Act!

Source:  True Health Is True Wealth

Day Two of Supreme Court ObamaCare Hearing: ObamaCare Could Be on Life Support

Photo:  The Blaze

People Are Saying That Obama's Healthcare Law Got Massacred At The Supreme Court Yesterday

Business Insider ^ | March 27, 2012 | Grace Wyler

The Supreme Court just wrapped up the second day of oral arguments in the landmark case against President Obama's healthcare overhaul, and reports from inside the courtroom indicate that the controversial law took quite a beating. Today's arguments focused around the central constitutional question of whether Congress has the power to force Americans to either pay for health insurance or pay a penalty. According to CNN's legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, the arguments were "a train wreck for the Obama administration."

The Supreme Court just wrapped up the second day of oral arguments in the landmark case against President Obama's healthcare overhaul, and reports from inside the courtroom indicate that the controversial law took quite a beating.

Today's arguments focused around the central constitutional question of whether Congress has the power to force Americans to either pay for health insurance or pay a penalty.

According to CNN's legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, the arguments were "a train wreck for the Obama administration."

"This law looks like it's going to be struck down. I'm telling you, all of the predictions including mine that the justices would not have a problem with this law were wrong," Toobin just said on CNN.

Toobin added that that the Obama administration's lawyer, U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, was unprepared for the attacks against the individual mandate.

"I don't know why he had a bad day," he said. "He is a good lawyer, he was a perfectly fine lawyer in the really sort of tangential argument yesterday. He was not ready for the answers for the conservative justices."

In the aftermath of today's arguments, Toobin and many other legal reporters agree that the Obamacare decision will come down to a fight between the nine Supreme Court justices.

According to reports from the courtroom, the four liberal justices seem inclined to uphold the law. But it is still unclear if the Obama administration's legal team will be able to get a fifth vote.

The WSJ reports that Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is considered the swing vote in the case, reportedly pushed Verrilli hard on his defense of the individual mandate, telling him that the government has a "very heavy burden of justification" to show where the Constitution gives Congress the power to force people to buy healthcare.

Tom Goldstein of SCOTUS blog sums up the end of the arguments:

Towards the end of the argument the most important question was Justice Kennedy’s. After pressing the government with great questions Kennedy raised the possibility that the plaintiffs were right that the mandate was a unique effort to force people into commerce to subsidize health insurance but the insurance market may be unique enough to justify that unusual treatment. But he didn’t overtly embrace that. It will be close. Very close.

Listen below to Solicitor General Verrilli nervously starting his opening argument on individual mandate (around 25 sec mark):  HERE

Video:  "This Is A Train Wreck For The Obama Administration!" Jeff Toobin On Healthcare Supreme Court

Revealed: Inside Obama’s Individual Mandate Memo and Why Obama Changed His Mind

March 23rd Second Anniversary of ObamaCare… March 26th a Future Day in American Infamy?

Photo:  The Foundry Blog

Friday March 23rd, 2012 is 2nd-year anniversary of the signing of the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, into law,  Monday March 26th is the day the states take their case against the ObamaCare individual mandate (as well as the full law itself) to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS).  It could end up being the day that saved America, or the day the Supreme Court helped America sink further into debt and further down the road toward Socialism.

If SCOTUS strikes down the individual mandate, ObamaCare will implode and die, giving America another chance at both surviving and re-addressing healthcare and Medicare.  If SCOTUS does not strike down the mandate, we will get a second chance to overturn the bill that will be the final nail in the coffin of American freedom in November 2012.  After that the only thing that will save us from ourselves is a total financial collapse.

Government-controlled/run healthcare is the jewel socialism and the most Progressive president and congress America has ever had crammed this bill down the throats of the American people without most of them ever realizing what happened. They even managed to force both the House and Senate to vote on this program, several times each, without reading the bills. Think about it.

There was a small group of people, the Tea Party and other patriots, who were engaged and did read those bills (at least one version), reviewed and  shared their findings, spoke out and traveled to Washington D.C. to stand up. I was one of those people… but nobody in Washington and not enough people in America listened.

Nancy Pelosi said, We have to pass the bill (without reading it… because there was not time) to find out what was in it?”.   They did… and now we, the American people, are beginning to find out what is in it… in dribs and drabs… one bad provision at a time. ObamaCare is fraught with broken promises and misrepresentations:  Obamacare’s Top 5 Broken Promises 

Well, we now have a group of doctors who have come together to get out the truth, the whole truth on how Obamacare will impact the health and welfare of your loved ones at: www.AmericanDoctors4Truth.org.  It is information absolutely vital for every American, especially if the SCOTUS does not over the full law or at least the individual mandate.

Remember the Democrat ad showing Paul Ryan throwing grandma off a cliff?

Well here is the response to that ad by www.AmericanDoctors4Truth.org based on the information of what really is in ObamaCare, now coming out. Please watch:

Video: The Whole Truth

It helps make the point by point case against ObamaCare.

My question is why nobody in Washington has read the full ObamaCare Bill in the meantime after it was passed and then spoken out… yelling from the rooftops?  Why?

Recently several important provisions have come to light.  Below are back-up articles and information for those who did not read the bill or at least the reviews of those who did:

Abortion, Birth Control an Woman’s Health:

Rep. Chris Smith on Obama Violating Own Executive Order, Funding Abortion

Obama Admin Finalizes Rules: $1 Abortions in ObamaCare

The Obamacare Second Anniversary: No Gift for Women

Sebelius: Decrease in Human Beings Will Cover Cost of Contraception Mandate

Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention?

What is the real purpose of birth control? Why is all of this so important to progressives?

Obamacare Will Not Value Human Life – Proof Lies In A Killer Theory

Costs and Funding of ObamaCare:

Democratic Leaders Run From Budget Deadline As Health Law Threatens Nation’s Finances

Oops ObamaCare’s Cost Has Doubled

ObamaCare 2nd Birthday, No Surprise: Still Not Lowering Costs

Insurance and Doctors:

Side Effects: Doctors Fear Obamacare

Obamacare Knows Best?

Power Grab:

Updated: 5-Reasons Obama is Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle… But Could be Winning the Power Grab Mandate War

Religious Liberty:

Stand Up For Religious Freedom Nationwide Rallies Friday - Coalition to Stop the HHS Mandate

Religious Liberty: Obamacare's First Casualty

War On: Obama and ObamaCare verses Constitutional Patriots and Religious Freedom

‘We Will Not Comply’: Catholic Leaders Distribute Letter Slamming Obama Admin Contraceptive Mandate

Seniors and Rationing:

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Obamacare rationing panels an ‘immediate danger to seniors’: former AMA president

Obamacare’s Second Anniversary: No Gift for Seniors

IPAB Spells Gloom And Doom For Medicare  -  Just yesterday (03.22.12) the House of Representatives voted to repeal key 'Obamacare' provision” IPAB  (the CLASS ACT has also been nullified)

Was told by a friend whose husband who works for one of our major hospitals here that the HR department posts upcoming news on a weekly basis on their bulletin boards throughout the hospital.

Late last week a posting went up stating: PER THE US FED GOVT, AS OF APRIL 24, 2013 THERE WILL BE NO CHEMO/RADIATION/MEDICATIONS/FOR ALL PERSONS DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER AT AGE 76. SURGICAL PROCEDURES WILL BE DONE ONLY IF THE SURGEONS CAN GET IT ALL. 

Taxes and ObamaCare Tentacles on house sales:

Thinking About Selling Your House After 2012?

Four Small Business Hikes in ObamaCare

Foundry:  The 10 Terrible Provisions of Obamacare You May Not Have Heard Of      

Alyene Senger  -  March 7, 2012 at 1:00 pm  (218)  - posted on the Foundry

Photo: The Foundry Blog

Obamacare includes such a variety and volume of negative policies that it’s hard to keep track of them all. Here is a list of 10 terrible provisions that every American should be aware of:

1. It increases taxes on families earning over $250,000. In 2013, the employee portion of the Medicare payroll tax will increase from 1.45 percent to 2.35 percent for families earning $250,000 or more and individuals earning $200,000 or more. The income threshold is not indexed for inflation, so more and more middle-income families will be hit by the tax hike as time goes on.

1. It adds a new tax to investment income. The increased payroll tax rate is also applied to high-earners’ investment income for the first time beginning in 2013. It will hit capital gains, dividends, rents, and royalties, discouraging investment and harming economic growth.
2. It puts new limitations on those with HSAs and FSAs. Starting in 2012, Obamacare restricts the products that consumers may purchase with a Health Savings Account (HSA) or Flexible Savings Account (FSA)—such as over-the-counter medications—and increases the penalty for such non-qualified uses of HSAs. It also limits the amount taxpayers may deposit into an FSA to $2,500 a year in 2013.
3. It adds a new tax on those who purchase medical devices. In 2013, a 2.3 percent excise tax will be applied to medical devices, causing a $28.5 billion tax hike on medical device manufacturers. The industry will pay for this tax by reducing jobs and passing additional costs on to consumers.
4. It penalizes marriage. Obamacare creates new taxpayer-funded subsidies for the low and middle classes to purchase health coverage, but the structure of the subsidies allows two individuals to claim more in subsidies alone than if married. This discriminates against married couples and discourages marriage at almost all age and income levels.
5. It violates religious liberty. The Department of Health and Human Services included the full range of contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs, among the women-specific preventive services that Obamacare requires insurers to include with no cost-sharing. This mandate violates Americans’ conscience rights and religious liberty. Its narrow exemption for religious employers will force many who find these products morally objectionable—including religious charities, hospitals, and schools—to pay for them.
6. It puts Medicare decisions in the hands of an unelected board. The Independent Payment Advisory Board, a board of 15 unelected officials, will have the power to cut Medicare spending without congressional approval. These unaccountable government appointees will be able to restrict seniors’ access to providers, treatments, and services.
7. It puts a premium tax on health insurers. Obamacare adds a premium tax on health insurers that offer full coverage beginning in 2014. On average, the tax is expected to increase premiums by 1.9 percent to 2.3 percent in 2014 and between 2.8 percent and 3.7 percent by 2023. Combined with the other provisions in Obamacare, this tax will have a huge impact on the cost of premiums.
8. It creates a new unsustainable entitlement program. On top of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, Obamacare created a new long-term care entitlement called the CLASS program. It is actuarially unsound, unworkable, and unsustainable. As a result, the Administration has already put its implementation “on hold.”
9. It puts over half of all Americans on a government program. Because of Obamacare’s huge expansion of Medicaid and creation of taxpayer-funded subsidies to purchase health coverage, more than half of all Americans will be dependent on a government health care program (Medicare, Medicaid, or the government exchanges) by the end of this decade.

Again, we only have a few chances of getting rid of ObamaCare, 4 if you consider a total financial collapse:

1. Having the Supreme Court overturn it after the court hearing on March 23rd.
2. Rep. Paul Ryan has just released the GOP’s new budget proposal that includes the repeal and replacement of ObamaCare, however, short of a miracle, that budget will pass in the House but will never even be put up for a vote in the Senate.
3. Voting in anyone (anyone but Obama… ABO) in November and then having them overturn and repeal as much of the entire bill as possible, on day one of their presidency, and start over, which all the GOP candidates have vowed to do.
4. Experiencing a total financial collapse of the United States after which there will be no money for any programs, especially ObamaCare.

If none of the first three above is done, the government will gain control of an additional 6 to 10% of the U.S. economy through ObamaCare and the tentacles will go so deep and wide that it can never be unwound after 4-more years of Obama and his radical team. Government controlled healthcare is always the crown jewel and center of socialism, especially with what is written into the Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare.  And if you realize what is in this bill and what has been done, it is also obvious that Nancy Pelosi,  Harry Reid and President must be ousted or shamed into quitting!!

Realizing how unpopular ObamaCare is the President and the White House have been very quiet about the 2-year anniversary, but Nancy Pelosi held a celebration in Washington on Thursday.

The SCOTUS decision is going to be a nail-bitter.  Many feel that the individual mandate will be struck down in a 5 to 4 decision; the 4-conservatives on the bench plus Judge Kennedy against the 4-liberals on the bench, which include Sotomayor and Kagen appointed by Obama just for this fight.  We shall see.  And unwinding this monster will be a mess no matter what SCOTUS decides or which method with use.

THE OTHER SHOE DROPS: A current events round-up for conservatives

Posted by Victoria Knox on February 21, 2012 at 4:32pm

 

Turning back the tide of information overload with a digest of the latest developments in news conservatives need to pay attention to:

† Living in these mad, mad, Madoff times: As little success as the Obama administration has had in reducing blue-collar unemployment, its track record for high-skilled, white-collar and professional jobs is even worse. No shovel-ready stimulus project can help an out-of-work project manager or staff attorney. And down to their last unemployment insurance checks, many white collar professionals are filing Social Security claims for mental illness and other disabilities. This trend makes the employment rate “look healthier than it should” because once people start collecting disability checks instead of unemployment checks they are no longer counted among the unemployed, New York Post reports:

As of January, the federal government was mailing out disability checks to more than 10.5 million individuals, including 2 million to spouses and children of disabled workers, at a cost of record $200 billion a year, recent research from JPMorgan Chase shows.

The sputtering economy has fueled those ranks. Around 5.3 percent of the population between the ages of 25 and 64 is currently collecting federal disability payments, a jump from 4.5 percent since the economy slid into a recession. …

During the recent economic boom, only 33 percent of applicants were claiming mental illness, but that figure has jumped to 43 percent, says [Matthew Rutledge, a research economist at Boston College] …

His research also shows a growing number of men, particularly older, former white-collar workers, instead of the typical blue-collar ones, are applying.

Social Security’s disability fund has been in the red since 2005 and is expected to run out of reserves within the next six years.

† A to Z approach on illegal immigration in AZ: After AL passed a tough AZ-style anti-illegal immigration law, Republicans hoped the measure would induce immigrants to self-deport in large numbers (related article, penultimate item on the page). A small percentage did – though to other states, not back to their home countries – and now that judges blocked several provisions of the law many of them are coming back, The Associated Press reports:

The Obama administration, immigrant groups and others sued over Alabama's law, and the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is set to consider arguments about it on March 1. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments a month later over Arizona's crackdown on illegal immigration, which isn't considered as strict as Alabama's. …

Estela Fuentes said friends of hers moved to Atlanta because the law required that public schools verify the citizenship status of students, yet they returned late last month after learning courts had put that section of the law on hold. The family was sad throughout its exile to Georgia, she said through a translator [emphasis, The Stiletto].

"One of their daughters cried and cried because she had no friends over there," said Fuentes, who is originally from El Salvador.

And while there are families returning, some officials say they haven't heard anything to suggest the numbers are huge. Zayne Smith, an immigration attorney with the nonprofit Alabama Appleseed legal center in Montgomery, said she had been hearing that some people wanted to wait until after the 11th Circuit considers the case in March.

The people of GA will be surprised to learn that AP thinks they are living “in exile,” though it’s a perfectly fine state with temperate weather, yummy peaches and is the headquarters of 14 Fortune 500 companies, including Home Depot, Coca-Cola and Delta Airlines.

† Socialized medicine good enough for thee, but not for me: British healthcare workers (related article, fourth item on the page): Well, well, well. Michael Moore may need a sequel to Sicko now that British Prime Minister David Cameron has decided to emulate the French in controlling healthcare costs. By partially privatizing the National Health Service Cameron hopes to scale back government entitlements to avoid a financial meltdown of Greek proportions. But the MSM and Dems in the U.S. are pretending not to notice, The Daily Caller reports:

Sally Pipes, an American health policy expert who leads the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco, told TheDC that President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi will likely ignore any changes in U.K. health policy. Their allies in the U.S. media and public policy establishment, she said, would follow suit.

“They are ideologues,” Pipes said. “They don’t care whether the system really works or not. They have an ideological goal in mind.” …

Joseph A. Morris, a former Reagan White House lawyer who now serves on the board of the American Conservative Union, told TheDC that socialized medicine has turned out to be a threat to Britons’ health, and to their economy as well.

“Europe’s message to the world is no longer that the socialist dream of the cradle-to-grave welfare state is an easy achievement,” Morris said. “Rather, it is the shouted warning that it is a fool’s paradise. The bills are coming due and the only real alternatives – serious financial reform of government or national bankruptcy – are not pleasant.”

Morris added that the British government, “unlike the Obama administration, is hearing the warnings, identifying its greatest vulnerabilities, and trying to race ahead of the deluge.”

Hope no one tells former administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Donald Berwick that his great romance with the NHS is about to end because it’s evolving in a different direction.

† The magic is gone: Remember Obama’s “youthquake” when 66 percent of the 24 million voters age 18-29 gave him their votes in 2008? Well, the earth has shifted under the feet of the youth vote and they’re experiencing the aftershocks of the Obama economy (click here for related article). A new poll from Generation Opportunity find that just 31 percent approve of Obama’s handling of youth unemployment, and significant numbers of young Americans are delaying making major life changes or purchases because of the poor economy, The Washington Examiner reports:

“Ironically for President Obama,” said the group’s president, Paul Conway, “the hardcore reality is that young voters are now very dissatisfied with the direction of the country and are becoming more vocal in their demands for real jobs rather than promises of more unpaid internships and unproven programs.”

And, he added, their anger coupled with their social media savvy could be a threat to Obama. “These vocal young voters are even more digitally connected--and politically potent--for 2012 than they were in 2008,” Conway told Washington Secrets. …

[A] whopping 77 percent say that they are delaying life changes due to economic woes. Of those:

‡ 44 percent are delaying buying a home.

‡ 28 percent are delaying saving for retirement.

‡ 23 percent are delaying starting a family.

‡ 18 percent will wait to get married.

According to Conway, young people have “strong objections to higher personal taxes, government interference with business, and reckless indebtedness to countries like communist China.” Hmmm. They sound more like Tea Partiers and less like Ocupiers.

† Chevy Volt: An electric Edsel: President Barack Hussein Obama wants to up the ante on taxpayer funds to subsidize the purchase of green vehicles (click here for related article). His budget proposal calls for raising the current $7,500 tax credit for purchasing natural gas or plug-in electric vehicles by 25 percent to $10,000 and allow for consumers to receive the tax incentive at the dealership, CNSNews.com reports.

† Let them eat steak!: Part VIII: You couldn’t afford to take your family anywhere for the holiday week-end because gas prices are too high, but Michelle Obama and her two daughters went on a ski trip to Aspen on your dime (related article, third item on the page), the Aspen Daily News reports:

Pitkin County Sheriff Joe DiSalvo confirmed that he has met with the Secret Service and has loaned seven deputies to help protect the first lady and her family. …

Last President’s Day weekend Obama and the girls spent the holiday at Vail and Beaver Creek. …

No public events are scheduled for the first lady’s visit.

The Stiletto marvels that MO needs another getaway just a few weeks after getting home from her 17-day Hawaiian vacay – in fact, this is the 16^th vacation members of the Obama family have taken in the past three years:

You better get it while you can.

You better get it while you can.

If you wait too long, it'll all be gone,

And you'll be sorry then.

† Obama is just about every U.S. president all rolled into one!: And in his review of Jodi Kantor's book, "The First Marriage" – which he terms “chick nonfiction” – historian Douglas Brinkley sycophantically describes Michelle Obama as having "echoes of Jackie Kennedy’s style sense, Lady Bird Johnson’s green thumb and Nancy Reagan’s zealous protection of her family from the slings and arrows of political discourse." To which John Glotzer, one of The Stiletto's waggish friends, posted this riposte on Facebook: "And Mary Lincoln's spending habits, Elanor Roosevelt's [sic] good looks, and Rosalyn Carter's [sic] vindictiveness."

† R-E-S-P-E-C-T: You get as you give (click here and here for related articles): Bill Maher thinks it’s OK for talk show hosts and pundits to attack a president viciously on the air as long as they don’t repeat their vituperative criticisms when they meet the president face-to-face, because the latter is disrespectful. Thanks for clearing that up, Bill.

What is the real purpose of birth control? Why is all of this so important to progressives?

With all that's going on with the Catholic Church and the President right now, this has become a huge hot button topic. But why is this so important to progressives? Rush Limbaugh keeps saying that "abortion is the sacrament of liberalism." What makes this so? Let's ask Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood… In her book "Women and the New Race", Sanger explains the purpose of birth control:(Page 229)

Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives. So, in compliance with nature’s working plan, we must permit womanhood its full development before we can expect of it efficient motherhood. If we are to make racial progress, this development of womanhood must precede motherhood in every individual woman. Then and then only can the mother cease to be an incubator and be a mother indeed. Then only can she transmit to her sons and daughters the qualities which make strong individuals and, collectively, a strong race.

Ok, now it makes sense. Birth control is the sacrament of eugenics.

h/t to ProgressingAmerica -  http://tinyurl.com/727ter6 and to AJ

It is time that people themselves read the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) and demand that their Congressman and Senators read it and work to repeal and replace it.

If for no other reason…  A vote for any of the 4-GOP candidates, whoever becomes the nominee, will guarantee the repeal and replacement of ObamaCare and removal of the government from our HealthCare!  A vote for Obama is a vote for socialized medicine, rationing and a long list of surprises yet to come.  2012 will be the last chance to get rid of ObamaCare because of the way its tentacles will spread.

Jack Lew appeared on Fox with Chris Wallace this morning and said there would be no additional compromise on the mandatory birth control mandate… “We have set out our policy” said Lew.

WALLACE: You say it's consistent. The Catholic bishops are clearly not satisfied with it -- if I may, sir. They have issued a statement that says that they view the decision by the president, the revision, with grave moral concern.

Let's put up their statement on the screen.

"Today's proposal involves needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion -- government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions."

And, sir, they call on Congress to block the president's policy.

LEW: No, I think the president's policy does not do that. It does not force an institution that has religious principle to offer or may for benefits they find objectionable. But it guarantees a woman's right to access. We think that's the right solution.

There are others who opposed women's access to contraception. They have different views than we do. I'm not going to speak to the motives of any of the parties. But it's quite significant that a range of Catholic organizations has embraced this.

We didn't expect to get universal support of the bishops or all Catholics. I think that what we have here is a policy that reflects bringing together two very important principles in a way that's true to the American tradition. And that's what the president is trying to do.

There are others who want to have a clash over it. We want to bring these two principles together.

WALLACE: But you say you're not going to get universal support. There are others -- this is the conference of Catholic bishops. This is the most powerful statement by the Catholic Church in this country. They deal with grave moral concern and they say it should be turned around.

LEW: I can't speak to the differences within the Catholic Church.

WALLACE: How do you respond to their statement that this government coercion?

LEW: I would point to the statement put out by the Catholic Health Association, which knows a fair amount about what it requires to health care in this country. They thought this was a very good solution. They understand what the policy is.

WALLACE: So, the bishops --

(CROSSTALK)

LEW: I think our policy is the right policy. I think that there's broad support, but they're not universal support for it. And we think this is right way to go.

WALLACE: So, you're not going to change despite what the bishops say.

LEW: Our policy is clear.

WALLACE: Your policy is clear. Meaning, no revisions to the revisions?

LEW: We have set out our policy.

WALLACE: And that's it?

LEW: We're going to finalize it in the final rules. But I think what the president announced on Friday is a balanced approach that meets the concerns raised both in terms of access to health care and in terms of protecting religious liberties. And, you know, we think that that's the right approach.

WALLACE: Mr. Lew, I think it's fair to say this is precisely why so many people and I understand, you can argue whether it's the majority or minority -- but why so many people are opposed to Obamacare, because they are concerned with the idea that the government can mandate what people have to do, what private businesses have to do, what even religious institutions have to do.

LEW: I think the notion that this is about should we provide basic health care to all Americans is not the issue. You know, there are differences to whether or not the Affordable Care Act is the right approach. We think providing coverage to tens of millions of Americans and making sure that we have a health care system that provides the kind of care that people need that will help drive down the cost of health care in this country is a very important thing.

This is -- this question of the impact on religious institutions is something we took very seriously right from the start. That's why when the policy was announced; we said it would take 13 months to transition it in a way that would be respectful of those differences.

So, I think we've addressed that. I think that this concern is one that people can disagree, you know, on the margins about. But we have addressed the core issue -- no institution that has, non-profit institution that has religious principles that we violated has to pay for or directly offer these services. But women have access to the kinds of care that they are entitled to.

We think that's the right approach.

· Obama administration struggles to contain uproar over birth ... – Since this piece was written the AG’s of 12 states have joined the suit being prepared and expected additional states of join the fight.

· U.S. News - Catholic TV network sues US over birth control mandate

Related:

Updated: 5-Reasons Obama Is Losing the Contraception Mandate Battle… But Could be Winning the Power Grab Mandate War

Let us not forget who is behind this bill… Here is Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin (Remember, Sebilius was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.)

Senator Rand Paul stood-up and blasted the HHS mandate as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘totalitarian; “Gloves are off”, he said!

Rubio Crushes Obama and His Contraceptive Mandate At CPAC; says it is a Constitutional issue!

Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention?

ObamaCare… Hits, Misses and Perhaps a Look into the Future

· Bilderberger Bill Gates Confirms Population Reduction Through Vaccination on CNN… a Concept He Has Been Found to Promote Many Times Before…

--
Posted at Ask Marion the Daily Thought Pad to Knowledge Creates Power and to True Health Is True Wealth!! at 2/11/2012 10:59:00 PM

Updated: 5-Reasons Obama is Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle... But Could be Winning the Power Grab Mandate War

(If you are not up on this issue… follow the thread here from the bottom up)

Update: Religious organizations are already saying that the Obama’s announced compromise is hollow. Catholic Bishops and other religious organizations are moving forward with their protests. The political fallout from this issue could be huge in the 2012 Election among religious groups and Independents. Remember Obama carried the Catholic vote in 2008.

But in reality:  Obama Didn't Cave on the HHS Mandate; He's Making an Unprecedented Power Grab and this is why, if people realize, this could be Obama’s Waterloo!  And if not, we are in big trouble!!

Don't Be Deceived! Evil Obama Policy Now Even MORE Evil!

Attention, Catholics, Protestants, and everyone who cares about the causes of life, religious freedom, and freedom of conscience!

Do not be suckered by the “accommodation” announced today by President Obama and spokeswoman Kathleen Sebelius!

*Here is Ultra Left Wing HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ Spin (Remember, Sebilius was an ardent supporter of murdered partial birth abortionist, Tiller and her extreme record on abortion has sadly been ignored (or hidden) by the media.)

Under the guise of making room for religious conscience, the President has actually made the policy worse—far worse.

Here’s how . . .

RUSH: Everybody's reporting that Obama's caving on this mandate that the Catholic services provide abortion and all. There's not a cave here! There may be an accommodation, but there's no big cave-in here. It's still the government mandating this stuff happen. They're just changing the provider. It's not done by the church. He says he gave them a way out of it by mandating the insurance companies do it, but that's not the point here.

Snip

So everywhere I'm reading that Obama is caving on the mandate in Obamacare that Catholic churches -- well, not churches, but the schools and hospitals are mandated to provide contraceptives and abortion-related services that they religiously disagree with. "What's happened here is that Obama's caved! He has seen, he has heard, and now he's gonna shift that burden to the insurance companies!"

Snip

Obama is not doing what he's doing to make Barbara Boxer happy or the pro-abortion crowd happy or the Democrat Senate Caucus happy. He knows that's gonna happen. What he's doing is violating the Constitution. He is coalescing extra-constitutional power. He is making a power grab here that is unprecedented in the history of the presidency. (interruption)

Thomas Edsall, that's right. Thomas Edsall wrote that piece in the Nuev Orc Times, former Washington Post columnist. So I don't think... This has been my if you then argument with the Republican establishment from the get-go with Obama. I don't think this is traditional politics at all. I don't think traditional politics has anything to do with why Obama's doing this. This is about fundamentally transforming this country from a representative republic to a pure, straight democracy with the president assuming he's the majority and therefore can do whatever he wants to do. We're not dealing with the average, "Okay, the Democrats won the White House. They're gonna have it for four or eight years. We gotta try to stop 'em however we can and we'll get power back."

There's something unprecedented going on here.

Woodrow Wilson dreamed of this.

FDR dreamed of this.

Obama is doing this.

The White House will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women!!!

by order and proclamation of...

BREAKING: Pro-life leaders slam White House ‘compromise’ on birth control mandate

They're Using Insurance for Communism' Ann Coulter Rocks CPAC

· Obama Didn't Cave on the HHS Mandate; He's Making an Unprecedented Power Grab

Friday, February 10, 2012 2:13:55 PM · by Kaslin · 13 replies  -  Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | February 10, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Everybody's reporting that Obama's caving on this mandate that the Catholic services provide abortion and all. There's not a cave here! There may be an accommodation, but there's no big cave-in here. It's still the government mandating this stuff happen. They're just changing the provider. It's not done by the church. He says he gave them a way out of it by mandating the insurance companies do it, but that's not the point here. Great to have you. It's Friday. Let's go to! JOHNNY DONOVAN: Live from the Left Coast at our satellite studios in Los Angeles,...

· BREAKING: Pro-life leaders slam White House ‘compromise’ on birth control mandate  -  Friday, February 10, 2012 1:28:01 PM · by unique1 · 50 replies

Lifesitenews.com ^ | Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:32 EST | Kathleen Gilbert

WASHINGTON, February 10, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The White House announced today that, instead of forcing religious employers to pay for birth control, it will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women, no matter where they work. The plan, touted as a concession to freedom of religion and conscience, was immediately denounced by pro-life Rep. Chris Smith. “The so-called new policy is the discredited old policy, dressed up to look like something else,. said Smith. .It remains a serious violation of religious freedom. Only the most naï or gullible would accept this as a change...

· Contraceptive “compromise” worse than original mandate: Eliminates any exceptions

Friday, February 10, 2012 1:36:19 PM · by Qbert · 14 replies  -  Jill Stanek.com ^ | 2/10/2012 | Jill Stanek

UPDATE, 12:14p: More evidence the “compromise” stinks: Planned Parenthood likes it. UPDATE, 12:02p: From a House source: This “new policy” is a distinction without a difference.  The services the religious organization opposes won’t be listed in the contract, but the insurance companies will give it the employees anyway.  Insurance companies will justify providing the coverage that the religious charity opposes by swearing that birth control coverage doesn’t actually cost anything because it’s cheaper than pregnancy services, so it’s just a free perk. The administration will argue that people of faith should be fine with this arrangement, because they can tell...

Health insurers question Obama birth control plan

Friday, February 10, 2012 5:39:10 PM · by Oldeconomybuyer · 1 replies - Reuters ^ | February 10, 2012 | By Lewis Krauskopf

(Reuters) - U.S. health insurers said on Friday they feared President Barack Obama had set a new precedent by making them responsible for providing free birth control to employees of religious groups as he sought to defuse an election-year landmine. "We are concerned about the precedent this proposed rule would set," said Robert Zirkelbach, spokesman for America's Health Insurance Plans, the industry's trade group. "As we learn more about how this rule would be operationalized, we will provide comments through the regulatory process." Zirkelbach said insurers "have long offered contraceptive coverage to employers as part of comprehensive, preventive benefits that...

Obama Still Poised to Takeover Churches and Eliminate First Amendment

With regards to government intervention into religion, the First Amendment to the US Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” First, Congress is the Constitutional body that has the authority to make laws for the United States of America. Second, it is to steer clear of anything pertaining to freedom of religion.

Obama's Big Compromise With The Catholic Church Is An Accounting Trick Catholics can't pay for it: morally it isn't much different than paying a Quaker in hand-grenades. The Church can't directly subsidize sin without being guilty… Read HERE

Pro-Abortion Planned Parenthood And NARAL Come Out In Support of Obama’s Contraception “Compromise,” Catholic Bishops Already Shot It Down… – You know this is bad!!

Let us all ask ourselves  again… Was the Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention? and let us not forget that a compromise now does not mean there is a change of ideology in the White House that will continue without compromise if Obama is re-elected.

AP Source Now Says Obama to Compromise

WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — The Blaze has covered the religious freedom issues surrounding the Obama administration’s contraceptive mandate extensively. President Barack Obama will announce a plan to accommodate religious employers outraged by a rule that would require them to cover birth control for women free of charge, according to a person familiar with the decision.

(Related: 5 Reasons the Obama Admin May Be Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle – See Posted Below)

Obama was expected to make the announcement at the White House Friday. ABC has more regarding what sources are saying the president is poised to present:

The move, based on state models, will almost certainly not satisfy bishops and other religious leaders since it will preserve the goal of women employees having their birth control fully covered by health insurance. [...]

One source familiar with the decision described the accommodation as “Hawaii-plus,” insisting that it’s better than the Hawaii plan — for both sides.

In Hawaii the employer is responsible for referring employees to places where they can obtain the contraception; Catholic leaders call that material cooperation with evil. But what the White House will likely announce later today is that the relationship between the religious employer and the insurance company will not need to have any component involving contraception.

CBS News corroborates:

The exact nature of the clarification remains unclear, but any accommodation could largely follow what exists in a majority of states, like in Illinois where DePaul University, the largest Catholic university in the country, offers an employee health plan that does cover contraception. Georgetown University offers a similar plan.

The shift is aimed at containing the political firestorm that erupted after Obama announced in January that religious-affiliated employers had to cover birth control as preventative care for women. Churches and houses of worship were exempt, but all other affiliated organizations were ordered to comply by Aug. 2013.

Video: A Compromise on Contraception 

Republican leaders and religious groups, especially Roman Catholics, responded with intense outrage, saying the requirement would force them to violate church teachings and long-held beliefs against contraception.

The issue also pushed social issues to the forefront in an election year that had been dominated by the economy. Abortion, contraception and any of the requirements of Obama‘s health care overhaul law have the potential to galvanize the Republicans’ conservative base, critical to voter turnout in the presidential and congressional races.

Republicans vowed to reverse the president’s policy, with House Speaker John Boehner accusing the administration of violating First Amendment rights and undermining some of the country’s most vital institutions, such as Catholic charities, schools and hospitals.

The measure also sparked an internal debate at the White House. Vice President Joe Biden, then-chief of staff Bill Daley and deputy national security adviser Denis McDonough, all Catholics, raised concerns about how the administration proceeded on the policy. On the other side, senior White House advisers Nancy-Ann DeParle, Pete Rouse and David Plouffe argued for the need to ensure coverage for all without exception, as a matter of women’s health and fairness.

'>'>'>Stephanie Cutter on CNN

The person with knowledge of Obama’s decision requested anonymity in order to speak in advance of the official announcement.

This is a breaking news story. Stay tuned for updates.

5 Reasons the Obama Admin May Be Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle

The Obama administration clearly underestimated the response it would receive from Catholics and non-Catholics, alike, after implementing a universal mandate on health plans that requires coverage of contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.

As the Blaze has extensively documented, the response has been swift and hard-hitting. Many liberals who traditionally support these options for women have been jumping ship to side with Catholic leadership in agreement that the administration has overstepped its bounds — an event that so rarely happens in theological and political circles.

But it’s important to note that, despite very boisterous outcries, Obama does have support from some liberals on this issue; many of them are pointing to the fact that nearly all Catholic women use contraceptives as a defense. Using this argument, those who favor the mandate claim that the Church is out of touch and not accurately speaking for its followers on this important women’s health issue.

But is this the proper lens through which to view the issue? Free and religious speech advocates would argue that usage has little to do with views on government intervention in church affairs. In the end, it’s a complicated scenario with political capital for whichever side wins the public over. At the moment, the situation may not be as favorable for Obama as he would like. In an article published on Wednesday, Religion News Service’s David Gibson provides five reasons that the president may be losing the battle.

First, the debate, despite what the mandate’s supporters say, is about religious freedom — not contraception. Regardless of where one stands, the main issue at hand is whether the government has the right to interfere in church affairs and dictate what will be covered in health care plans. Gibson writes:

The bishops don’t have as much credibility with the laity as they used to, thanks to the clergy sex abuse scandal, among other things. But Catholics are still a potent tribe, and if outsiders are seen as attacking the church, Catholics can get defensive – and they can get even.

Then there’s the fact, as mentioned, that some liberal Catholics have abandoned the president on the issue. Regardless of where these individuals stand on use of these health care options, forcing Catholic institutions (among other faith-based groups) to violate their conscience just isn’t sitting right.

Now, let’s talk about those other faith groups. Many times, people of different religious traditions have a tough time coalescing, but on this issue, individuals with varying theological ideals are coming together. After all, it’s one thing to sit back and watch an attack on a rival faith group unfold, but when considering what could happen, should this mandate go unchecked, many religious people are fearful: “What’s next?,” they’re wondering. Gibson continues:

Even though evangelicals and other conservative Protestants generally don’t have religious objections to contraception, they do have a big problem with “big government” and with perceived infringements on religious freedom. Evangelicals – both their leaders and their troops – have never been big Barack Obama supporters anyway, so they were happy to provide any electoral and rhetorical muscle the Catholic hierarchy could not muster.

Video: Obama Administration, Catholic Leaders Clash Over Contraception Mandate

The fourth reason Gibson highlights is the fact that the “attack on religion” frame the issue is being explored through is an appealing one for Republicans. While many conservatives are wondering why Obama would approach this subject in an election year to begin with, others are noticing just how effective religious freedom rhetoric will be for the GOP nominee.

The rhetoric is already ratcheting up. “This attack by the federal government on religious freedom in our country cannot stand, and will not stand,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said earlier this week.

And, of course, there’s the overwhelming fact that the president will need to secure the Catholic vote to ensure re-election. “While Obama won the overall Catholic vote 54 percent to 46 percent in 2008, he lost the white Catholic vote, 47 percent to 53 percent,” Gibson writes. It‘s hard to imagine the president won’t lose a portion of this important cohort as a result of his refusal, thus far, to compromise.

As GOP Presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have both said, “Obama has shown his hand and if he is re-elected, even if they walk this back now, this is the road that his administration will go down!”

Sure, he’s shown “openness” to the ideal of coming up with a viable solution that appeases both sides, but to those so staunchly opposed, such a notion isn’t good enough. The president will need to admit wrongdoing and back away from the mandate, should he wish to appease many of those individuals who feel wronged by the government’s newfound regulations. So far, there’s no evidence that he will take such a course.

Click here to read Gibson’s RNS article.

Related:

Senator Rand Paul stood-up and blasted the HHS mandate as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘totalitarian; “Gloves are off”, he said!

Rubio Crushes Obama and His Contraceptive Mandate At CPAC; says it is a Constitutional issue!

Timing of War Over ObamaCare Mandatory Birth Control Payments… God’s Answer to Prayers for Intervention?

ObamaCare… This Will Knock Your Socks Off!!

THIS VIDEO IS A GUIDE TO THE ORIGINAL HEALTHCARE BILL H.R. 3200.  H.R. 3962 is the actual bill that passed, but virtually everything the public and the GOP fought against was just moved, buried and hidden somewhere else in the bill or is a contingency to be added later.  Just like the circus created over not funding abortions with taxpayer money quickly proved to be all smoke and mirrors, after being one of the pivotal points of compromise to get the bill past… at any cost. It was all a game of smoke and mirrors. Remember Nancy Pelosi’s famous statement: “You have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”, and we certainly are… virtually everything that was in H.R. 3200!

Recently we are finally reading news report and article after article about things that someone has finally found and verified that is hidden in the ObamaCare Bill.  You can bet that all the negative things in this video and more are part of the revised bill H.R. 3962.  It really is the gift from Hell that just keeps on giving…

Please watch this video:

Video:  Know the TRUTH about the Government Health Care Bill H.R.3200 - Key Points

Update With Video: THIS IS A GUIDE TO THE ORIGINAL HEALTHCARE BILL H.R. 3200. Yes the healthcare bill HR3962 passed. Now it's up to us to do all we can to repeal it!! This video is based on HR3200 but it is very closely related to HR3962 with the exception that HR3962 is deemed to be worse! If we don't get this bill thrown in the trash where it belongs we can expect to see much if not all of what this video shows us. THE PDF.OF THE BILL HR3200 NOTED AT THE END OF THE VIDEO IS NO LONGER VALID. HERE IS THE UPDATED LINK TO THE PDF. http://candicemiller.house.gov/pdf/hr3200.pdf

I am well aware of the typo in this video, I apologize but It's too late to fix it now.

Healthcare is only a powerful stepping stone to their government takeover plan. Open your eyes America, they don't care what "we the people" want or need, they simply want control.
Aug. 2009

Original Bill (Video): This is a point by point description (A guide not the actual reading of the bill!) of the Government Healthcare plan taken from the ACTUAL proposed bill H.R.3200 http://candicemiller.house.gov/pdf/hr3200.pdf

Though not opposed to healthcare reform most Americans do not want this KIND of reform which is a dangerous UN-AMERICAN UNCONSTITUTIONAL We want reform that makes sense and that is helpful for all not a destructive death warrant for the unborn and the elderly. We want government to stay out of our personal life decisions period. This is America !!

Here is the link to H.R. 3590: http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/PDF/hr3590.pdf

Docs 4 Patient Founder and president Hal Scherz, M.D., released the following statement today regarding the US Preventative Services Task Force recommendation to stop the routine PSA screening of men:

"On Thursday, the US Preventative Services Task Force issued their recommendation that routine PSA screening of men looking for prostate cancer was no longer indicated. So said the chairperson of this group, pediatrician Virginia Moyer, of Baylor School of Medicine. There were no urologists on this committee- the universally recognized experts on the treatment of prostate cancer.

"This is the same body that issued the controversial recommendations to stop routine mammography.

"It is unlikely that this task force took into account that in the years that PSA screening has been routinely done, that mortality from prostate cancer has dropped significantly. Over 32,000 men die BECAUSE of their prostate cancer every year, and it is the second most common cancer in men, with a particular predilection for African Americans. It is important to note that the death rate from prostate cancer in England, where routine screening is not performed in order to save money, is dramatically higher than in the US.

"It can only be concluded that this task force is doing the bidding of the federal government, under the guise of science and evidentiary medicine, to justify the intent to covertly ration care. This attempt to put bureaucrats between patients and doctors is precisely why groups like the Preventative Task Force needs to be exposed for what it is and marginalized. Patients make the best decisions about their care along with the good counsel from their own personal doctors- in this case urologists, not pediatricians."

The Supreme Court will hear the case against ObamaCare in the upcoming session and each of the GOP candidates has sworn to overturn this bill by Executive Order and whatever means necessary to undo it if they are elected in 2012, and then put forth a real healthcare reform bill or program. If one of those two things doesn’t happen and ObamaCare is allowed to go into affect, it will destroy our Republic! This was never about healthcare for the poor or better health care for all, it was about the Progressive Movement getting control of one-sixth of the U.S. economy and ‘control’… over you!

Ask Marion – Source: THITW 

Related:

Obama’s Civilian Army Is Now LAW and is Funded… Through ObamaCare

What MSM Won’t Tell You: Doctors Are Challenging Government Health Care-and the AMA

Attempting to enact his big-government health care scheme, President Obama and his supporters frequently claimed that a “majority” of doctors supported his health-care plans. When the American Medical Association – which had opposed HillaryCare – signed onto Obama’s plan last year, the organization seemed to make the President’s case. Most people assumed that the AMA represented most of the doctors in the country. But in fact, the AMA represents less than 20 percent of all physicians in the United States. And yet as the organization’s leadership moved more to the left, it held a near monopoly on media attention on issues pertaining to public health. No longer.

As the AMA has become increasingly politicized in recent years – issuing a statement in support of climate change, for example, in 2008 – a new group of doctors has risen to challenge them. Like other anti-statist groups that have risen in opposition to the Obama-Reid-Pelosi agenda, Docs4PatientCare are challenging the AMA’s stranglehold on health care matters, just as other groups once challenged the right of the left-leaning American Bar Association to determine what judges are and are not qualified for the United States Supreme Court. How Docs4PatientCare managed to barge its way into the closed-door meetings of Washington offers a lesson to other groups seeking to have a voice in their federal government.

Founded by Dr. Hal Scherz, a prominent Atlanta physician, the group of doctors expressed concern that like so many other professional groups, the AMA’s leadership have been thoroughly “Washingtonized” – caring more about the pleadings of other lobbyists on K Street, White House invitations and Capitol Hill committee appearances than the professions they are supposed to represent. As doctors have taken a battering over several decades from insurance companies, HMOS, and government agencies, Scherz says the AMA was a bystander.

“As the insurance companies become more and more impossible and government intrusion keeps growing, we’ve seen our delivery of care to our patients compromised and our incomes decrease,” he said.

But it was the AMA’s support for ObamaCare that really troubled Scherz and others in his field.

Many doctors run small businesses and by nature are entrepreneurial. Why then, he wondered, would the AMA favor ObamaCare’s regulatory and taxation burden? Why would they want a multitude of government panels interfering with the decisions doctors usually make with their patients about care and treatment? Recognizing that the AMA was compromised, Scherz decided to organize his own group in opposition to the Obama plan.

He recalled how effective talk radio had been the year before in stopping the seemingly unstoppable immigration amnesty bill, and wondered if there was a way for him to get his voice heard on the air. In fact, Scherz was driving home one night when he heard talk show host Hugh Hewitt ask on the air, “Where are the doctors?” opposing ObamaCare in the health care fight. Scherz wanted to give him an answer. So when Salem radio brought a “road show” on Obama’s first 100 days to Atlanta last May, he decided to attend. Listening to Hewitt and other Salem talk show stars like Bill Bennett and Dennis Praeger again ask, “Where are the doctors?” Scherz waited patiently in a long line of people to give them his answer. But just as he reached the head of the line, the master of ceremonies shut down the mikes for the evening.

Undeterred Scherz called a fellow physician, Congressman Tom Price, and asked the Congressman if he would come address a group of doctors if Scherz could assemble them. Price agreed and when Scherz got 40 doctors in the waiting room of his office to discuss ObamaCare, the meeting ended with the doctors deciding to form an organization to it. They christened themselves Docs 4 Patient Care that night and put together enough money to hire an attorney, set up a business structure, and establish a website.

Growing past this initial cadre of supporters proved difficult, however. Scherz spent as much time as he could emailing and phone calling more doctors to join the effort, but the response rate was slow. So coming home one night from the operating room, he called the Hewitt show and got in on the call-in queue. Waiting on hold for two hours, he finally got on the air in the show’s third hour. Delighted to have his missing-doctor question finally answered, Hewitt spoke with Scherz for a lengthy period.

“Then Hewitt blogged about us and put us the website and that made all the difference,” said Scherz.

Having heard the doctor on Hewitt’s program, Salem Radio’s vice president of content, Lee Habeeb, a legendary talk show producer, booked him on other Salem shows including a co-hosting gig with Mike Gallagher in Dallas, Atlanta, and New York. “Mike and his show were coming on strong. So it was just the right moment. He made our group a focal point of listener interest and it really helped,” says Scherz. This led to television interviews, involving Scherz and other members of the group to get their message out, such as Fred Shessel, one of Scherz’s partners and vice president, Scott Barbour, a prominent orthopedic and sports medicine surgeon, and Todd Rubin, a local anesthesiologist who started making something of the website (www.docs4patientcare.org). One talk show listener and activist, Felicia Horton, asked to be brought on as volunteer executive director.

With their newfound growth and publicity, Docs 4 Patient Care made getting heard in Washington their next objective. Wearing their scrubs and white jackets, the doctors drew attention as they walked the halls of congress and spoke at rallies on Capitol Hill. Often just showing up in the offices of members of the House and Senate, they would manage to get appointments with the members themselves or key staff members.

One particular meeting that stuck out in memories was with the staff of Senator Olympia Snowe, the Maine Republican senator who was being heavily courted by Democrats in the hope of getting some bipartisan window dressing for the Democratic bill. The meeting was a long one by Capitol Hill standards and the Snowe staff kept bringing up the arguments made by Democrats on behalf of ObamaCare. But in the face of the doctor’s facts and experience the arguments didn’t stand up long. Schertz believes Docs 4 Patient Care may have helped make a difference in Snowe’s ultimate, and fateful, decision not to sign on to ObamaCare.

Another memorable incident cited by members of the group occurred when one of their members, Joyce Lovett MD, an African American female pediatrician, got the doctors into a meeting of the Congressional Black Caucus. A debate opened up over the health care plan and soon the doctors were text-messaging their colleagues visiting other offices around the capitol for reinforcements. As the room began filling up, the doctors, doing well in the back and forth of debate, seemed to be changing some minds. At that point, a worried Black Caucus leader and diehard partisan, John Conyers, broke up the meeting, saying the doctors were more interested in embarrassing the first black president than in achieving real reform. Unused to this sort of political attack, the astonished doctors told other caucus members how they felt after taking time from their practices and patients to come all the way to Washington only to hear a member of Congress insinuate they were racists. One caucus member privately dismissed Conyers’ “old ways of thinking,” suggesting that the CBC might be ready for fresh, and more innovative, leadership.

In addition to return trips to Washington over the next 4 months, Docs4PatientCare also helped organize physician led-rallies around the country with hundreds of doctors participating in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Chicago, Indianapolis and Portland. The rallies proved crucial as the largely Atlanta-based group made new connections in taking on a national character. Jaime Ronderos MD, a prominent Texas anesthesiologist, who had already organized many of the doctors in his own state, folded his group in with D4PC. Also coming on board was Marc Neerhof, a perinatologist who is also on the faculty of the University of Chicago and a skillful op-ed writer. In addition, Reed Wilson, a well-known Los Angeles cardiologist with a business and political background became a board member. And finally, as the group showed its interest in working with all health care professionals, Joel Strom, a Los Angeles dentist and experienced coalition organizer agreed to head up an outreach program.

Only last month, the group had its inaugural board meeting in Atlanta where, in addition to making plans to increase their public and media presence, they inaugurated a fund raising program that would let them run a full-blown field operation in the elections this Fall. “We want to be out there in the states and let voters know which members of Congress put patient care second and voted for this power grab by Washington politicians,” said Scherz.

But, beyond this, Scherz and the other board members want Docs 4 patient Care to grow into what the AMA should have been. This means more than defeating ObamaCare. The group is non-partisan and anxious to work with all those who want to hear from Docs 4 Patient Care on the dangers of state-run medicine. With chapters recently up and running in several states, he sees growth ahead. That is likely discouraging news for the status quo world of Washington, D.C., but an inspiration for other Americans who see what their government is doing and want to offer an alternative.

Source: What MSM Won’t Tell You: Doctors Are Challenging Government Health Care-and the AMA by Matt Latimer