Obama And Hillary Lied About Care.

This is also bought over for My Blog Spot. Com Blog

Starting Day June 19 2017 And Ending Jan 24 2014

  1. JUL19Blame Dishonest Dems Who Created Obamacare & Lied About It

    Behold, this is your health care, run by the federal government.Politicians far, far away in Washington — advised by armies of bureaucrats whose salaries you pay but you have never met — all huddled in Congress deciding what pills they will give you and how long is long enough for you to be on life support.Also, they will decide just how much money you will pay for pregnancy insurance, even though you do not technically have a uterus and your name is not Caitlyn Jenner. (Isn’t it funny how the only way anybody buys something named the “Affordable Care Act” is if the federal government forces them to buy it?)Oh, and they are deciding just how much of your money they are going to set aside to “stabilize the insurance market,” which is just the latest rosy euphemism for “dump trucks full of your tax cash given to massive insurance companies that you already despise.”Meanwhile, throngs of cloaked lobbyists slither the hallways of Congress in search of legislative gems and baubles they can haul in dirty sacks back to their nests to be pawned off later.The closest thing to you — actual American citizens — here in Washington these days are the hoards of screaming unwashed healthcare “protesters,” by which I mean people who somehow do not work yet somehow manage to loaf across the country to bang drums and caterwaul up and down the sidewalk outside the Capitol at all hours. (For every one of them, somewhere there is a mom and dad just glad to have them out of the basement for a couple of days.)http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/18/blame-democrats-who-created-obamacare-and-are-dish/
    Posted 19th July 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  2. JUN29Death Spiral: Anthem Stops Offering Obamacare in Most Nevada Counties   Anthem announced they will stop selling insurance in all but three Nevada counties on the state’s Obamacare exchanges.Anthem has drawn significant headlines recently as it announced that it would withdraw from the Wisconsin, Indiana, and Ohio Obamacare marketplaces.

    Republican Governor Brian Sandoval called the situation a crisis on Wednesday night. Anthem will only offer health insurance plans in Nevada’s three most populous counties, leaving 8,000 Nevadans in 13 counties without access to Obamacare insurance plans.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/29/death-spiral-anthem-stops-offering-obamacare-in-most-nevada-counties/Posted 29th June 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  3. JUN27Posted 27th June 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  4. JUN27Posted 27th June 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  5. JUN27Posted 27th June 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  6. JUN27Under the Left’s Demagogic Standards, Obamacare is ‘Killing’ Tens of Thousands of Americans

    As we mentioned in a previous post, a popular talking point against Republicans’ (rather modest) Obamacare replacement effort is that it would result in thousands of deaths.  It’s a tax cut paid for with “blood money,” fumes racial-hoax propagator Elizabeth Warren.  It’s “evil” sneers incurable demagogue Chris Murphy.  The GOP is setting itself up to be the “death party,” scolds twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.  A number of these arguments are traced back to the bill’s “mean” cuts to Medicaid, a government program originally designated to serve America’s poorest and most vulnerable citizens.  Medicaid was failing on the meritsbefore Obamacare expanded it to include millions of new people, many of them able-bodied childless adults living well above the poverty line.  And thus, new strains were placed on a hugely expensive program already suffering from poor health outcomesand constraints on access to care.  Here are a few succinct expositions of the compounded unfairness of Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion, via Yuval Levin and the Wall Street Journal editorial board, both of whom I quoted earlier:Today, people newly covered by Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion (who tend to be childless adults with relatively higher incomes than the non-expansion population) are funded by the federal government on much better terms than the traditional Medicaid population (which tends to include more women with children and people with even lower incomes)…the Senate bill would gradually equalize funding for the two groups, effectively shifting Medicaid’s focus back to the most vulnerable of its beneficiaries. In states that respond to that by pulling back the expansion—and for states that have not pursued an expansion—the fact that the [GOP bill’s tax credits] now [go] all the way down [to the bottom of the income scale] means the Senate bill would provide an income and age-based subsidy that would allow these lowest-income individuals to afford at least modest insurance coverage in the individual market.The Journal:The budget will never balance, and debt will continue to accumulate, if Congress can’t modernize entitlements…Liberals call block grants heartless, but ObamaCare increased Medicaid enrollment by 29% to 74.5 million Americans—one of four citizens—in a program originally meant for poor women and the disabled. Equalizing payments for these traditional beneficiaries and ObamaCare’s new able-bodied adult enrollees above the poverty line is uncaring only in liberal caricature. The real scandal is Medicaid’s poor health outcomes and a funding formula that doesn’t encourage states to prioritize the neediest Americans.Republicans’ plan would make Medicaid fiscally sustainable, and gradually revert back to a model that prioritizes help to the poorest people, who need the most help.  It’s perverse that the federal government provides a more generous funding formula for Medicaid’s better-off, better-situated expansion enrollees than the original, neediest population for whom Medicaid was supposedly created in the first place.  And while the GOP proposal would reform the structure of the program by offering a capped per-capita annual allowance to each state (which would foster restraint, prioritization, innovation, and creativity), the notion that it makes drastic “cuts” to the overall program is deeply misleading.  Former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, frustrated by these word games, has been teeing off on this point: FollowAri Fleischer ✔@AriFleischerThere are NO Medicaid cuts in GOP reforms. For decades, the press has done a rotten job dealing w budget stories. Here are the numbers:4:44 PM – 25 Jun 2017 · New York, USATwitter Ads info and privacy25 JunAri Fleischer ✔ @AriFleischerMy 1st job on the Hill was in ’83. The Fed gvt spent $19 billion on Medicaid that year. When I was at the WH in ’01, we spent $129 billion. FollowAri Fleischer ✔@AriFleischerToday, Federal Medicaid spending is $389 billion. Under GOP reforms,it will increase to about $500 billion in 2027.4:46 PM – 25 Jun 2017Twitter Ads info and privacy
    This funding increase of tens of billions of dollars is nevertheless cast as a “cut”because it would spend less than Obamacare would.  Beyond this point, a raft of data indicates that in the aggregate (obviously, this does not apply to all individual cases), Obamacare has not saved American lives.  In fact, life expectancy has dropped for the first time in decades under the law, with particularly bad news in Obamacare Medicaid expansion states:
    Public-health data from the Centers for Disease Control confirm what one might expect from a health-care reform that expanded Medicaid coverage for adults: no improvement. In fact, things have gotten worse. Age-adjusted death rates in the U.S. have consistently declined for decades, but in 2015 — unlike in 19 of the previous 20 years — they increased. For the first time since 1993, life expectancy fell. Had mortality continued to decline during ACA implementation in 2014 and 2015 at the same rate as during the 2000–13 period, 80,000 fewer Americans would have died in 2015 alone. Of course, correlation between ACA implementation and increased mortality does not prove causation. Researchers hypothesize that increases in obesity, diabetes, and substance abuse may be responsible. But thanks to the roughly half of states that refused the ACA’s Medicaid expansion, a good control group exists. Surely the states that expanded Medicaid should at least perform better in this environment of rising mortality? Nope. Mortality in 2015 rose more than 50 percent faster in the 26 states (and Washington, D.C.) that expanded Medicaid during 2014 than in the 24 states that did not.If conservatives were inclined to traffic in the same brand of ugly, motive-impugning hysteria that many liberals have embraced on healthcare, they could throw nuance and causation arguments to the wind and simply shriek that Obamacare killed 80,000 Americans in 2015.  And that politicians who expanded Medicaid have even more blood on their heartless, cruel, murderous hands.  By the way, is there evidence that Obamacare actually has had a causal effect on increased death rates?  A look at opioid abuse and overdose-related death statistics suggests that yes, it is likely a contributing factor:26 JunSpotted Toad @toad_spotted3. The NYT estimated 161-178 Americans died of drug overdoses every day in 2016.For comparison 220 US service personnel died per day in WWII pic.twitter.com/sU6RuxKxku FollowSpotted Toad @toad_spotted4. Rates of overdose in Medicaid expansion and Holdout states quite similar prior to 2010, and then diverged right around ACA passage. pic.twitter.com/8yDaCoOQrz7:04 AM – 26 Jun 2017Twitter Ads info and privacy
    Read this entire thread, which provides in-depth data pointing to increases in insured rates (greatest in Medicaid expansion states), coinciding with a measurable, significant, commensurate uptick in drug overdose deaths.  As NBC News recently reported, insured people have easier access to pills and drugs — a fact that some terrible people have been capitalizing on by exploiting loopholes in well-meaning government programs to “rehabilitate” drug abusers.  Looking at the information linked above, one could make a simplistic, accurate, and unfair argument that Obamacare is killing people, and that Obamacare boosters are responsible for tens of thousands of deaths.  This is how the Left is currently demonizing Republicans.  The more serious assessment would be to say that in a genuine attempt to mitigate problems X, Y and Z, Obamacare backers inadvertently opened a can of worms, leading to an explosion in problems A, B and C.  The truth is that laws require trade-offs and can generate unforeseen consequences — and healthcare represents an uniquely large, complex policy challenge.   If only liberals would acknowledge these applicable dynamics when reviewing the GOP’s Obamacare replacement proposals.

    But as long as the debate over addressing Democrats’ failing healthcare experiment has degenerated into “you’re selfish, uncaring, blood-stained killers!” shouting, liberals should know that two can play that nasty and counter-productive game, if necessary.  And under their own standards, their hands are dripping with the blood of 80,000 innocent Obamacare victims, or whatever.  A less demagogic and entirely accurate approach would involve reminding Americans that Democrats lied to them incessantly while passing a healthcare scheme that is collapsingharming millions, and getting worse.  And that their so-called “solutions” entail ever more government, ever more spending — and worse.  I’ll leave you with this development, which should not come as a surprise:

     FollowHaley Byrd ✔@byrdinatorBig: Senate Republicans won’t vote on the health care bill this week at all, a Senate GOP source tells @TheIJR10:33 AM – 27 Jun 2017Twitter Ads info and privacy FollowCortney O’Brien ✔@obrienc2Fox reporting McConnell wants a new CBO score. #AHCA11:17 AM – 27 Jun 2017Twitter Ads info and privacy FollowSeung Min Kim ✔@seungminkimNEWS!!! Trump is inviting all GOP senators to the White House today for a meeting at 4 p.m.10:36 AM – 27 Jun 2017https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/06/27/hey-democrats-isnt-obamacare-killing-people-n2347370Posted 27th June 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  7. JUN22Anthem pulls out of Obamacare market in two more states?








    Anthem announced Wednesday it is pulling out of the Obamacare marketplace in two more states, Indiana and Wisconsin. The insurer announced earlier this month that it was pulling out of the Ohio market. From Forbes:

    Anthem, which operates under the Blue Cross and Blue Shield brand in 14 states, described the situation in a statement Wednesday as a “difficult one” that followed “dialogue with state leaders and regulators.” The decision comes amid regulatory uncertainty in Washington and a lack of funding for cost-sharing subsidies for millions of Obamacare enrollees in 2018…
    “Planning and pricing for ACA-compliant health plans has become increasingly difficult due to a shrinking and deteriorating individual market, as well as continual changes and uncertainty in federal operations, rules and guidance, including cost sharing reduction subsidies and the restoration of taxes on fully insured coverage,” Anthem said in a statement Wednesday.In Wisconsin, Governor Scott Walker responded to the decision. From Business Insider:


    Growing uncertainty in the health insurance market was created by Obamacare’s costly regulations and it is causing higher premiums and a lack of options,” Walker said in a statement. “If we do nothing, more companies will back out and more people will lose coverage. Wisconsin families expect and deserve better health care coverage options and the time to act is now.”
    Another insurer, MDwise, also announced it was also dropping out of the Indiana market today. From IndyStar:
    Anthem and MDwise, the two insurance providers that sold Obamacare plans in all 92 Indiana counties this year, are pulling out of the health exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act.
    MDwise, which covers 30,800 in exchange plans, wants to focus instead on its Medicaid plans, which serve 370,000 Hoosiers. The decision was also influenced by the growing uncertainty over the future of the federally-subsidized market, MDwise said Wednesday.There are two remaining insurers in Indiana, CareSource and Centene, so it’s possible that the entire state will still be covered by one or both.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2017/06/21/anthem-pulls-obamacare-market-two-states/Posted 22nd June 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  8. MAY11Implosion: The law was, after all, just a “step on the path to single payer.” Aetna to lose almost $1 Billion from 2014-2017 – Will abandon ALL ObamaCare exchanges

    Last year, you may recall that one of the nation’s largest insurers, Aetna, announced it had suffered major losses under the failing Affordable Care Act.  As a result, it was pulling out of many ACA exchanges.  The company said it intended to soldier on in just four states –  Delaware, Iowa, Nebraska, and Virginia. Back then, Aetna claimed losses of almost $450 million.  A few weeks ago, they announced that number has risen to $700 million since 2014, and they trimmed Iowa and Virginia from the list.  They promised they’d “continue to evaluate” future plans for Delaware and Nebraska.It appears they’ve done just that.  They expect to lose another $200 million through the remainder of 2017, for a total of almost $1 Billion. They’ve decided that enough is enough, and the dumpster fire known as ObamaCare has completely lost the insurer.
    “Looking beyond 2017, we continue to evaluate our footprint with a view towards significantly reducing our exposure to individual commercial products in 2018,” said Shawn Guertin, Aetna’s chief financial officer. “We have already disclosed our planned 2018 exit from one of our 2017 state-based exchanges and intend to communicate other 2018 footprint decisions when appropriate.”A week later, the company is now announcing the exit of the last two states it was participating in.“We will not offer on- or off-exchange individual plans in Delaware or Nebraska for 2018, and at this time have completely exited the exchanges,” said T.J. Crawford, a spokesman for Aetna.“Our individual commercial products lost nearly $700 million between 2014 and 2016 and are projected to lose more than $200 million in 2017 despite a significant reduction in membership,” said Crawford. “Those losses are the result of marketplace structural issues that have led to co-op failures and carrier exits and subsequent risk-pool deterioration.”
    …And that’s what collapse looks like.Of course, this is all turning out according to plan.  The law was, after all, just a “step on the path to single payer.” The exchanges were supposed to fail, insurers were supposed to face their doom, and Hillary was supposed to be there to save us all with an abomination she’d no doubt call Hillarycare.In fact, the only part that hasn’t gone according to plan is the 2016 election.  …And that’s why they’re so furious about their loss. All the pieces were in place.  Their fingertips had grazed the brass ring. Then, thanks to their own hubris, it all slipped away.http://canadafreepress.com/article/aetna-to-lose-almost-1-billion-from-2014-2017-will-abandon-all-obamacare-exPosted 11th May 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  9. MAR31Death Spiral Disaster: Last Major Insurer Reportedly Plans to Abandon Most Obamacare Markets Next Year
     



    One of the consistent and factually-correct refrains from Republican critics of Obamacare — the president especially — is that the current law is failing and getting worse.  Democrats inadvertently confirm this reality when they accuse Republicans of “sabotaging” the law by allowing it to be followed as-written.  Unstable risk pools disrupted by adverse selection are driving costs up, healthier consumers away, and carriers out of the market.  The result is a toxic trend of costlier coverage with fewer options, purchased disproportionately by sicker consumers — which only deepens the unhealthy fiscal trajectory.  In short, the clear markings of a “death spiral” in progress, which is why one top healthcare CEO used that term to describe the status quo, setting up a controversy we covered earlier in the week in which a left-leaning “fact checker” is doing its best to paper over this ugly reality through semantics games and general sloppiness.  Following the demise of the American Health Care Act, which some providers supported as a means of stopping Obamacare’s bleeding, the laws of economics are wreaking further havoc on the law.  This is an absolutely devastating development for the solvency of Obamacare:
    Anthem Inc is likely to exit from a large portion of its Obamacare individual insurance markets next year, Jefferies analysts said, nearly a week after Republican leaders pulled legislation to overhaul the U.S. healthcare system. Anthem is one of the few health insurers that still sells plans under Obamacare. Humana Inc, Aetna Inc, and UnitedHealth Group Inc pulled out after reporting hundreds of millions of dollars of losses. Anthem is leaning toward exiting a “high percentage” of the 144 rating regions in which it currently participates, Jefferies analysts said in a note on Thursday after talking to the health insurer. Obamacare, former Democratic President Barack Obama’s signature legislation created by the Affordable Care Act of 2010, has had a tough beginning. The mix of sick and healthy customers has been worse than expected, and premium rates on the individual insurance market went up 25 percent this year. The Republicans’ failure to repeal Obamacare, at least for now, means it remains federal law.Thanks to Obamacare’s slow-motion implosion, just one single provider remains as a “choice” for consumers who live in roughly one-third of all US counties. In many of those places, Anthem has been that last holdout insurer, which is now reportedly about to end in 2018. Millions of Americans could be left with zero marketplace options, as the planned withdrawal of the last remaining US healthcare giant from most areas marks the latest sign that Obamacare is an unworkable actuarial nightmare.  In a new Fox News national poll, Americans split approximately evenly in their approval and disapproval of Obamacare — a decent public opinion outcome for the law.  But that result comes on the heels of a bombardment of negative headlines about the GOP replacement plan, including from many conservative sources.  And it comes months removed from news of Obamacare’s enrollment shortfalls, receding coverage offerings and soaring price tags.  But all of those statistics are going to look really bad again this coming fall, when Americans will be reminded of those realities.  Even with the “good” news stretch for Obamacare, a plurality of respondents in the poll still believe that if it’s left alone, the law will collapse.  The Anthem development confirms why that’s an evidence-based conclusion to reach.  And then there’s this nugget:

    This should embolden Republicans and encourage them not to abandon their biggest campaign promise in recent memory. They must fashion a better bill that deals with critical policy challenges in a more productive way, perhaps taking advantage of reconciliation-related opportunities they didn’t recognize were available to them until very late in the previous process. Millions of people continue to be actively harmed by an unpopular law that is still deteriorating. Unify and do your job, GOP.
    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/03/31/fox-news-poll-n2306668Posted 31st March 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  10. MAR8New Web Ad Targets Paul Ryan’s Obama Lied About Care 2.0, Questions If Republicans Will Keep Promise to RepealRespectPosted 8th March 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  11. FEB15First Major Health Insurance Company To Withdraw From Obama Lied About Care

    According to Politico, the healthcare insurer Humana will completely withdraw from the Affordable Care Act exchange program in 2018, leaving a sizable dent in the Obamacare market.This would make Humana the first major health insurance company to walk away from Obamacare. The company states that it has come to this decision due to the fact that it stands to lose $45 million in 2017 on Obamcare business.“We are again seeing signs of an unbalanced risk pool based on the results of the 2017 open enrollment period,” CEO Bruce Broussard said in an investor call. “Therefore we’ve decided we can’t continue to offer this coverage in 2018.”President Donald Trump’s administration is said to soon introduce new rules that would convince insurers to stick around, however Broussard doesn’t believe there’s anything that could convince his company to stick around.“We’re really feeling that this organization needs to stay focused on what we do well, and I think what we do well is serving chronic conditions,” he said. “I think it’s going to be hard for us to get back into that marketplace.”This news comes on the heels of a failed $32 billion merger with health insurer Aetna, who refused to fight a court ruling that blocked the deal on anti-trust grounds. While this has little to do with Obamacare, the nebulous future of healthcare policy made it too difficult to determine a good reason to remain in the program.http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/02/14/first-major-health-insurance-company-to-withdraw-from-obamacare/Posted 15th February 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  12. FEB14It’s Failing: Rare Surviving Obama Lied Care, Co-Op Hiking Premiums By Up to 40 Percent 






    his is one of the precious few Obamacare co-ops still in existence, mind you, as the large majority of them have imploded under their own weight — despite billions of dollars in taxpayer funding under the law. And as we’ve seen across the country, year after year, and across a wide variety of coverage platforms, premiums are heading up for New Mexicans who receive their coverage through this co-op. Those increases will range from high single digits to 40 percent spikes in 2018. Via the Free Beacon and Kaiser Health News:
    One of the co-ops created through the Affordable Care Act will see premiums rise as much as 40 percent, Kaiser Health News reported. Martin Hickey, the CEO of New Mexico Health Connections, said that premiums for their plans may rise as little as 7 percent or soar as much as 40 percent. Hickey said that there has been massive confusion regarding what will happen to the Affordable Care Act with the new administration and Congress. “The more uncertainty they create, the higher the rates” will be for 2018, he said. “Insurers have a hard enough time making the normal predictions of who will get sick and how much it will cost,” the article states.As the article states, only five (or four, depending on the reporting) of the 23 co-ops originally erected under the failing health law remain operational. These programs have proven unsustainable, and now New Mexico’s is going to get much more expensive for participants. The co-op’s CEO partially blames the uncertainty of Obamacare’s future as a factor driving up costs (which is understandable), but it’s important to remember that Obamacare’s financial house of cards had been collapsing for years prior to the prospect of repeal becoming much more realistic following the election of Donald Trump. Indeed, in the weeks prior to the election — when the overwhelming conventional wisdom held that Clinton would win — the Obama administration’s own numbers spelled out the law’s undeniable failures. This piece of news out of New Mexico is totally in line with the overall status quo trajectory, not a departure from it.  Republicans must be ready to prosecute that case in a detailed and compassionate way as pressure from Democrats and the media ramps up.  Tentative, under-informed performances at town hall meetings will do them no favors, especially if those meetings are stacked with repeal opponents and sympathetic journalists.  Part of this process requires an actual consensus replacement plan, of course, which we’ve been promised for years (multiple GOP plans have been presented and even filed as legislation, just not as “the” unified proposal).  If Republican members want to emulate the successful example of a colleague on this, they should pay attention to the approach Michigan’s Justin Amash has taken:
    It had all the makings of the anti-Trump town hall meetings Republicans have come to fear. Retired health care industry worker Paul Bonis stood up and implored Republican Rep. Justin Amash to commit to keeping Obamacare — his life, the 61-year-old cancer survivor said, might actually depend on it. But Amash refused, and the auditorium packed with some 600 mostly liberal constituents erupted in boos and jeers for a good 30 seconds. “You are not supporting your constituents!” yelled one person. Instead of getting defensive or ducking for cover, though, the 36-year-old Michigan lawmaker leaned in, coolly explaining his position on the health care law. He made a point of trying to connect with the overwhelmingly Democratic room, jabbing President Donald Trump for what he called racially insensitive remarks and overreaching policies. Amash seemed to enjoy the give-and-take so much that he stayed 40 minutes longer than scheduled and promised to book an even bigger venue next time…“Most of my colleagues, unfortunately, go with the flow; they want to stick to their comfort zones in many cases,” Amash told POLITICO in a brief interview after the event. “This doesn’t make me uncomfortable. I like to be here, hearing the different perspectives. I’m not afraid of my positions.”Part of Amash’s strategy can’t be replicated in every GOP-held district, given the Congressman’s libertarian leanings and frequent Trump criticism. But on Obamacare, Amash understands the issue, makes factual appeals, and knows what his policy alternative entails. Rather than retreating into a crouch, Amash is able to spar, push back, and even go on courteous offense. It’s that sort of preparation and confidence that other Congressmen would be wise to embrace. It’s probably worth pointing out that Amash may be uniquely practiced in such things, as he makes a point defends every vote he takes in Facebook posts explaining his rationales and their constitutional grounds.  Once a Trump/Ryan Obamacare alternative takes shape and is introduced (Speaker Ryan says the process will occur this year), the broad strokes of a Republican messaging strategy will need to fall into place:

    (1)
     Democrats used false promises to jam through an unpopular and failing program on a party line vote. (2) The law is harming more people than it’s helping, and obviously violating Democrats’ pledges.  (3) If we do nothing, the current situation will get worse — both on costs and on access to care. (4) Republicans’ alternative helps provide affordable care without a raft of coercive mandates, and it helps protect people with pre-existing conditions. (5) Democrats have no plan other than more government spending and more government control; in other words, doubling down on their own failure.  They can’t be trusted on this issue because they blew their credibility on Obamacare. Making this case shouldn’t be terribly hard if — and only if — the GOP can get on the same page on the details of “repeal and replace,” present a united front, and explain their plans in a proactive and positive manner.  That’s far easier said than done, but accomplishing something like uprooting a bad program that’s been embedding itself into the American healthcare system for several years isn’t a layup.  Republicans should study and internalize the Amash approach on this subject, then honor the Boy Scouts’ motto and be prepared. 
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/02/14/obamacare-new-mexico-coop-hiking-premiums-by-up-to-40-percent-n2285434Posted 14th February 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  13. JAN5The Crucifixion of Jonathan Gruber by Mike Turner: Obama Lied About Care!Posted 5th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  14. JAN53 Jonathan Gruber Videos: Americans “Too Stupid to Understand” ObamacarePosted 5th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  15. JAN5Dems say Obamacare repeal will #MakeAmericaSickAgain? Time for a reality checkPosted 5th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  16. JAN5Posted 5th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  17. JAN5Posted 5th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  18. JAN5Dems say Obamacare repeal will #MakeAmericaSickAgain? Time for a reality check

























    @CounterMoonbatThis is the Gruber Party. They have zero credibility on this. Period. End of story. https://twitter.com/cbsnews/status/816684143304179712 …9:26 AM – 4 Jan 2017
    Earlier today, newly minted Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer had this to say in response to possible Obamacare repeal:

      FollowChuck Schumer 
     ✔@SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain6:18 AM – 4 Jan 2017
    Great slogan, Dems.





      FollowCBS News 
     ✔@CBSNews“We’re united in our opposition to these Republican attempts to make America sick again,” says Sen. Schumer http://cbsn.ws/2hRmS6P 8:34 AM – 4 Jan 2017
    That’s cute, Senator. Very clever. But from where we’re sitting, Obamacare did nothing to make America healthy; in fact, it made things much, much worse.Up for a brief glimpse at reality?
    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowKassandra_Moreland @kassandra_m@SenSchumer #OBAMA should have left healthcare alone! I’ve had to pay out of pocket for my weekly Chemo thanks to #OBAMACARE#TRUMP #MAGA6:57 AM – 4 Jan 2017

    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowMelinSA @melissae777@SenSchumer my insurer got out end of Dec bc OC costs too much! Options now are too expensive, high deductible, & my doctors are running for the hills!6:36 AM – 4 Jan 2017

    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowElkin L Evens @ElkinEvens@SenSchumer Could afford my policy before Obama care but not after. Thank you Democrats for making health care unaffordable for my family.6:39 AM – 4 Jan 2017

    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowJustin O’Connor @OfTwoEmpires@SenSchumer You and that clown @NancyPelosi helped destroy healthcare. Never had insurance that was of no use before. #RepealACA6:19 AM – 4 Jan 2017

    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowDouglas Karr 
     ✔@douglaskarrAs a #smallbiz, it was you that made it unaffordable for my business to supply my own and my employees’ insurance coverage @SenSchumer7:21 AM – 4 Jan 2017 · Greenwood, IN

    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowReddog815 @Reddog815@SenSchumer #MakeAmericaSickAgain I’m sick because I can’t afford a 5K deductible! !!! You are so out of touch!8:57 AM – 4 Jan 2017

    23hChuck Schumer 
     ✔ @SenSchumerRepublicans should stop clowning around with America’s health care. Don’t #MakeAmericaSickAgain
      FollowGen-x-ista @gen_x_ista@SenSchumer My 1st hand exp is I get 2 pay almost 10k a year out of pocket before insurance pays one dime…that makes me sick. Sadness 10:18 AM – 4 Jan 2017






      FollowJason C. @CounterMoonbat#MakeAmericaSickAgain9:31 AM – 4 Jan 2017


      FollowJason C. @CounterMoonbatReminder: Obamacare subsidies cost over $32 Billion. Middle class foots the bill. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obamacare-premium-subsidies-cost-over-205200022.html …9:55 AM – 4 Jan 2017
    Obamacare Premium Subsidies Cost Over $32 Billion: Here’s Where They GoMany critics argue that Obamacare has not delivered on the “affordable” part of the Affordable Care Act. Even so, the federal government will issue nearly $33 billion in tax credits to enrollees on…finance.yahoo.com



    View image on Twitter


      FollowJason C. @CounterMoonbatBrutal. This map shows how much Obamacare premiums are going up in every state.6:03 AM – 27 Oct 2016


      FollowScott Presler VA @ScottPreslerMy idea of healthcare does NOT include a $5,000 deductible! You expect me to pay that much out of pocket? #Obamacare#MakeAmericaSickAgain10:07 AM – 4 Jan 2017


      FollowScott Presler VA @ScottPreslerObama told me if I liked my doctor I could keep my doctor.

    President Obama is a liar.#MakeAmericaSickAgain #Obamacare10:54 AM – 4 Jan 2017Posted 5th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  19. JAN4Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  20. JAN4Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  21. JAN4Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  22. JAN4Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  23. JAN4Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  24. JAN4Pelosi, Schumer accuse Republicans of attempting to ‘make America sick again’Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  25. JAN4OOF! Ben Shapiro schools Bernie Sanders about the ‘working class’ in just one, simple tweetThere’s just one teensy little problem with his agenda: FollowBen Shapiro ✔@benshapiroMost of the working class is Republican, idiot. https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/815992307103109121 …11:30 PM – 2 Jan 2017Oof.Posted 4th January 2017 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  26. NOV8Obama And (Now) Hillary Lied About Care Tightens Vice, Puts Squeeze on Middle-Class Americans’ Pocketbooks.Posted 8th November 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  27. NOV8Obama And (Now) Hillary Lied About Care Tightens Vice, Puts Squeeze on Middle-Class Americans’ Pocketbooks.Posted 8th November 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  28. NOV8Obama And (Now) Hillary Lied About Care Tightens Vice, Puts Squeeze on Middle-Class Americans’ Pocketbooks.Posted 8th November 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  29. NOV8Obama And (Now) Hillary Lied About Care Tightens Vice, Puts Squeeze on Middle-Class Americans’ Pocketbooks.





    Taxpayers are being squeezed financially in Obamacare’s tightening vice.On one side, taxpayers already are funding Obamacare entitlements, notwithstanding President Barack Obama’s high-profile promise to spare middle-class Americans from new taxation. Liberals in Congress and elsewhere are seeking remedies, among them heavier taxpayer subsidies and bigger deficits, that will squeeze taxpayers even more.On the other side, those whose income is too high to qualify for subsidies must pay for overly expensive Obamacare coverage without any assistance.Obamacare’s mandates and excessive insurance regulations, which drive excessive costs, apply to all health plans in the individual market, whether offered in or out of the exchanges.If persons get coverage in the individual market outside the exchanges, with no tax relief or subsidy to offset their coverage, they are the hardest hit by Obamacare’s skyrocketing premium and deductible hikes.Taxes and the Middle ClassLet’s talk taxes. During the intensifying congressional debate on Obamacare, on Aug. 11, 2009, Obama said: “My belief is, is that it should not burden people who make $250,000 a year or less.”This was—and is—pure nonsense.Over the next 10 years, the Affordable Care Act will raise $832 billion in taxes, fees, and penalties.Most of Obamacare’s tax increases affect middle-class Americans, either directly or indirectly. The individual mandate penalty—which the Supreme Court ruled a “tax penalty”—is one that, curiously, mostly affects lower-income Americans.The special taxes on medical goods and services are passed on to the middle class, such as Obamacare taxes on drugs, health insurance, and medical devices. Likewise, middle-class retirees are affected by the law’s elimination of the business tax deduction of 28 percent for drug coverage.Consider also Obamacare’s additional tax increase, in which the Medicare payroll tax jumps from 2.9 percent to 3.8 percent. Though initially confined to a tiny cohort of “the rich”—single persons with annual incomes of $200,000 and couples with annual incomes of $250,000—the Medicare tax increase will relentlessly push its way down deep into the American middle class.Because the tax is not indexed to inflation, Medicare trustees now project that an estimated 79 percent of all workers eventually will pay the higher Medicare payroll tax.Taxpayer SubsidiesLet’s also talk health insurance costs. Low-income folks are largely insulated from the premium shocks.Under the Affordable Care Act, a person with an income between 100 percent of poverty ($11,770) and 400 percent of poverty ($47,080 ) is eligible for a sliding scale of premium “tax credits” if, and only if, he or she buys a health plan in the Obamacare insurance exchanges.For most enrollees, these “tax credits” aren’t really conventional tax credits, because they’re not credited against anybody’s federal income or payroll taxes. They are simply taxpayer subsidies.Nonetheless, given the big, impending premium hikes averaging 25 percent nationwide in 2017, these subsidies largely shield enrollees (about 85 percent) from Obamacare’s explosive costs. The higher one’s income on the statutory scale of income eligibility, the smaller the subsidies.Likewise, if a person enrolled in an exchange plan has an annual income of 250 percent of the poverty level ($29,425) or less, that person is eligible for “cost-sharing” subsidies.
    Deep TroubleFor 2017, the average “silver plan” deductibles are estimated to be $3,572 for single coverage and $7,474 for family coverage. Because of cost-sharing subsidies, eligible low-income persons also are insulated from big out-of-pocket costs.But a large chunk of the American middle class earns too much (more than 400 percent of the poverty level) to qualify for either the premium tax credits or the cost-sharing subsidies.If these persons don’t have, or have lost, employer-sponsored health coverage, they are in deep trouble.They can risk going “bare” with no insurance—certainly a cheaper, yet risky option—and pay the relatively small price of taking that big risk by coughing up the individual mandate’s tax penalty. Or, instead of joining the ranks of the uninsured, they can enroll in health coverage outside the Obamacare exchanges.The number of people who buy health coverage outside the exchanges—about 10 million people altogether—is almost the same as those who are enrolled in the Obamacare exchanges, according to the data. But if these people enroll in the individual insurance plans operating outside the exchanges, they are, as noted, unprotected from the full shock of the impending premium increases and explosive out-of-pocket costs.One could argue that people who aren’t eligible for subsidies and who enroll in coverage outside the exchanges can find insurance options that are somewhat more generous because they have broader provider networks, assuming they can afford them.These folks invariably are taxpayers, like their neighbors who get coverage at their place of work, but they have no tax relief to offset the cost of their more expensive coverage.Especially ToughPlans on and off the exchanges are under the same benefit and insurance rules of the Affordable Care Act. The levels of coverage, with some exceptions, are categorized under the same metallic tiers—platinum, gold, silver, and bronze.On the Obamacare exchanges, the so-called “silver” plans—the standard plans eligible for both sets of taxpayer subsidies—naturally dominate.Outside the Obamacare exchanges, the distribution of the metallic coverage tiers is quite different. Recent research indicates that expensive (high premium) “gold” plans have 25 percent of the individual market outside the exchanges (compared to just 12 percent on the exchanges), while 38 percent of the plans offered on the individual market were lower premium “catastrophic” or “bronze” plans with big deductibles.This could be especially tough for people buying coverage outside the exchanges.Next year, people on the exchanges who choose a “bronze” plan face an average deductible of $6,000 for single coverage and $12,393 for family coverage. Those buying coverage outside the exchanges also face even higher premiums and deductibles.For middle-class families who find themselves in this situation, buying health insurance would be akin to taking out a second mortgage. People buying individual health insurance don’t even enjoy individual tax relief for their coverage unless they are self-employed.A Genuine Free MarketIn 2017, the new president and Congress should junk Obamacare’s complicated, confusing, and dysfunctional subsidy program and replace it with a simpler, more rational, and more cost-conscious system.At the heart of that reform—as the late Nobel laureate Milton Friedman of the University of Chicago and a generation of conservative economists have argued for decades—must be the provision of individual tax relief for health insurance.Such a new system would promote a genuine free market in health care without the excessive tax and regulatory penalties. It also would enable Americans to control their health care dollars and decisions.That, once again, would be an enormous improvement in the lives of millions of Americans, and a positive, even revolutionary, change in the giant health care sector of the economy.http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/robert-e-moffit/obamacare-tightens-vice-puts-squeeze-middle-class-americans-pocketbooksPosted 8th November 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  30. NOV6Obama Lied About Care Unaffordable For The Middle Class.Posted 6th November 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  31. NOV6Obama Lied About Care Unaffordable For The Middle Class






    Guy has written extensively on the policy trainwreck that is the Affordable Care Act. It is a complete nightmare, with double-digit premium spikes about to hit the nation (on average) next year. 

    That’s a Tomahawk missile strike to most home budgets, especially those in America’s middle class. An ironic twist since Obamacare was supposed to help this economic demographic, which now finds itself being more squeezed by this law. Even CNN Money noted that Obamacare is turning into another government program that helps predominantly lower income Americans. Simply put, the law isn’t affordable. Republicans have known this. Minnesota Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton admitted this. If you’re able to qualify for a subsidy,

    Via CNN:…[F]or many middle class Americans — a single person earning more than $47,520 or a family of four with an income of $97,200 — the pricey premiums and deductibles mean health care coverage remains out of reach.”The middle class are getting squeezed,” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation. “They aren’t getting subsidies and these deductibles are hard to afford.”This schism is turning Obamacare into another government benefit program for lower- and moderate-income Americans. The typical enrollee has an income of only 165% of the federal poverty level, or $40,000 for a family of four.[…]For the 10.5 million enrollees on the Obamamcare exchanges, health insurance costs are more transparent. And more of the burden falls on the consumers. That is leaving an untold number of Americans opting to remain uninsured, rather than shell out thousands a year for premiums and deductibles. In 2015, 46% of uninsured adults said that they tried to get coverage but did not because it was too expensive, a Kaiser study found.The big price spikes for 2017 have some current Obamacare enrollees wondering whether they’ll renew their plans next year or opt to pay the penalty of $695 per person, or 2.5% of income, whichever is larger.Take Irene Solesky of Towson, Maryland. A mortgage underwriter, Solesky and her husband earn too much to receive a subsidy. So next year, they will have to pay $1,351 a month for a CareFirst Bronze plan for themselves and their two sons. On top of that, they face a $13,100 family deductible.”It’s a catastrophic policy as far as I’m concerned,” said Solesky, 55, noting her Obamacare policy costs twice as much as her mortgage. “Medical insurance was meant to keep medical expenses from driving you in financial ruin, not for the medical insurance to drive you in financial ruin.”And yes, more Americans have been opting to pay the penalty because it’s a more economical option. The Obama White House has taken a more vicious reaction to the news that their policy has totally failed. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest simply said that people could avoid paying the penalties if they sign up for their unaffordable health care program. Yeah, thanks for the advice, kid genius. President Obama has resorted to just straight up lying, saying that the premium hikes will only impact a handful of people, and that everything the GOP has predicted about Obamacare hasn’t come true. Uh, yeah it has, Barry.But have no fear, folks—Hillary Clinton will fix the law. If you actually believe that, please seek medical assistances, preferably a cat scan, immediately. Obamacare is failing, it’s unaffordable, it’s yet another economic force that’s killing the middle class, and more Americans might opt out of it. As for young people, dependent coverage was extended to 26 years of age, so why would they voluntarily go off their parents’ plan, where they’re already insured, to sign up for Obamacare on their own and get slammed with increasingly rising premiums? Also, young people don’t go to the hospital as much, so they feel they don’t need health insurance. This seems to be a big part of making the law for lack of a better term work, though the Obama administration seems to have overlooked this part, but that could be said for most of their policies over the past eight years, especially the ones we’ve enacted overseas.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/11/05/cnn-obamacare-unaffordable-for-the-middle-class-n2241895?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=Posted 6th November 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  32. OCT29Posted 29th October 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  33. OCT26FLASHBACK: Obama Says Obama Lied About Care Will Decrease Premiums by 3000 Percent 


    As everyday Americans grapple with healthcare premium increases of 116 percent on top of losing their primary care doctors and networks, the White House and Democrats are attempting to do damage control.

    During a speech last week in Miami, President Obama said rate increases have nothing to do with him. Just Today, Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton argued she’ll “fix” the imploding program.

    Obama’s claim of non-responsibility particular draws a lot of critical attention considering the great promises he made to the American people in order to pass the “Affordable” Care Act without a single Republican vote in the dead of night.

    In 2010, he said Obamacare would decrease employer offered healthcare premiums by 3000 percent. Today employers are dumping healthcare coverage for employees in droves.

    Obama also repeatedly said families would see their premiums decrease by $2500. 

    Considering Hillary Clinton essentially wrote Obamacare in the 1990s with Hillarycare and that Obama is actively campaigning on her behalf, she owns this. Trump would do well to stay on message about the ever cascading broken promises and destruction of healthcare the vast majority of Americans used to enjoy.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/10/26/flashback-obama-says-obamacare-will-decrease-premiums-by-3000-percent-n2237482?utm_source=TopBreakingNewsCarousel&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=BreakingNewsCarouselPosted 26th October 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  34. OCT26Obama: I Have Nothing to Do With Obama About Care Rate Increases 






    Earlier this week the White House announced Obamacare premiums across the country will increase yet again this year, despite President Obama promising the law would save families $2500 per year back in 2010. In Arizona, rate increases of 116 percent are expected, while other states brace for hikes of at least 25 percent.

    But despite making a laundry list of promises about decreased costs thanks to the “Affordable” Care Act, all of which have been broken, President Obama isn’t taking responsibility for the healthcare takeover he once bragged about. In fact, he’s saying he has nothing to do with the current rate crisis.
    “A lot of the times, they [media] just report ‘premium increases’ and everybody thinks ‘wow, my insurance rates are going up, it must be Obama’s fault,'” Obama said late last week during a speech in Miami. “I had nothing to do with that.”

    Just last week, Obama compared the collapsing Obamacare system to exploding Samsung 7 phones.
    I’ll leave you with this, a montage of Obama making it clear why people might believe rate increases are his responsibility.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/10/26/obama-obamacare-premiums-are-increasing-because-they-were-too-affordable-before-n2237447?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=
    Posted 26th October 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  35. OCT20USA Today: The Cascade of 2017 Obama Lied About Care Premium Hikes Has Arrived






    The Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein penned a prescient column in February, arguing that Obamacare was “off to a rocky” start in 2016. In the piece, he noted that potential political pain for Democrats would start to make headlines and land in consumers’ mailboxes around…well, right about now: “For months leading up to the election, voters are going to be hearing more and more about staggering rate increases coming in 2017. And this year, open enrollment – when individuals shopping for insurance can start to go online and see the premiums on new plans — begins on Nov. 1, or just one week before the election. This means that for the months, weeks, and days leading up to the election, the Democratic presidential nominee and all of the party’s Congressional candidates are going to have to contend with news of sky-rocking rates coming from Obamacare as insurers struggle to make the business profitable,” he wrote.  And that is exactly how things are playing out.  USA Today is out with new reporting confirming that Obamacare rate spikes are being approved by regulators across the country — some even green-lighting increases above and beyond what insurers requested:
    State insurance regulators across the country have approved health care premium increases higher than those requested by insurers, despite a national effort to keep rates for policies sold on Affordable Care Act exchanges from skyrocketing, a USA TODAY analysis shows. In eight states, regulators approved premiums that were a percentage point or more higher than carriers wanted, said Charles Gaba, a health data expert at ACASignups.net who analyzed the rates for USA TODAY. As of Tuesday, those states are Arizona, Pennsylvania, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota and Utah…“To consumers, this seems terrible like, ‘Oh, they’re price gouging us,’ ” Gaba said. “But part of regulators’ jobs is to keep insurance companies solvent so they can continue to give people insurance.” In fact, this year many insurance carriers have requested premium rate increases that are closer to what regulators think are appropriate, says Gaba. “Ideally you want what’s requested to be what’s necessary,” he added. “And that was part of what happened.” Insurer withdrawals from some markets and rate hikes of more than 50% in some areas prompted fears that some insurance marketplaces were at risk of collapsing.’They’re just doing what’s necessary to keep these companies afloat’ is the whole problem.  The reason that so many major insurers are pulling out of Obamacare is that the disproportionately sicker risk pools are quite expensive to cover, resulting in huge financial losses to the providers.  To offset those losses, enormous rate increases are being approved, making coverage even less affordable for the relatively healthy consumers trying to keep their heads above water — including millions who receive taxpayer subsidies through the law.  As their costs skyrocket even further, more and more younger, healthier people will either walk away from the law, or continue to avoid signing up for it.  After all, paying the individual mandate tax is much cheaper than shelling out big bucks every month, on top of out-of-pocket costs; plus, in the event of a health emergency, insurers are required under the law to accept all comers during open enrollment, regardless of pre-existing conditions.  This is the unsustainable, spiraling trajectory that has industry experts warning of a potential full collapse.  By the way, here is the article’s accompanying infographic, illustrating the prevalence of double-digit premium increases.  As you peruse this map, recall that the tent pole promise of Obamacare was that it would significantly reduce costs for virtually all American consumers.  Instead, here is the “Affordable” Care Act reality:

    Based on that chart, only a small handful of states will have the supposed ‘good fortune’ of experiencing single-digit hikes.  The vast majority will experience cost surges in the double-digits, with roughly half of all states getting slammed with increases of at least 20 percent.  Time magazine reviews the eight states where consumes will suffer the most next year, where regulators have imposed rate jumps of at least 30 percent.  The piece’s opening sentence says it all: “The Affordable Care Act is getting a lot less affordable for many Americans.”  Meanwhile, many Arizonans find themselves in Obamacare’s crosshairs, getting rocked by the double-whammy of soaring costs and dwindling-to-nonexistent choices:
    Arizonans will have fewer options at higher rates when they buy coverage for 2017 on the federal health insurance exchange. This week, the Arizona Department of Insurance released details about the plans and rates being offered on the marketplace created by the Affordable Care Act. Maricopa County will only have one insurer on the exchange, Health Net, which is offering four plans and raising rates by nearly 75 percent. “It’s definitely on the high side. There’s no question about that, but Arizona is not the only one with significant, more than 50 percent increases,” insurance analyst Jim Hammond, publisher of the Hertel Report, said…In the rest of Arizona’s counties, except for Pima, Blue Cross and Blue Shield will be the only insurer. Those rates are going up 51 percent. Other insurers will be offering plans off the exchange this year, but most are also raising rates by about 70 percent. Open enrollment begins Nov. 1.Arizona’s Democratic Senate candidate calls her vote in favor of Obamacare one of her proudest moments. She’s getting smoked.  Republicans should press this issue down the home stretch of the campaign.  As we mentioned yesterday, Americans for Prosperity is rolling out an ad campaign in key Senate races to help hold Democrats accountable for their failing law:
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/10/20/usa-today-the-cascade-of-obamacare-premium-hikes-has-arrived-n2234719Posted 20th October 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  36. OCT20Ouch: Fewer Americans Have Private Health Insurance Now Then Before Obama Lied About Care ReformGuy wrote about the coming damage Obamacare will inflict upon us in 2017. In short, it’s a total disaster, with premiums set to spike to outrageous levels, 75 percent in Arizona alone. Another punch to the gut regarding this miserable failure of a health care law; there are fewer Americans with private insurance now than there were in 2007 (via Weekly Standard):
    That’s according to the federal government’s own figures. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (see table 1.2b), 66.8 percent of those living in the United States had private health insurance in 2007. Now, as of 2015 (the most recent year for which figures are available), only 65.6 percent of those living in the United States have private health insurance.
    It turns out that median incomes aren’t the only thing that have dropped since 2007.
    There are currently about 320 million people living in America. If the percentage who have private health insurance were as high now as it was in 2007, 3.8 million more people would now have private health insurance.This isn’t the only thing that off. The projections from the Congressional Budget Office regarding where enrollment should be with Obamacare missed its target…by 24 million. Hope and change, folks.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/10/20/ouch-fewer-americans-have-private-health-insurance-now-than-before-obamacare-reform-n2234957Posted 20th October 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  37. OCT3This Just In: Obamacare Collapsing

    The whole idea behind the scam known as Obamacare — from its Stalinist passage along a strict party line vote, to its ludicrous state “exchanges,” to its predictably parlous financial condition, to its misuse of a politicized IRS to act as its enforcer, to its destruction of the reputation of a pusillanimous and cowardly chief justice John Roberts — was to wreck the American private-insurance industry so dramatically that a demoralized and anxious public would demand socialized medicine, aka a “single-payer” system. That day is now here:The fierce struggle to enact and carry out the Affordable Care Act was supposed to put an end to 75 years of fighting for a health care system to insure all Americans. Instead, the law’s troubles could make it just a way station on the road to another, more stable health care system, the shape of which could be determined on Election Day.Seeing a lack of competition in many of the health law’s online insurance marketplaces, Hillary ClintonPresident Obama and much of the Democratic Party are calling for more government, not less.The departing president, the woman who seeks to replace him and nearly one-third of the Senate have endorsed a new government-sponsored health plan, the so-called public option, to give consumers an additional choice. A significant number of Democrats, for whom Senator Bernie Sanders spoke in the primaries, favor single-payerarrangement, which could take the form of Medicare for all.SPONSORED Yeah, like Medicare — which is basically insolvent — is so great.Donald J. Trump and Republicans in Congress would go in the direction of less government, reducing federal regulation and requirements so insurance would cost less and no-frills options could proliferate. Mr. Trump would, for example, encourage greater use of health savings accounts, allow insurance policies to be purchased across state lines and let people take tax deductions for insurance premium payments.
    In such divergent proposals lies an emerging truth: Mr. Obama’s signature domestic achievement will almost certainly have to change to survive.https://pjmedia.com/trending/2016/10/03/this-just-in-obamacare-collapsing/Posted 3rd October 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  38. SEP7From ‘Hillarycare’ debacle in 1990s, Clinton emerged more cautiousPosted 7th September 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  39. AUG30Aetna Has Revealed Obamacare’s Many Broken PromisesThe recent exodus of insurers shows we need more reliable affordable careThe health-insurance giant Aetna has announced it will exit 11 of the 15 health-insurance exchanges where it sells Obamacare plans. Aetna’s announcement comes on the heels of news that UnitedHealthcare,Humana, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Mexico, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, and Texas’ Scott and White Health Plan, and 70% of Obamacare’s failed Co-Ops, and other insurers will exit many or all of the exchanges for which they had previously shown such enthusiasm.The ongoing and nationwide exodus of insurers is just the latest piece of evidence that Obamacare is a failed law built on false promises.Obamacare’s only real selling point was that it supposedly guarantees access to care for people with expensive illnesses. President Obama repeatedly boasted that under Obamacare, it will be illegal for insurance companies to deny coverage to the sick because “all discrimination against pre-existing conditions will be prohibited.”On the contrary, Obamacare itself is denying coverage to people with preexisting conditions. Just ask the residents of Pinal County, Arizona, where Obamacare has driven every carrier out of the exchange, and may yet destroy the individual market outside the exchange.Read more: Private Insurance Companies Are Destroying Affordable Health CareAs it turns out, Obamacare does not prevent insurance companies from denying you coverage, dropping your coverage, or watering down your coverage. It does not prevent insurers from limiting your coverage. It does not prevent discrimination against the sick. All of these things happened in Pinal County—and not in spite of Obamacare, but because of it. Obamacare made covering everybody in the exchange prohibitively expensive, so insurers stopped covering anybody.If you’re a Pinal County resident who had a pre-Obamacare plan that covered your (now-preexisting) medical condition, Obamacare took away your coverage and the long-term protection it provided. It has left you either with far more expensive coverage, or no coverage at all.President Obama also promised Obamacare would give everyone “the same kind of choice of private health insurance that members of Congress get for themselves.” Members of Congress can choose from four carriers in D.C.’s small business Exchange. (Who knew Congress is a small business?)What about us little people? In 2017, one third of counties and one in six enrollees will have only one carrier in their Exchange. As it was before Obamacare, few Americans will have as many health-insurance choices as Congress.President Obama repeatedly assured Americans: “If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.” This year’s ongoing insurer exodus has so far added another 2 million Americans to the number that Obamacare has thrown out of their health plans.In the same breath, Obama promised: “We will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period.” Can you guess what one of the worst parts of all those plan cancellations is? They often force patients to switch doctors and hospitals mid-treatment.In 2010, Obama found one insurer who raised premiums by an “unacceptable” 39%. Obamacare would make such increases a thing of the past, he promised.Are you sitting down? He hasn’t kept that promise, either.In 2016, eight states had Obamacare plans whose premiums increased by 39% or more. Half the states saw increases of 30% or more.Premiums appear to be rising even faster in 2017. Across Tennessee’s three exchange-participating insurers, the lowest average increase will be 44%. The highest will be 62%.Obamacare’s defenders respond that subsidies defray the cost of Obamacare plans. Except they don’t. Subsidies don’t reduce the amount of the premium. They just shift the cost of Obamacare coverage to taxpayers. Either way, fewer than half of consumers facing these premium hikes are getting subsidies.For a great many people, including many with preexisting conditions, Obamacare has made matters worse. No one wants the system we had before Obamacare. But repealing Obamacare would create space for a sounder and more sustainable health reform than this ongoing failure.http://time.com/4466081/broken-obamacare-promises/Posted 30th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  40. AUG30Why the Un- Affordable Care Act is Anything But Affordable? , Remain Me Again Were Obama Say, That People Were Going To Save Over $2500.00? What Happen, Were It Go?


    For years, ObamaCare supporters have been telling critics of the law to shut up and fall in line. Now, they are urging them to come to its rescue.A key part of President Obama’s domestic legacy is sputtering so badly that even the law’s boosters are admitting that the federal government needs to do more to prop it up.The ObamaCare exchanges were supposed to enhance choice and hold down costs — and are doing neither. Abandoned by more and more insurers, the exchanges — once billed as robust “marketplaces” — are becoming pitiful shadows of themselves.In most or all of the following states — Alaska, Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Missouri, Oklahoma, North Carolina and Tennessee — probably only one insurer will offer insurance through the exchanges next year, reports The Wall Street Journal. One large county in Arizona may have no exchange insurer at all. An analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation finds that 31 percent of US counties will have one insurer and another 31 percent will have just two.It isn’t Republicans hobbling the law. It isn’t the greedy insurance companies, who were overly optimistic about the exchanges at the outset and are now paying the price. It is fundamental economic forces that the law’s architects blithely ignored. But economic incentives will not be mocked.ObamaCare regulations make health insurance more expensive and keep insurers from conducting their business on a rational basis. This means the exchanges are less attractive to younger and healthier people and therefore less economical for insurers.The mandate was supposed to force healthier people to buy insurance anyway, but it has proven too weak, and subsidies were supposed to cover the higher costs for poorer people, but they’re only a band aid on spiraling costs.The exchanges have created perverse insurance products that feature the worst of all worlds: They have high premiums, and high deductibles and co-pays, and limited networks of doctors. No wonder the exchanges have attracted half as many people as they were expected to. Leave it to the federal government to create a market so unappealing that it is border-line unsustainable.When Aetna announced it was exiting all but four state exchanges about two weeks ago, liberals charged that the company was exacting revenge on the Obama administration for blocking its hoped-for merger with Humana. But what accounts for UnitedHealth pulling back, and all the other exoduses? All these insurers made a go of it on the exchanges, before reality slapped them in the face.Insurance companies may be as malevolent as their fiercest critics depict them, but one can’t really begrudge them needing to make some money. If the Department of Health and Human Services can spin and obfuscate, these companies can’t ignore the bottom line. Analysts expect the insurers remaining in the exchanges to ask for big premium hikes next year.The answer to this turbulence, the law’s supporters say, is yet more subsidies. They’re paying an inadvertent obeisance to the old Ronald Reagan quip that the government’s view of the economy is: “If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”ObamaCare’s boosters are loath to admit that there might be something wrong with the structure of a law they’ve celebrated as a glorious success from the day it passed.Instead, they’ll now argue Republicans are sabotaging it by declining to double down on its subsidies.But it obviously makes no sense for the government to make a product more expensive with one hand and then to subsidize its cost with the other. This was pointed at the time the law was being debated.But the Obama administration and its allies were too transfixed with “making history.” And so they did — by passing an Affordable Care Act that’s one of the great misnomers in the history of major America legislation.http://nypost.com/2016/08/29/why-the-affordable-care-act-is-anything-but-affordable/Posted 30th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  41. AUG29Health Care Law Voters Doubt More Than Ever That Obamacare Will Reduce Health Care Costs?





    Voters still tend to view the national health care law negatively, and fewer voters than ever expect it to lower health care costs.
    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters think health care costs will go up under the new health care law. Only nine percent (9%) now expect those costs to decrease, the lowest finding since the law was passed by Congress in March 2010. Twenty-four percent (24%) expect costs to stay about the same. (To see survey question wording, click here.)http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_lawPosted 29th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  42. AUG29Tennessee’s Insurance Commissioner: Obama Lied About Care is ‘Very Near Collapse’ in My State



    As we reported last week, one top industry expert believes Obamacare is in danger of being within one year of collapse. Several economists are sounding the alarm over new evidence of the dreaded insurance “death spiral” — which we’ll return to momentarily.  Now here is Tennessee’s insurance commissioner pointedly declining to sugarcoat the increasingly dire status of Democrats’ grand healthcare experiment in her state:Tennessee’s insurance regulator proclaimed the state’s Obamacare exchange “very near collapse” Tuesday, after signing off on hefty premium hikes in an extraordinary bid to keep the program afloat. Her remarks largely overshadowing the dramatic premium increases, Commissioner Julie Mix McPeak thrust the issue of preserving competition into the spotlight at a moment when states around the country are grappling with dwindling numbers of insurers willing to sell on the exchange. The rate approvals, while a tough decision, were necessary to ensure healthcare options in every part of Tennessee when open enrollment begins in November, said McPeak, commissioner of the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance. BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee is the only insurer to sell statewide and there was the possibility that Cigna and Humana would reduce their footprints or leave the market altogether…“I would characterize the exchange market in Tennessee as very near collapse … and that all of our efforts are really focused on making sure we have as many writers in the areas as possible, knowing that might be one,” McPeak told The Tennessean. “I’m doing everything I can to prevent a situation where that turns to zero.”An important note: For those who’ve been loosely following this law’s many travails since its 2010 passage, it’s possible to become inured to “implosion” headlines and urgent warnings.  Haven’t a bunch of these exchanges failed already?  What’s new about this?First, a large percentage of Obamacare co-ops have totally collapsed and closed up shop.  These are taxpayer funded non-profit alternatives constructed within the law with the goal of offering consumers options outside of the private market exchanges.  Second, there were also high-profile face-plants in the creation stage of state-based exchanges, most notoriously Oregon’s meltdown.  Maryland was another big one.  When those exchanges went down the tubes technologically, state leaders shifted over to the federal exchange at Healthcare.gov.  What we’re seeing in Tennessee (which is on the federal exchange) is a third phenomenon: The costs and losses caused by the law are destroying the market itself.  This isn’t a co-op disappearing or a state-funded website crashing.  It’s a statewide individual health insurance market evaporating.  Why?  Because providers are pulling out, unable to sustain the associated financial beating any longer.

    Now, with fewer choices risking the departure of more insurers, the state is approving steep rate increases to try to keep the remaining players solvent.  Of course, substantially higher rates will have the direct effect of scaring away younger, healthier consumers at a faster clip; after all, if they get sick or hurt, the law mandates that they be able to obtain “insurance” with their new pre-existing condition — at a comparable rate to everyone else, to boot.  This is the slow, aforementioned “death spiral” in action.  This effect is playing out across the nation, with millions of Americans facing a contracting list of options, especially those living in the roughly one-third of the country where there’s only one “choice” left.  You’ll also notice that the only statewide insurer left in Tennessee is Blue Cross Blue Shield, an industry giant that has not yet followed in several large competitors’ footstepsand withdrawn from Obamacare fairly comprehensively.  Is that shoe getting ready to drop?  Back to the story:Chattanooga-based BCBST, the only insurer that’s sold statewide in the first three years of the federal exchange, is estimating that, by the end of 2016, it will have lost close to $500 million in three years. Such losses are unsustainable, said Roy Vaughn, chief communications officer of BCBST. The insurer, which has previously underscored its support for the individual market, is still weighing what its presence in 2017 will look like. At this point in the process, the insurer only has to notify the state if it decides to make changes to where it will sell plans, McPeak said. It’s too late for another insurer to come onto the 2017 market. “We agree with the assessment of the ACA marketplace in Tennessee. We appreciate the support of our request to close the gap between our rates and medical expenses for ACA marketplace plans. Beyond rates as we’ve discussed with the (TDCI), we continue to have concerns about uncertainty with the ACA at the federal level,” Vaughn said to The Tennessean. “Due to these concerns, we are keeping all of our options open at this point about participating in the 2017 marketplace. We anticipate making a final decision in mid-September.”Trouble ahead.  CBS News, meanwhile, took a look at options for new “Obamacare orphans,” who’ve been displaced by the law’s ongoing turbulence and disruptions.  Yet again, Americans are discovering that contra the president, they can’t necessarily keep their plan.  CBS tells this group to get ready to open their wallets:Prepare to incur out-of-pocket health care costs. They are rising for just about everybody. If you find out from your doctor you’ll need to be going out of network to continue care, try to estimate how much more that will cost you in terms of higher premiums for a flexible plan and higher co-pays. Also, take a look at the medicines you take. Will those still be covered by your limited choice of plans? If not, how much will you be paying for prescriptions? Finally, with fewer choices you may need to move to a higher deductible plan, again costing you more out-of-pocket.Budgeting now for these costs can help make the coming year’s health care costs less of a surprise.The “Affordable” Care Act, ladies and gentlemen.  I’ll leave you with another piece of negative Obamacare news from yet another health insurance titan, followed by a political observation that could have an impact on how some races turn out this fall — particularly with some of the finalized rate hikes scheduled to be rolled out just before the election:One of the country’s largest insurance companies is now expected to lose money this year after emerging as one of the few insurers that made money on Obamacare’s exchange business early on. Anthem, one of the country’s five largest insurers, was projected to be successful in its business on Obamacare exchanges earlier this year. But last week, the company announced it’s expecting to see “mid-single-digit” losses on coverage sold on Obamacare’s exchanges. Joseph Swedish, Anthem’s CEO, told investors on a conference call it experienced higher medical costs than originally anticipated and would be looking to raise premiums substantially to make up for the losses…Swedish also said Anthem is going to be making “accurate business decisions going into 2017 and beyond regarding our continued engagement on a broad scale in the public exchange space.” Anthem’s participation outweighed that of other large insurers selling on Obamacare’s exchanges. With 923,000 exchange enrollees, the company sold coverage in 14 states.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/08/29/obamacare-another-major-insurer-in-the-red-consumers-face-fewer-choices-n2211285Posted 29th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  43. AUG28Obama Lied About Care enrollment to be less than half of what was expected











    In 2013, the Congressional Budget Office predicted that in 2016, 24 million Americans would sign up for health insurance on the exchanges.
    As it turns out, the actual number is closer to 11 million, signalling that those insusrance companies who remain servicing the exchanges are going to continue to lose money.Washington Post:“Enrollment is key, first and foremost,” said Sara R. Collins, a vice president at the Commonwealth Fund, a nonpartisan foundation that funds health-care research. “They have to have this critical mass of people so that, by the law of averages, you’re going to get a mix of healthy and less healthy people.”
    A big reason the CBO projections were so far off is that the agency overestimated how many people would lose insurance through their employers, which would force them into the exchanges. But there have been challenges getting the uninsured to sign up, too.
    The law requires every American to get health coverage or pay a penalty, but the penalty hasn’t been high enough to persuade many Americans to buy into the health plans. Even those who qualify for subsidized premiums sometimes balk at the high deductibles on some plans. 
    And people who do outreach to the uninsured say the enrollment process itself has been more complex and confusing than Obama’s initial comparison to buying a plane ticket.
    “This exchange will allow you to one-stop shop for a health-care plan, compare benefits and prices, and choose a plan that’s best for you and your family,” Obama said in a speech in 2009. “You will have your choice of a number of plans that offer a few different packages, but every plan would offer an affordable, basic package.”
    In some markets, a shortfall in enrollment is testing insurers’ ability to balance the medical claims they pay out with income from premiums. In an announcement curtailing its involvement in the exchanges this month, Aetna cited financial losses traced to too many sick people signing up for care and not enough healthy ones.
    The health-care law has been a political lightning rod from the beginning, and Republican legislators have used insurance companies’ withdrawals from the exchanges to reignite calls for the law’s repeal.Yeah…we told ya so.
    But this attitude is cold comfort to those whose premiums are skyrocketing – up to 67% in some places – or who will eventually not have any insurance options at all. 
    Obamacare advocates continue to insist the law is a success because so many Americans are being covered that weren’t covered before. But at least 11 million of those people newly covered have taken advantage of Medicaid expansion – a dubious means of measuring “success” when the program is already broken and on an unsustainable path.
    The only question now is will Obamacare’s meltdown lead to chaos in the insurance industry, or can it be managed to mitigate at least some of the adverse consequences.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/08/obamacare_enrollment_to_be_less_than_half_of_what_was_expected.html#ixzz4Ifttb5pP
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on FacebookPosted 28th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  44. AUG25Obama Lied About Care Collapsing: All Insurers Preparing to Exit the Market in Arizona, Social Justice Warrior Are Dumbass. 


    So far this year, many Obamacare insurers have pulled out of the unconstitutional and lawless Affordable Care Act that bears the nickname of the usurper-in-chief. Now, all the Obamacare insurers in one Arizona County are poised to pull out of Obamacare. This would make Pinal County the first county in the nation to lose health coverage tied to Obamacare.
    12 News reports:

    Pinal County could become the first county in the United States to lose Affordable Care Act coverage after Aetna’s announcement that it’s pulling out of Arizona.

    Aetna’s withdrawal follows the exit of United Healthcare and Humana from Arizona. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona and Health Net announced in June they would end coverage in Maricopa and Pinal counties.

    The mass exit by the health insurers, all citing financial losses, will force tens of thousands of Arizonans to look for new coverage next year from a dwindling pool of providers. Several rural counties have just one health insurance option on the Obamacare marketplace next year.

    Statewide, 200,000 people are insured under Obamacare, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. About 126,000 Maricopa County residents are insured; 9,700 people in Pinal County are covered.

    usiness Insider adds:
    Pinal County, Arizona, right next to Phoenix, was founded in 1875 and is home to roughly 400,000 people.
    It’s also the county that Obamacare forgot.

    After Aetna’s announcement that it will roll back 70% of its offerings in public exchanges, Pinal County appears to be the only county in the US with a public exchange but zero insurers offering Affordable Care Act plans in 2017.
    Many other insurers have already pulled out of Obamacare because it is unprofitable for them.
    For instance, The Washington Free Beacon reported on August 17, “Participation by insurers in the Obamacare exchanges has already declined by 27 percent since the law took effect. In 2013, just before Obamacare took effect, 395 insurers offered individual market coverage. In 2016, that number dropped to 287, according to an analysis by Ed Haislmaier, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.”
    “Haislmaier projects that next year there will be roughly 45 fewer insurers participating in the Obamacare exchanges, a 15 percent decline from the previous year,” the reported added. “Haislmaier, who tracks the numbers daily, says the picture will become more clear when insurance arrangements are solidified around the end of October.”
    In the meantime, the fraudulent “Affordable Care Act” is becoming less and less affordable for Americans. From taxes imposed illegally by the pretended legislation for those who don’t have health insurance to the skyrocketing of health insurance premiums, there is no doubt that Obamacare does not need to be repealed and replaced, just simply repealed.

    Reposted with Permission from Freedom Outpost.Posted 25th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  45. AUG24Five States Suing Over Obama Lied About Care Rules About Gender Dysphoria


    It is one thing to say that a man who identifies as a woman has to be allowed in the woman’s bathroom. It is a whole other thing to say that he should be given a hysterectomy. But this is exactly what the Affordable Care Act states that a doctor must do.Because of such silliness, Five states have just filed suit.Christian News reportsFive states have filed a legal challenge against the Obama administration over its recently-released healthcare rules, which some believe might be used to force doctors to perform sex change operations or other services that may violate their conscience.Texas, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Nebraska and Kansas are all a part of the suit, as well as the Christian Medical and Dental Association and the Roman Catholic FranciscanThis is not that the medical personnels are against the transgender, it is that they are for their consciences. They believe what they would be forced to do is wrong and unhealthy. It is not a political statement but a healthy issue.Christian News continuesThe department provide the examples that “a covered entity may not deny, based on an individual’s identification as a transgender male, treatment for ovarian cancer where the treatment is medically indicated” and if “an issuer or state Medicaid agency denies a claim for coverage for a hysterectomy that a patient’s provider says is medically necessary to treat gender dysphoria,” the case will be investigated.The site Modern Healthcare also outlines that the rules could require that hospitals provide sex change operations and other treatments related to switching one’s gender identity.So the question that we must ask is whether or not this is indicative of a free society? Can we be free while forcing doctors and hospitals to provide services that are needed because of the patient’s delusions?Unfortunately, in this upside down world, they probably will say that it is.Posted 24th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  46. AUG24Burn After Reading: Obamacare Website Scrubs Any Reference On How To Keep Your Doctor?

    It was the biggest lie of the year: if you like your health care plan, you can keep it. It was one of the main selling points of the president’s health care overhaul, besides that the new law would cut costs. It hasn’t. To make things more intriguing, healthcare.gov has scrubbed references to the promise on their website, including whole sections on how you could keep your doctor under the Obamacare regime. Jeryl Bier of The Weekly Standard had more:The original website contained a section entitled “Can I keep my own doctor?“, later revised to “How to keep your doctor.” A version of the website as of last October can be seen here:Just before open enrollment began last year, however, this section was dropped. Now the same link takes users to a section entitled “How to pick a health insurance plan.” (The internet address that contains the words “keep-your-doctor” redirects to an address ending with “plan-types.”)The closest the website comes to mentioning the president’s “keep your doctor” commitment is, “To be certain your doctor is included in your plan’s network, contact the plan or provider for the most up-to-date information.”It may be appropriate to tweak some aspects of the site, given that the entire law is on the verge of total collapse. The notion whether the law was meant to collapse on itself to pave way for single-payer health care has been a subject of debate among conservatives since the law was passed. Americans have been opting to remain uninsured and pay the penalty since it’s more economical for them. The premiums for almost every plan, including the low-cost plans, have shot through the roof. So, yeah, I guess how I can see why the Obama’s speechwriters shared a nice laugh about the “you can keep it” promise. Disgusting.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/08/24/burn-after-reading-obamacare-website-scrubs-any-reference-on-how-to-keep-your-doctor-n2209538Posted 24th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  47. AUG11Obama Lied About Care Crashing: Insurers Seek Massive Rate Hikes . . . Obama Lied About Care Chickens Come Home To Roost. It’s enough to scare Jeremiah Wright.
















    Remember when everyone watching ObamaCare was focused on how many people had signed up? First they needed 7 million, then 11 million, and on it went as new targets replaced the old. These weren’t meaningless – at least it didn’t appear that way. The targets represented the critical mass the Obama Administration itself said the program needed to be economically sustainable. Insurance, they told us, is about risk pools. If you’ve got enough people in the risk pool, you’d have enough premiums being paid in to cover those who were sick.Well, they got their numbers, although it wasn’t easy. There are now more than 20 million people signed up for ObamaCare. So it must be a financial boon for the insurers participating in the exchanges, yes? After all, the insurers supported ObamaCare on the theory that the participation mandate would net them lots of new customers.
    As a result, companies are scrambling to find ways to cut their losses and stop the fiscal bleeding. A few say they’ll be forced to pass on costs to customers.Already, rates on the exchanges are skyrocketing. From 2013 to 2016, almost every state has seen an increase in monthly premiums. In Michigan they are expected to jump 17.3 percent this year. In Virginia, the average premium increase could hit 37.1 percent, Bryan Rotella, attorney and founder of the Rotella Legal Group, warns.“In fact, two of three federal programs to manage this exact risk are due to expire in 2017,” Rotella wrote in anopinion piecefor The Hill. “Without these programs to fall back on, many insurance companies likely will need to jack up their premiums even higher or bail out of the exchanges all together.”Blue Cross reported losing hundreds of millions of dollars on its exchange plans across the country. In Tennessee, it took a $300 million hit; in North Carolina, $280 million and in Arizona, $135 million.In California, the company is expected to raise rates 19.9 percent—more than triple the average annual increase.All this comes from an excellent report by Barnini Chakrabortyat Fox News.
    ObamaCare chickens come home to roost. It’s enough to scare Jeremiah WrightAnyone who is surprised by these developments has to be so ignorant about the nature of health, markets and economic incentives that they have no business ever being allowed to vote on a law concerning such things. And yet they – 100 percent of them Democrats – did just that.First of all, when you offer a product at a reduced or subsidized rate that people can already buy for market rates, who is going to buy the product? Poor people who have previously not had any coverage. A disproportionate number of these people are going to have health issues. So far from a nice big risk pool with lots of healthy people to pay in and cover the costs of the sick, you’ve got a big pool of sick people, most of whom are going to use health care services at a cost greater than what they’re paying in.That’s a guaranteed economic disaster.Second, risk pools don’t really work in health insurance the way they work with other forms of insurance, because it’s not really about risk. When you get home insurance, auto insurance or renters’ insurance, you’re insuring against the risk of something terrible happening. Your house burns down. A tree falls on it. You get in a collision. You pay the premium and hope you will never file a claim. And most people never do file a claim.In health insurance, just about everyone files claims because everyone seeks out the service. With ObamaCare mandating that insurers make routine office visits free (meaning they pay instead of the patient paying), the risk pool theory goes out the window because there are no premium-payers who pay in but don’t take out, which is what makes real risk pools work.If your only goal is to give poor people access to health care, then sure, ObamaCare did that. But if you want to do so with a model that’s economically sustainable, ObamaCare is a disaster. In order to get the law passed, the Democrats mandated absurdly low premiums and required insurers to get HHS approval if they ever wanted an increase. Then they put the taxpayers on the hook to subsidize premiums that individuals couldn’t afford.Now the insurers are losing money and the taxpayers are going to have to shell out even more. Oh, and remember how Obama claimed that this would all work because of his vaunted “marketplace”? This is a classic example of a guy who doesn’t even really believe in free market economics nevertheless trying to hawk a bastardized version of it – and getting a fiasco for his trouble. The mere fact that you have competition doesn’t mean an entire industry will prosper if forced to do so under rules that defy all economic logic. The insurers tried competing on price, and now they’re all losing money because ObamaCare forced them to provide a service in a way that makes no economic sense.Those who can afford not to sign up for ObamaCare are not signing up because the plans are not attractive. They limit your choice of doctors and they exercise far too much control over what kind of care you can get and under what circumstances. People don’t want that, nor should they. They want to make their own choices in consultation with their doctors, without a third party getting a vote on what can happen because the third party is paying the bills – and certainly not with the government getting any say whatsoever.The Trump campaign must find a way to make this a campaign issue, and to overcome the media’s determination to sweep it under the rug. The media are going to do their best to ignore this story until after the election because they know it won’t help Hillary if Americans realize just how bad things have gotten with ObamaCare. She won’t favor any solution unless it puts the federal government in complete control of everyone’s health care, and her media servants don’t want to force her to defend that position.It’s very difficult for any Republican presidential candidate to get traction on an issue when the media are determined to keep that issue out of the spotlight, but Trump has to find a way – and that has to involve more than just getting the attention of conservative news sites like this one. That won’t influence enough of the independents who swing elections. I understand how difficult this is going to be. Trump could talk about the problems with ObamaCare all day every day, and eventually he’s going to say something that provides fodder for a media hubbub of irrelevance. He’ll accidentally say “titties” when he means to say cities, or he’ll mention the Second Amendment and give the media an opportunity to pretend he wants Hillary assassinated.He cannot force them to cover this issue no matter how much he tries, so he has to somehow go over their heads to the public and get them the truth about the disaster that is ObamaCare. If he doesn’t, Hillary gets elected and this never gets fixed. And if you think America’s in bad shape now – with $19 trillion in debt and more than $100 trillion in unfunded entitlement obligations – wait until you see what happens when the ObamaCare chickens come home to roost. It’s enough to scare Jeremiah Wright.http://canadafreepress.com/article/obamacare-crashing-insurers-seek-massive-rate-hikes-.-.-.-if-theyre-staying?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=104d1b33be-CFP+Daily+Mailout&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-104d1b33be-297703129&mc_cid=104d1b33be&mc_eid=5f77ccf796Posted 11th August 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  48. JUL1Obama Lied About Care Enrollment Drops by 1.6 Million Customers      Obamacare enrollment declined by 1.6 million customers between the end of open enrollment in January through March, according to new data released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).CMS’ Obamacare “Snapshot” reveals that enrollment in President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare program dropped to 11.1 million consumers, down from the 12.7 million who signed up prior to the January 31 deadline.

    The drop in enrollment represents a nearly 13 percent decline in the number of people paying their premiums and maintaining an active policy as of March 31.

    Despite the drop-off, CMS stresses that the program remains strong, as the retention rate is between the anticipated 80-90 percent window. The agency also pointed to an increase of a million new customers compared to March of last year.

    “This increased level of enrollment demonstrates the strength of the Marketplace over time, as millions of Americans continue to have access to quality and affordable coverage when they need it,” Kevin Counihan, CEO of the Health Insurance Marketplace said in a statement. “As of early this year, 20 million Americans had coverage thanks to provisions of the Affordable Care Act, and the Health Insurance Marketplace is an important contributor to that progress.”

    Of the remaining 11.1 million users, 9.4 million or about 85 percent were receiving subsidies averaging $291 a month to help pay their premiums.

    Also over that three-month timeframe, another 17,000 Obamacare customers with what CMS terms “unresolved citizenship or immigration status data matching issues” were terminated and some 73,000 households with “unresolved annual household income data matching issues” had their subsidies adjusted.

    “Compared to the first quarter of last year, this represents an 85 percent decrease in the number of consumers whose coverage ended because of an unresolved citizenship or immigration data matching issue, and a 69 percent decrease in households with income data matching issues who had their advanced payment of the premium tax credit and/or their cost sharing reduction adjusted,” CMS noted in it’s snapshot report.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/01/obamacare-enrollment-drops-1-6-million/Posted 1st July 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  49. JUN29Posted 29th June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  50. JUN24It’s Working: Blue Cross Exits Obam Lied About Care Market

     the nation’s largest insurer announced its departure from a few Obamacare state exchanges last year, the law’s defenders pooh-poohed the development as a blip on the radar. Then the health insurance giant pulled out of almost all markets, forcing apologists to insist that all was well because UnitedHealth’s overall Obamacare marketshare was relatively small. Next, the company said it was closing up shop within Covered California, the massive exchange in America’s largest state. And now we get word that another enormous insurer is edging away from participation in the law — withdrawing not just from Minnesota’s Obamacare exchange, but from the state’s entire individual-based market: FollowSarah Kliff ✔@sarahkliffThis is a big deal – first Blue Cross plan to leave an Obamacare marketplace. http://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/06/24/blue-cross-blue-shield-individual-insurance-market …7:25 AM – 24 Jun 2016Blue Cross delivers major blow to health reform in MinnesotaBlue Cross and Blue Shield says the change will affect about, “103,000 Minnesotans [who] have purchased Blue Cross coverage on their own, through an agent or broker, or on MNsure.”mprnews.orgMany Minnesotans will once again feel the sting of President Obama’s dishonest “keep your plan” pledge, as the predictable consequences of his signature “accomplishment” are driving offerings out of existence:Minnesota’s largest health insurer, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota has decided to stop selling health plans to individuals and families in Minnesota starting next year. The insurer explained extraordinary financial losses drove the decision. “Based on current medical claim trends, Blue Cross is projecting a total loss of more than $500 million in the individual [health plan] segment over three years,” BCBSM said in a statement. The Blues reported a loss of $265 million on insurance operations from individual market plans in 2015. The insurer said claims for medical care far exceeded premium revenue for those plans. “The individual market remains in transition and we look forward to working toward a more stable path with policy leaders here in Minnesota and at the national level,” the company stated. “Shifts and changes in health plan participation and market segments have contributed to a volatile individual market, where costs and prices have been escalating at unprecedented levels.” The decision will have far-reaching implications. Blue Cross and Blue Shield says the change will affect about, “103,000 Minnesotans [who] have purchased Blue Cross coverage on their own, through an agent or broker, or on MNsure.”Risk pools have been sicker and older than expected, driving up expenses for insurers and resulting in losses.  A major Blue Cross Blue Shield study released this year determined that the cost of insuring new Obamacare enrollees is 22 percent higherthan it is for consumers in the employer-based market. This law is failing across the board: On spiraling premiums, on out-of-pocket costs, on enrollment figures, on economic impact, and on cost curves.  It’s hurting real, hardworking people and harming more Americans than it’s helping, which is why it remains unpopular with voters.  Hillary Clinton, who effectively designed the scheme, believes it’s working.  Republicans do not, which is why they’ve voted to repeal Obamacare on numerous occasions (with some successes), finally getting a full repeal bill to the president’s desk this year.  Even though various individual members and coalitions have put forward specific and detailed replacement plans, one of the fair knocks on the GOP is that they’ve never offered a unified Obamacare alternative proposal.  That changed this week, as House Speaker Paul Ryan unveiled a 20,000-word plan that repeals virtually all of the law, while maintaining popular provisions like the ’26-year-old’ rule, and working to ensure that people with pre-existing conditions are able to obtain coverage.  Ramesh Ponnuru analyzes the particulars and writes that if Republicans eventually find themselves in a position to legislatively implement the plan, Obamacare will have set the table for its own replacement:In the past Republicans have argued about how to reform tax policy on health care: Should employer-provided coverage remain untaxed, or should this tax break end? Should people without access to such coverage get a tax credit or a tax deduction? The House plan lets the tax break stay — avoiding the political disaster that a less compromising free-market plan would have courted — but trims it for the most expensive plans. And it offers those without employer coverage a tax credit.Republicans would not have resolved the issue that way without Obamacare. Offering a tax credit, instead of a deduction, would enable many more low-income people to buy coverage, but by the same token it eats up more of the budget. In the aftermath of Obamacare, though,Republicans realize that they need to minimize the number of people who lose coverage under a replacement.A thorny issue for any health-care plan other than single-payer is how to handle people with pre-existing conditions. Obamacare’s approach is to prohibit insurers from considering these conditions. But that prohibition means people can wait until they get sick to buy insurance, threatening the viability of insurance markets. The Affordable Care Act attempted to solve that problem by requiring healthy people to buy insurance. The Republicans take a different approach. They too would keep insurers from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions — so long as those people had maintained continuous coverage. That regulation creates the opposite incentive from Obamacare’s total prohibition: Healthy people have a reason to buy insurance, so no further action needs to be taken to get them to do it…People who had not maintained continuous coverage, who do not have an employer plan and who cannot buy private coverage would be covered by subsidized high-risk pools.Ponnuru concludes: “These ideas have no immediate prospect of becoming law. They look about as unlikely to carry the day as the ideas behind Obamacare did six years before it was enacted. The House plan makes it much more likely, though, that Republicans will be ready to act should they ever attain unified control of the government. And if that day comes, Obamacare will have paved the way for its own replacement.”  Here’s Ryan laying out broad strokes at AEI, followed by a panel discussion among the four committee chairmen who crafted the new blueprint:The Speaker made reference to the essential importance Medicare reform in his remarks, which he has championed for years. I’ll leave you with a reminder of why that challenge is so pressing. In short, if we do nothing, “Medicare as we know it” is on a rapid path to insolvency — as entitlement spending remains by far the largest driverof our long-term debt crisis: FollowModern Healthcare ✔@modrnhealthcrMedicare will be insolvent by 2028, two years earlier than previous estimates: http://bit.ly/28Xbz6u 9:50 AM – 22 Jun 2016Medicare will be insolvent by 2028, two years earlier than previous estimatesThe Medicare trust fund will be insolvent by 2028, according to the 2016 Medicare trustees’ report released Wednesday.modernhealthcare.com
    The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates Medicare’s insolvency date will arrive two years earlier, in 2026.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/06/24/its-working-blue-cross-plan-exits-obamacare-gop-rolls-out-replacement-proposal-n2183088Posted 24th June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  51. JUN10It’s Working: Health Insurer Once Touted by Obama Proposes 40 Percent Premium Hike, Did Some One Tell Us All About Saving $2500.00 A Year Who Say That? ?




    Now that Barack Obama has formally backed Hillary Clinton for president, let’s check in on how his signature domestic “accomplishment” is working for the American people — bearing in mind that the policy was originally her brainchild. She agrees with Obama that the law is working, even as she struggles to adequately explain its obvious failures. Speaking of which, here’s the lede from a fresh New York Times story entitled, “why do health costs keep rising? These people know:”
    The Geisinger Health Plan, run by one of the nation’s top-rated health care organizations, foresees medical costs increasing next year by 7.5 percent for people buying insurance under the Affordable Care Act. So when Geisinger requested a rate increase of 40 percent for 2017, consumer advocates were amazed. And Kurt J. Wrobel, Geisinger’s chief actuary, found himself, along with other members of his profession, in the middle of the health care wars still raging in this political year…“Our rates for Medicare, Medicaid and employer-sponsored insurance have been relatively stable, but those products have to bear the cost of our losses on exchange business,” Mr. Wrobel said. Last October the Pennsylvania Insurance Department, headed by a former Obama administration official, approved a 20 percent increase in Geisinger’s rates, about half of what the company had requested. “But based on experience,” Mr. Wrobel said, “the 2016 premium rate is too low, so we want to correct it in 2017.”http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/06/10/its-working-insurer-touted-by-obama-proposes-40-percent-premium-hike-n2176216Posted 10th June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  52. JUN10Study: Obama Lied About Care Is Keeping Hundreds of Thousands Of Workers In Part-Time Limbo




    Remember when Hillary Clinton said thatObamacare incentivizes part-time employment, and that this needed to be changed? I do. It was in Iowa City On December 16, 2015. In short, someone might say that’s a tacit acknowledgment that President Obama’s new health care law is bad for workers.

    QUESTIONER: “Hi, I just want to know why there is discrimination against the part-time workers when so many companies are going to part-time when it comes to FMLA [Family and Medical Leave Act]?”HILLARY CLINTON: “Well, that’s why they are going to part-time. That, and also, the Affordable Care Act. You know, we got to change that because we have built in some unfortunate incentives that discourage full-time employment. A lot of employers believe if you don’t work 40-hours a week you don’t get benefits and that includes; you don’t get health care benefits; that might include you’re not eligible for the family medical leave; you’re not eligible for paid sick days. So, there is a disincentive in our system that we need to deal with and I really worry about it because there is trend to try and move more and more people into part-time work; and how many of you are part-time workers? And sometimes you want to work part-time, it fits into your family, it fits into your life obligations but sometimes you want to work full-time but you can’t get a full-time job. So, I want to look at all the employment rules.Now, a Goldman Sachs survey said that hundreds of thousands of workers have been forced into part-time work or had their hours cut (via Washington Examiner):Obamacare is forcing hundreds of thousands of people into part-time work, according to a new analysis from the bank Goldman Sachs.In a research note sent out Wednesday, bank economist Alec Phillips concluded that “the evidence suggests that the [Affordable Care Act] has at least modestly elevated involuntary part-time employment.” He wrote that a “few hundred thousand” workers may have had their hours cut or been forced to take part-time jobs because of the law.[…]Obamacare is thought to incentivize part-time work through several means. One is that employers with more than 50 full-time workers face penalties if they do not provide health insurance coverage, giving them a reason to cut hours or avoid hiring new workers if they are near the 50 employee level.[…]As a share of the total 6.4 million people forced into part-time work, a few hundred thousand is not that many, Phillips noted. But that number could help explain why involuntary part-time work is still as elevated as it is this late in the jobs recovery.May was the worst jobs report we’ve had in five years. Concerning Obamacare, itremains unpopular, Americans are opting to pay the penalty to remain uninsured because it is cheaper, health care providers are leaving markets due to the massive losses they’ve accrued, and the last remaining exchanges are hanging by a thread.Sounds like it’s working, right? I’m kidding of course.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/06/10/study-obamacare-is-keeping-hundreds-of-thousands-of-workers-in-parttime-limbo-n2176413Posted 10th June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  53. JUN2Posted 2nd June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  54. JUN2Posted 2nd June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  55. JUN2Posted 2nd June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  56. JUN2Largest Texas Insurer Wants To Raise Obama Lied About Care Premiums By 60%



    Remember those good old days when the Democrats were working to shove Obamacare down our throats? Americans were promised the government takeover of healthcare would translate into big cost reductions for individuals, families and businesses. President Obama said the “typical” family would see a yearly $2500 savings in their health costs. Perhaps Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas never heard Obama’s promise because the largest health insurer in Texas wants to raise its rates on individual policies by almost 60 percent.Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas has about 603,000 individual policyholders and, unlike other insurers in the state, offers coverage in every county. In a recent filing with federal regulators, a summary of which is available on HealthCare.gov, the company said it is seeking increases averaging from 57.3 percent to 59.4 percent across its individual market plans.The problem is that insurance companies are losing money hand over foot on the Obamacare plans due to lower enrollment than expected, and an older, sicker customer base. Some big insurance companies have left, or are threatening to leave because they are losing too much money.Roughly half of the state exchange marketplaces created to sell the Obamacare-compliant insurance plans have gone bankrupt.Consulting firm Avalere Health found that the lowest cost “silver” plan (the most popular option in the law’s insurance marketplaces) increased 13 percent in 2016. That doesn’t seem like bending the cost curve downward. And guess who’s paying for the cost increases? According to one report, “More than 80 percent of exchange customers qualify for subsidies, so they don’t bear the full cost of the premium increases.”  They might not bear the full cost, but the rest of America does, as the cash for the subsidies come from the pockets of the taxpayers.And 2017 looks like it’s going to be worse. Along with the Texas increase described above,North Carolina’s largest insurer said it will seek an average increase of 18.8 percent. On the bright side thats less than 60 percent. WellPoint (now Anthem) it is currently seeking premium hikes from nearly 20-41 percent in Indiana for coverage under the health care law.The “party line” from the adminstration is the concerns about 2017 premiums are premature and overblown.In a statement, the Health and Human Services Department said the Texas rate request is just the beginning of a process. Consumers in Texas and other states will have lower-premium options when sign-up season begins Nov. 1. If they don’t like what their current insurer is charging for 2017, they can switch.“Consumers will have the final word when they vote with their feet during open enrollment,” said the statement.http://constitution.com/everythings-bigger-texas-including-healthcare-provider-increasing-premiums-60-percent/Posted 2nd June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  57. JUN2Obama Lied About Care IS Coming After Your Craft Beer 



    Listen up Bernie Sanders supporting hipsters: Obamacare is coming for your craft beer.
    According to the Brewer’s Association, craft brewing contributed $55.7 billion to the U.S. economy and provided more than 440,000 jobs in 2014, a significant impact in a still sluggish economy. 
    Small and independent American craft brewers contributed $55.7 billion to the U.S. economy in 2014. The figure is derived from the total impact of beer brewed by craft brewers as it moves through the three-tier system (breweries, wholesalers and retailers), as well as all non-beer products like food and merchandise that brewpub restaurants and brewery taprooms sell.

    But a regulation buried in Obamacare could change craft brewing and not for the better. From Americans For Tax Reform:
    Amidst Obamacare’s 3,000 pages lies a regulation that may squeeze craft beer brewers out of business. Why would federal healthcare bureaucrats want to meddle in this thriving industry? Well, regulators claim that American consumers are not healthy because they are blissfully unaware of the amount of calories in beer.As of December 2016, Obamacare dictates that all brewers must include a detailed calorie count on every type of beer they produce. Failure to comply with the new regulations means craft brewers will not be able to sell their beer in any restaurant chain with over 20 locations. Because this is a major market for selling beer, it hamstrings smaller craft brewers if they do not comply.The Cato Institute estimates the Obamacare calorie labeling requirements will cost a business as much as $77,000 to implement. For larger beer companies, this is a drop in the bucket, but for small, local craft brewers it represents a substantial cost that they must pay. As a result, it creates a significant disadvantage compared to larger beer companies who can better absorb the cost of this new regulation.
    Obamacare: ruining healthcare, creativity and fun one niche industry at a time.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/05/31/obamacare-is-coming-after-your-beer-n2171764
    Posted 2nd June 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  58. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  59. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  60. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  61. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  62. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  63. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  64. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  65. MAY28Obama Lie’s About Care, He Dose Not Care!Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  66. MAY28Another Obama Lied About Care Co-Op Down — Ohio Non-Profit Insurer Goes Under 



    InHealth Mutual announced Thursday its 21,800 members members have 60 days to find new insurance through the federal marketplace, Columbus Business First reported.
    The co-op will be liquidated by the State Department of Insurance.

    “Our examination of the company’s financials made it clear that the company’s losses would prevent it from paying future claims should its operations continue,” Lt. Gov. Mary Taylor said in a statement provided to The Hill.



    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokesman Aaron Albright assured they are working to make certain everyone stays covered.

    Twelve of the insurers created under the Affordable Care Act failed in 2015 and another seven of the remaining co-ops are expected to fail within the year.

    The initial 23 co-ops, created to increase competition in the marketplace, received $2.5 billion in federal loans in 2010. Most of the $1.2 billion provided to the failed co-ops isn’t expected to be paid back.
    http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/27/another-obamacare-co-op-down-ohio-non-profit-insurer-goes-under/Posted 28th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  67. MAY17The Cost of Obama Lied About Care: Wrecking The Private Health Insurance Market


    Obamacare has caused health insurance premiums to skyrocket. It has caused millions of Americans who liked their health plans to lose their health plans. It has caused doctor and hospital networks to narrow. Now the Wall Street Journal reports that the Obamacare exchanges in Alabama and Alaska will each have one—that’s right, one—insurer offering plans. We’re moving toward “single insurer” health care.http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/05/17/cost-obamacare-wrecking-private-health-insurance-marketPosted 17th May 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  68. APR21Posted 21st April 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  69. APR21Posted 21st April 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  70. APR21Posted 21st April 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  71. APR21Abandon Ship: UnitedHealth To Exit ‘Unsustainable’ Obama Lied About Care Exchanges In 34 States 




    UnitedHealth Group, America’s largest health insurer, announced today that it would be abandoning Obamacare’s insurance exchanges, after absorbing hundreds of millions in losses. While the exchanges can continue to function without United, United’s departure could represent the “canary in the coal mine”: a signal that other insurers will not be able to remain in these highly unstable markets.
    White House improvisations destabilized the market

    UnitedHealth made waves last November when it reported massive losses in its Obamacare-based business. “We cannot sustain these losses,” said United CEO Stephen Hemsley on a conference call with investors. “We can’t really subsidize a marketplace that doesn’t appear at the moment to be sustaining itself.”

    Because Obamacare’s individual mandate is so weak, and because the Obama administration created various loopholes to juice enrollment numbers, people who sign up for exchange-based coverage have had the ability to come in and out of the system whenever they need someone to pay for their health care. “We have identified higher levels of individuals coming in and out of the exchange system to use medical services,” said Hemsley. “Our own emerging claims experience…is worsening as the year end nears.”

    United CFO Dan Schumacher added that “over 20 percent of our enrollment base were folks that had joined us after enrollment,” increasing to 30 percent, and that these late enrollees were consuming 20 percent more health care than usual enrollees. In theory, there shouldn’t be many late enrollees; but again, the White House allowed them in order to be able to claim that Obamacare was helping more people. Those late enrollees were often people who declined to pay premiums until they needed to go to the doctor.

    Things got even worse over the last five months
    In January, United stated that it estimated that it lost $1 billion on the exchanges over the last two plan years: $475 million in 2015, and $525 million in 2016. Today, United increased its estimated 2016 losses by another $125 million, or $650 million total for the 2016 plan year. United was forced to increase its “premium deficiency reserve,” or PDR, to take its Obamacare-based losses into account.

    Needless to say, for things to get even worse—even with the problems well understood—is a red flag. “The smaller overall market size and shorter term, higher risk profile within this market segment continue to suggest we cannot broadly serve it on an effective and sustained basis,” said Hemsley on today’s call. “We will not carry financial exposure from exchanges into 2017.”

    Could non-profit insurers be next?
    What’s remarkable about the United story is that the company was quite prudent about entering the Obamacare exchanges. The company sat out year one of the exchanges—the year of the website crashes—because it wanted to see who would enroll in the exchanges before determining how to price its products.

    United, after all, is accountable to shareholders, and didn’t want to lose money, even for a single quarter. This contrasts favorably with non-profit BlueCross insurers, who dove in headfirst in year one, taking on billions in losses after underpricing their products and being unable to take advantage of taxpayer-financed slush funds designed to cushion early losses.

    In other words: if United is losing money, so are BlueCross plans. United is highly sensitive to losing money, because it’s a for-profit company. But even non-profit BlueCross insurers can’t lose money forever and stay in business.


     president and CEO of UnitedHealth Group, speaks at a news conference, in Southfield, Mich. Hemsley told analysts Tuesday, April 19, 2016, that his company cannot continue to broadly serve the market created by the Affordable Care Act’s coverage expansion due in part to the higher risk that comes with its customers. UnitedHealth will remain in public health insurance exchanges in only a handful of states next year after expanding to 34 for 2016. (AP Photo/File)UnitedHealth Group, America’s largest health insurer, announced today that it would be abandoning Obamacare’s insurance exchanges, after absorbing hundreds of millions in losses. While the exchanges can continue to function without United, United’s departure could represent the “canary in the coal mine”: a signal that other insurers will not be able to remain in these highly unstable markets.
    White House improvisations destabilized the market

    UnitedHealth made waves last November when it reported massive losses in its Obamacare-based business. “We cannot sustain these losses,” said United CEO Stephen Hemsley on a conference call with investors. “We can’t really subsidize a marketplace that doesn’t appear at the moment to be sustaining itself.”

    Because Obamacare’s individual mandate is so weak, and because the Obama administration created various loopholes to juice enrollment numbers, people who sign up for exchange-based coverage have had the ability to come in and out of the system whenever they need someone to pay for their health care. “We have identified higher levels of individuals coming in and out of the exchange system to use medical services,” said Hemsley. “Our own emerging claims experience…is worsening as the year end nears.”

    United CFO Dan Schumacher added that “over 20 percent of our enrollment base were folks that had joined us after enrollment,” increasing to 30 percent, and that these late enrollees were consuming 20 percent more health care than usual enrollees. In theory, there shouldn’t be many late enrollees; but again, the White House allowed them in order to be able to claim that Obamacare was helping more people. Those late enrollees were often people who declined to pay premiums until they needed to go to the doctor.

    Things got even worse over the last five months
    In January, United stated that it estimated that it lost $1 billion on the exchanges over the last two plan years: $475 million in 2015, and $525 million in 2016. Today, United increased its estimated 2016 losses by another $125 million, or $650 million total for the 2016 plan year. United was forced to increase its “premium deficiency reserve,” or PDR, to take its Obamacare-based losses into account.

    Needless to say, for things to get even worse—even with the problems well understood—is a red flag. “The smaller overall market size and shorter term, higher risk profile within this market segment continue to suggest we cannot broadly serve it on an effective and sustained basis,” said Hemsley on today’s call. “We will not carry financial exposure from exchanges into 2017.”

    Could non-profit insurers be next?
    What’s remarkable about the United story is that the company was quite prudent about entering the Obamacare exchanges. The company sat out year one of the exchanges—the year of the website crashes—because it wanted to see who would enroll in the exchanges before determining how to price its products.

    United, after all, is accountable to shareholders, and didn’t want to lose money, even for a single quarter. This contrasts favorably with non-profit BlueCross insurers, who dove in headfirst in year one, taking on billions in losses after underpricing their products and being unable to take advantage of taxpayer-financed slush funds designed to cushion early losses.

    In other words: if United is losing money, so are BlueCross plans. United is highly sensitive to losing money, because it’s a for-profit company. But even non-profit BlueCross insurers can’t lose money forever and stay in business.


    Things are going to get even tougher in Obamacare’s exchanges as the “three R” program—risk corridors, reinsurance, and risk adjustment—begins to phase out. Premiums will continue to climb, and healthier enrollees will continue to face financial pressure to drop out.

    Obamacare’s exchanges are unlikely to be fixed
    In theory, you could make Obamacare’s exchanges work in one of two ways.
    One, you could make them work like actual markets where people were free to choose the health coverage that’s best for them. But that would involve deregulating them, something that President Obama and Hillary Clinton are ideologically opposed to doing.

    Two, you could stiffen the individual mandate, forcing people to buy costly insurance that they neither want nor need. But such a plan would never get through a Republican-controlled Congress, which would much rather repeal the mandate entirely.

    That stalemate is unlikely to change anytime soon. The most likely outcome is that the insurers who stay on the exchanges will have to jack their premiums even higher, leading to less affordable coverage and more people uninsured.

    Which means that negative headlines for Obamacare’s exchanges will continue for some time.
    Posted 21st April 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  72. APR16Health Law Expert’s Dire Obama Lied About Care Warning: ‘Something Has to Give’
     





    Many health insurance companies are issuing warnings at increasing rates about Obamacare’s financial sustainability in the marketplace after several major companies dropped out of the plans this year.

    Some insurers say that their companies are losing money at alarming rates through the plans instituted under the Affordable Care Act, according to The Hill. Others have begun discussing whether or not they should drop out of the marketplaces altogether.

    “Something has to give,” said Larry Levitt, an expert on the health law at the Kaiser Family Foundation, according to The Hill. “Either insurers will drop out or insurers will raise premiums.”

    These insurers have been expressing their concerns over Obamacare’s pricing, as well as the likelihood that those companies who are losing substantial amounts of revenue may push for substantial premium increases, The Hill reported. Some have even been predicting that a “death spiral” will result if the market begins to collapse, causing increasing concerns for Democrats during a crucial election cycle.

    “The industry is clearly setting the stage for bigger premium increases in 2017,” Levitt continued. “What we’re likely to see is more of a market correction than any kind of death spiral. There are enough people enrolled at this point that the market is sustainable. The premiums were just too low.”
    Concerns continued to rise after UnitedHealth Group Inc., one of the largest health insurers in the U.S., opted out of Obamacare markets in Georgia and Arkansas this month, according to Bloomberg. Both UnitedHealth and Aetna Inc. revealed that they had suffered losses last year due to the ACA’s policies, and Blue Cross and Blue Shield revealed that they had suffered losses in states such as North Carolina that same year.

    “We continue to have serious concerns about the sustainability of the public exchanges,” Mark Bertolini, the CEO of Aetna, had said back in February, according to The Hill.

    But some companies still maintain that these negative early responses to Obamacare were expected and do not indicate that the whole system is doomed to failure.

    “As with any new market, we expect changes and adjustments in the early years with issuers both entering and exiting states,” said Aaron Albright, a spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Bloomberg reported. “The marketplace is a reliable source of coverage for millions of Americans with a robust number of plan choices.”Posted 16th April 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  73. APR8How Obama Lied About Care Just Made Filing Your Taxes Worse
     


    It’s that wonderful time of year again: tax season. Some 150 million American businesses and individuals are expected to file taxes by this month, covering thousands of arcane provisions that determine how much you and your family will pay Uncle Sam and state governments this year.But this filing season is the second in which Americans may have yet another—and bigger—tax bill to worry about: the one forced on us by the Affordable Care Act. It serves as a stark reminder of all the ways this law continues to harm American families and businesses, six years after it was signed.While the Affordable Care Act’s tax increases are many, two are front and center this month: the individual and employer mandates. Both were supposed to increase coverage, but in reality they’re limiting career opportunities and taking more out of families’ and individuals’ wallets.Start with the individual mandate, which is one of the most controversial provisions of the Affordable Care Act—and for good reason.
    This mandate requires every American to be covered by a health insurance policy that complies with the law’s labyrinthine coverage requirements and restrictions. In 2015, for example, annual premiums for “low-cost” bronze plans obtained through the law’s exchanges averaged $2,484 for individuals and $12,420 for families with three or more children. If you don’t think this pricier insurance is worth the cost, or simply can’t afford it, you’ll likely face tax penalties upon filing your return.

    That’s bad news for millions already living paycheck-to-paycheck. The 2015 penalty—which is being assessed now—is $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, or 2% of household income, whichever is greater. The penalty increases in 2016 to $695 per adult and $347.50 per child, or 2.5% of household income, whichever is greater.That is money many families just don’t have. According to December 2015 estimates from the Kaiser Family Foundation, the average household without compliant coverage faces $661 in tax penalties for 2015, rising to $969 for 2016. The penalties are even higher for those not eligible to receive premium subsidies under the law: $1,177 for 2015, rising to $1,450 this year. While some will be exempt, millions of families and individuals will be penalized for not purchasing health insurance they cannot afford.
    That’s a raw deal, especially as the Affordable Care Act has done nothing to lower insurance costs like its supporters claimed. In fact, a new study by my organization using the White House’s own data found premiums for employer-sponsored health plans—a widely-cited benchmark of health insurance costs—have actually risen faster since the law was signed. The only difference is now, families and businesses that can’t afford it will have to pay a tax instead.
    And that’s just the individual mandate. There’s also the employer mandate, which is limiting career opportunities for workers across the country.
    The employer mandate went into effect in 2015, forcing employers with 100 or more full-time employees to provide health insurance to most of their workers, and expanding to those with more than 50 employees beginning this year. Those that cannot afford the costs—which average $12,591 per employee for family coverage—face a tax penalty of either $2,000 or $3,000 per employee after the first 30 employees. So as an example, an employer with 100 full-time employees who can’t afford rising health-care costs could face over $100,000 in tax penalties.
    That’s not an option for many employers struggling through a sluggish economy. For some, staying in business requires reducing the number of employees covered by the mandate. Worse for employees, the law defines “full-time” work at just 30 hours per week. Many employers—including in the public sector—therefore have no choice but to reduce “full-time” positions or cut hours to below 30 per week.
    This isn’t speculation—it’s already happening. A New York Times report documented public school districts that began cutting hours as far back as 2014, while many community colleges and universities have done the same for adjunct faculty. As for the private sector, a 2015 survey by the Society for Human Resource Management found that one-in-five businesses have already reduced or plan to reduce part-time work thanks to the Affordable Care Act, while another 5% have or plan to lay off employees. As the employer mandate expands and its penalties continue to worsen, more workers will find it harder to start their careers.
    Such is the result of a federal health-care law that favors government mandates and restrictions over patient choice and control. While the Affordable Care Act has failed to bend down the cost curve of health insurance, it has increased taxes on families and businesses alike. April 15 has been a dreaded date for decades—and it’s only getting worse.
    http://time.com/4282054/obamacare-taxes/
    Posted 8th April 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  74. MAR2Posted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  75. MAR2Posted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  76. MAR2Another Big Obama Lied About Care Problem, This Time in Obama’s Home StatePosted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  77. MAR2Another Big Obama Lied About Care Problem, This Time in Obama’s Home StatePosted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  78. MAR2Another Big Obama Lied About Care Problem, This Time in Obama’s Home StatePosted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  79. MAR2Another Big Obama Lied About Care Problem, This Time in Obama’s Home StatePosted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  80. MAR2Another Big Obama Lied About Care Problem, This Time in Obama’s Home State
    Posted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  81. MAR2Another Big Obama Lied About Care Problem, This Time in Obama’s Home State
     





    A major Chicago-based health co-op designed to work under Obamacare rules is suffering what’s described as “crippling” losses.

    Land of Lincoln Health, initially heralded by small businesses as an alternative to large insurers, totaled $90.8 million in losses for 2015, Crain’s Business Journal reported. That’s far worse than the $17.7 million lost in 2014.

    Health care co-ops have been collapsing across the country. But a co-op heralded as a model for the industry in President Barack Obama’s home state provides another demonstration of problems with the Affordable Care Act, the president’s signature legislative accomplishment.

    Land of Lincoln was one of 23 co-ops across the country launched after Obamacare was passed and the only one started in Illinois. Twelve of these co-ops closed as of early this year.

    Despite the fate of other Obamacare co-ops across the country, the loss came as a surprise for Land of Lincoln, which at one point had a booming membership of 70,000 members and generated $147.4 million in revenue for 2015.

    Of the nearly $91 million in losses for 2015, $40 million came in just three months of operation, according to information released to financial regulators.

    “Land of Lincoln Health, like other insurers across the market, continues to adjust its business model as we learn how to best adapt to the new marketplace,” Kevin Scanlan, chairman of the insurer’s board of directors, told Crain’s in a statement. “The board is confident in its long-term viability and will continue to evaluate and invest in the needs of our members.”

    In October 2015, the company announced it was capping enrollment, then dropped the University of Chicago Medicine from its network since it is more expensive than other hospitals.

    If the co-op continues losses, the Illinois Department of Insurance has two options. If the co-op stops selling policies, it could pay remaining claims under the department’s supervision. The department could also petition the courts to be the Land of Lincoln’s receiver. This would mean Illinois Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Association, a state nonprofit, would cover the cost of the Land of Lincoln’s members.
    Posted 2nd March 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  82. JAN3The Cost of the Individual Mandate Penalty for the Remaining Uninsured

    The Affordable Care Act (ACA) expands health insurance coverage by offering both penalties and incentives.  Low and middle income households who earn too much to qualify for Medicaid can purchase subsidized coverage on the health insurance marketplaces using premium assistance tax credits.  Individuals who do not obtain coverage, through any source, are subject to a tax penalty unless they meet certain exemptions. The penalties under the so-called individual mandate were phased in over a three-year period starting in 2014 and are scheduled to increase substantially in 2016. A key area of uncertainty for 2016 is how much the increased penalties will encourage uninsured people – particularly those who are healthy – to obtain coverage, boosting enrollment in the marketplaces and improving the insurance risk pool. This analysis provides estimates of the share of uninsured people eligible to enroll in the marketplaces who will be subject to the penalty, and how those penalties are increasing for 2016.How the Individual Mandate WorksPeople are generally required to be covered by a health insurance policy which meets minimum standards or pay a tax penalty.Some individuals are exempt from the penalty, including undocumented immigrants, those whose incomes are so low that they are not required to file taxes, people with incomes below 138% of poverty in the “Medicaid gap” in states that have not expanded eligibility for Medicaid under the ACA, people who have to pay more than 8.13% of household income for insurance (taking into account any employer contributions or subsidies) and certain individuals who have membership in certain groups or face a particular hardship.For those who are uninsured and do not meet one of the exemptions, the penalty for 2016 is calculated as the greater of two amounts:
    1. A flat dollar amount equal to $695 per adult plus $347.50 per child, up to a maximum of $2,085 for the family.
    2. 2.5% of family income in excess of the 2015 income tax filing thresholds ($10,300 for a single person and $20,600 for a family).
    The penalty can be no more than the national average premium for a bronze plan (the minimum coverage available in the individual insurance market under the ACA), which was $2,484 in 2015 for single coverage and $12,420 for a family of three or more children. The penalty is pro-rated for people who are uninsured for a portion of the year and waived for people who have a period without insurance of less than three months.As the table below shows, the penalty amounts have increased substantially since 2014.Table 1: Penalties Under the Individual MandateYearPercent of Income (%)Per Adult Penalty ($)Household Penalty ($)Prior Tax Year Filing Threshold Individual under 65 ($)Prior Tax Year Filing Threshold – Married filing jointly under 65 ($)Affordability Standard (%)201419528510,00020,00082015232597510,15020,3008.0520162.56952,08510,30020,6008.13Estimates of the Actual Penalties People Will FaceTo assess how effective the individual mandate may be in increasing marketplace enrollment, we looked at how penalties are increasing for people who were uninsured in early 2015 and are “marketplace eligible.” This includes non-elderly people eligible for marketplace subsidies as well as those who are not because their incomes are too high, but excludes people who are Medicaid-eligible, in the “Medicaid gap,” or eligible for employer coverage. 1 We estimate that 78% of people who are uninsured and marketplace eligible would be subject to the individual mandate penalty if they remain uninsured in 2016, including 75% of people who are eligible for premium subsidies and 84% of people who are not.Figure 1: Percent of Uninsured Individuals who are Members of Households Subject to Shared Responsibility Payments, 2016Among individuals who were uninsured in early 2015 and eligible to enroll in the marketplace, the average household penalty in 2016 is $969. This is up 47% from the average estimated penalty this year of $661. Those who are eligible for premium subsidies will face an average household penalty of $738 in 2016, while the average household penalty totals $1,450 for uninsured individuals not eligible for any financial assistance.Figure 2: Among Uninsured Individuals, the Average Household Shared Responsibility Penalty, 2015-2016About 7 million uninsured people are eligible for marketplace premium subsidies and are a key target group for increasing marketplace enrollment. Almost half (48%) of them could, in fact, buy a bronze plan for a zero premium contribution or for less than the penalty they would owe for remaining uninsured, including 28% who could buy a bronze plan using their premium subsidy for a zero premium.  In other words, 3.5 million subsidy-eligible uninsured people could either get coverage for free or end up paying less by enrolling in marketplace coverage than by remaining uninsured and paying the individual mandate penalty. However, bronze plans come with high deductibles and low-income enrollees may be better off financially enrolling in silver plans that have higher premiums but are eligible for cost-sharing subsidies.Figure 3: Percent of Uninsured who are Members of Households Where the Shared Responsibility Payment is the Same Amount or Greater than the Cost of a Marketplace Plan, 2016In total, out of almost 11 million uninsured people who are eligible to enroll in marketplace coverage either with or without financial assistance, 7.1 million would pay less for any penalty than they would to buy the least expensive insurance available to them.DiscussionIncreasing enrollment in the ACA’s health insurance marketplaces would help to reduce the number of people uninsured and keep premium increases down as more healthy people sign up. Premium subsidies are an important “carrot” to attract new enrollees. As penalties grow in 2016, the “stick” of the individual mandate may also become an increasingly significant factor in the household decisions about whether to buy insurance.However, the effectiveness of the individual mandate as a tool to increase enrollment will depend on how prominent a place it occupies in outreach messaging. And, emphasizing the mandate to obtain coverage presents challenges for ACA advocates since it is the most unpopular part of the law. At the same time, lack of knowledge about the increasing penalties under the mandate could lead to unpleasant surprises when people file their 2016 taxes in early 2017.Matthew Rae, Cynthia Cox, Gary Claxton, and Larry Levitt are with the Kaiser Family Foundation. Anthony Damico is an independent consultant to the Kaiser Family Foundation.Methods:This analysis uses data from the 2015 Current Population Survey (CPS) Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC). The CPS ASEC provides socioeconomic and demographic information for the United Sates population and specific subpopulations. Importantly, the CPS ASEC provides detailed data on families and households, which we use to determine income for ACA eligibility purposes.The CPS asks respondents about coverage at the time of the interview (for the 2015 CPS, February, March, or April 2015) as well as throughout the preceding calendar year. People who report any type of coverage throughout the preceding calendar year are counted as “insured.” Thus, the calendar year measure of the uninsured population captures people who lacked coverage for the entirety of 2014 (and thus were uninsured at the start of 2015). We use this measure of insurance coverage, rather than the measure of coverage at the time of interview, because the latter lacks detail about coverage type that is used in our model. Based on other survey data, as well as administrative data on ACA enrollment, it is likely that a small number of people included in this analysis gained coverage in 2015.Medicaid and Marketplaces have different rules about household composition and income for eligibility. For this analysis, we calculate household membership and income for both Medicaid and Marketplace premium tax credits for each person individually, using the rules for each program.  For more detail on how we construct Medicaid and Marketplace households and count income, see the detailed technical Appendix A available here.Undocumented immigrants are ineligible for Medicaid and Marketplace coverage. Since CPS data do not directly indicate whether an immigrant is lawfully present, we draw on the methods underlying the 2013 analysis by the State Health Access Data Assistance Center (SHADAC) and the recommendations made by Van Hook et. al.2,3 This approach uses the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) to develop a model that predicts immigration status; it then applies the model to CPS, controlling to state-level estimates of total undocumented population from Department of Homeland Security. For more detail on the immigration imputation used in this analysis, see the technical Appendix B available here.Individuals in tax-filing units with access to an affordable offer of Employer-Sponsored Insurance are still potentially MAGI-eligible for Medicaid coverage, but they are ineligible for advance premium tax credits in the Health Insurance Exchanges. Since CPS data do not directly indicate whether workers have access to ESI, we draw on the methods comparable to our imputation of authorization status and use SIPP to develop a model that predicts offer of ESI, then apply the model to CPS.  For more detail on the offer imputation used in this analysis, see the technical Appendix C available here.The household contribution for a marketplace plan includes the cost of covering all subsidy-eligible individuals in the tax filing unit, including those who might currently be purchasing non-group coverage outside of the exchange.  Individuals who are eligible for a Basic Health Plan in New York or Minnesota are included as subsidy-eligibles in this analysis.  The penalty for each uninsured non-elderly individual is based on the number of uninsured people in the household.  The cost of the average bronze plans in 2016 is estimated by inflating the 2015 average by the growth between 2014 and 2015.  In this analysis, households with incomes below the relevant tax filing threshold, in the Medicaid gap, or where the cost of the cheapest available (subsidized) bronze plan exceeds the affordability standard are considered to not have a penalty.  Individuals ineligible to purchase marketplace coverage, such as undocumented immigrants, are excluded from the analysis.  There may be additional exemptions which individuals are eligible for, including particular hardships such as medical debt or domestic violence and membership in groups such as a health care sharing ministry or a recognized Indian tribe.  Individuals 65 or above are excluded from the analysis.Endnotes
    1. Individuals who are eligible for a Basic Health Plan in New York and Minnesota, and who would otherwise be eligible for subsidized coverage, are considered marketplace-subsidy eligible in this analysis.← Return to text
    2. State Health Access Data Assistance Center. 2013. “State Estimates of the Low-income Uninsured Not Eligible for the ACA Medicaid Expansion.” Issue Brief #35. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Available at:http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2013/rwjf404825← Return to text
    3. Van Hook, J., Bachmeier, J., Coffman, D., and Harel, O.  2015. “Can We Spin Straw into Gold? An Evaluation of Immigrant Legal Status Imputation Approaches”  Demography. 52(1):329-54.
    4. http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/the-cost-of-the-individual-mandate-penalty-for-the-remaining-uninsured/
    Posted 3rd January 2016 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  83. DEC15Obama Lied About Care Deathwatch: Dems Want the Cadillac Tax On Ice

    The hideous beast Democrats unleashed against an unwilling American public, ObamaCare, is dying.Its death throes are slow, messy, and horribly expensive. Billions of dollars have been wasted, and countless people who deserved better have been made to suffer for Barack Obama’s ambitions. The whole scheme was a fraud from the beginning, its every major feature an act of deception. The sooner it’s dead and gone, the better off this country will be.That’s why Republicans should strenuously resist Democrat efforts to surgically remove the “Cadillac Tax” from ObamaCare and put it on ice for a couple of years. No “fixes” to ObamaCare should be permitted – full repeal is the only answer, and Democrats must be forced to accept it. Until then, they and their union allies should be made to feel every second of the agony they deserve, without release or reprieve. It is sheer political madness for any Republican to intervene on their behalf, especially when so many of the GOP’s constituents are suffering from lost insurance plans, soaring premiums, exploding out-of-pocket costs, and lost access to their doctors.Also, the Cadillac Tax – a hefty 40 percent tax on high-end health insurance plans – is supposed to be a major funding mechanism for ObamaCare, which has already lost quite a few of its income streams. Delaying it for years turns the Affordable Care Act into an even more expensive scam for hard-working taxpayers.The Heritage Foundation notes that Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has been wailing that the Cadillac Tax wound up “falling on too many middle-class people, and we have to do something.”In other words, Senator, you and your Party lied through your teeth about how ObamaCare would shower the Sainted Middle Class with benefits at virtually zero cost. Your ignorance and mendacity have inflicted incredible damage on the health insurance industry, and on the larger U.S. economy. We do have to do something, but you and your fellow con artists will be no part of it. What we’re going to do is repeal ObamaCare and work on real market-oriented health care reform, and not a Democrat hand will be allowed anywhere near the process, if the American people retain a shred of common sense.How did Barack Obama put it, back at the beginning of his presidency? “I don’t want the folks that created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them just to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess. I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking.”The people who twisted American government and the Constitution out of shape to saddle us with ObamaCare should prepare for several years of not talking, while we try to fix the mess.Of course, it’s never a safe bet to assume congressional Republicans will do the right thing.Some of them are working on a deal to delay the Cadillac Tax, because they need leverage to get Democrat support for extending a number of tax breaks. Also, the GOP’s corporate donors hate the Cadillac Tax. The proper way to address their concern is full repeal, not yet another emergency repair to keep ObamaCare creaking and farting along for a few more years… as part of yet another last-minute Yuletide panic deal to keep the government running.Why are we allowing the most expensive government in history to be run like a fly-by-night operation? We shouldn’t be cutting desperate deals for “tax extenders” to save the economy from the impact of tax breaks ending abruptly, or making arrangements to temporarily delay painful blunders like the Cadillac Tax for an election or two. We should have a reasoned and honest discussion about financing the government, and design transparent, stable systems with fewer special exemptions and short-term sweeteners. The budget-by-crisis approach we’ve been allowing the political class to take throughout the Obama presidency allows both parties to slip far too much past the voters.Ambiguous and temporary laws give politicians too many carrots and sticks to control us.Instead of low, simple, permanent tax rates, we get an insanely confusing mass of self-destructing exemptions that give politicians plenty of chips to put on the table during midnight poker sessions with special interests. Why lower taxes for everyone, for good, when you can shake big-money interests down every few years, to renew temporary exceptions?The objective of our government should be handling a carefully-defined list of duties as efficiently as possible, financed rationally with the lightest, simplest, most evenly-distributed tax burden. Simplicity and transparency dilute power, so we’ll never have those virtues from our political class unless we firmly insist upon them. Step One is getting rid of ObamaCare lock, stock, and barrel – no temporary reprieves for special interests, no backroom deals, and no quick relief for political pain.http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/15/obamacare-deathwatch-dems-want-cadillac-tax-ice/Posted 15th December 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  84. DEC4For First Time Ever, Senate Votes to Repeal Obama Lied About Care — This Is What You Can Expect to Happen Next
    The bill will now head to the House, where it should win easy approval from the Republican majority.Congress will then send the measure, which also strips federal funding for Planned Parenthood, to Obama who will veto it.This marks the first time the 

    n a statement, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who has been relentless in his efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, said the vote represented a “significant step towards repealing every word of Obamacare.”“Since before my first day in office, I pledged to do everything within my power to repeal Obamacare,” he said. “And over the last three years, I’ve worked day and night to do exactly that, sometimes to the dismay of those in Washington.”“This bill repeals as much of that failed law as we can under arcane Senate rules and the narrow guidelines of the budget,” Cruz added. “I am also encouraged that this bill prohibits taxpayer funds from going to abortion-providers. This bill is a substantial improvement over the original House bill, and I’m grateful to Senate conservatives and Senate leadership for joining me in making it so.”Planned Parenthood, however, saw things differently, releasing a statement calling the measure a “cynical political attack.”“In spite of these political attacks, we’re focused on providing high-quality, compassionate health care to people all across this country. We won’t be deterred by violence, smear campaigns, or cynical political attacks like this.”Posted 4th December 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  85. NOV19The Deep, Complicated, and Expensive Web of Obama Lied About Care and Insurers 





    n another example of the Obama Administration’s Friday afternoon news dump, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is holding what they call a “Pharmaceutical Forum” on November 20, the Friday before the Thanksgiving holiday. In typical Obama Administration fashion, the so-called “forum” is by invitation only. HHS has also not been transparent about how who is invited and only Thursday morning released the details on the panel speakers to the public.
    The reality is that the rising cost of health care is an important and relevant issue that affects the lives of every American. And as HHS readily admits, this is a “multi-faceted problem with no one solution.”

    If we are going to have a meaningful conversation about the total cost of health care, then we must look at what is really driving the rising insurance costs that are hurting families in every state across the country.

    According to a study released this week by Avalere, the causes of health insurance premium increases in 2016 largely mirror the distribution of health care spending in the individual and small group market, with hospital and physician spending being the largest drivers of growth. The analysis also finds that premium increases for 2016 do not point to prescription drugs as having any sort of significant impact on premiums.

    If the Obama Administration truly wants to address the heart of the issue of rising health care costs, why wouldn’t they use this forum as an opportunity to take a look at every angle and hear from every voice on this issue?

    Despite promises from President Obama to keep health insurance companies “honest” and “accountable,” we continue to see the insurers padding profits and canceling coverage for the sick under Obamacare.

    Friday’s forum is the latest example of the established coziness between the Obama Administration and health insurers. Even the New York Times has noted the relationship between insurers and the Administration has evolved “into a powerful, mutually beneficial partnership that has been a boon to the nation’s largest private health plans.”

    In fact, the relationship between the government and insurers is so close that the Obama Administration is hiring directly from within the health insurance industry. Consider Andy Slavitt, a former executive at United Health. In July 2015, Slavitt was nominated to be Administrator at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) after a UnitedHealth group, called Optum, worked to help the Obama Administration repair the technical glitches of HealthCare.gov in the months after its launch.

    And then there’s Marilyn Tavenner, the former head of CMS, who led the Administration’s efforts to enact Obamacare and was responsible for HealthCare.gov. In July 2015, Tavenner became the top lobbyist for the nation’s health insurance industry as the new president and CEO of America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP). In her new position, Tavenner’s duties include negotiating with Congress regarding the future of Obamacare from the voice of insurers. Many criticized the appointment, including Sen. John Barasso (R-WY), who said it shows how Obamacare has created a cozy and profitable relationship for some.

    In another example, Joel Ario, the former Director of health insurance exchanges at HHS resigned in August 2011 to become Managing Director of Manatt Health Solutions, a Washington, D.C. firm that advises numerous health insurance companies. And Steve Larsen, who was running a key part of health reform as former head of HHS’ Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight, stepped down in June 2012 to go to work for Optum, the subsidiary of UnitedHealth Group. Larsen’s involvement in approving UnitedHealth’s government contract for QSSI later came under congressional scrutiny based on potential conflicts of interest surrounding the deal. QSSI is a technology company that was hired to build the federal insurance exchange where UnitedHealth competes with other insurance plans to sign up new enrollees.

    As the revolving door keeps spinning and the alliance between the health insurance industry and the Obama Administration grows deeper, health care costs continue to rise and the real losers in the equation are consumers. Meanwhile, HHS is actively working to pile all of the blame on pharmaceutical companies for rising health care costs, which is the obvious objective of the forum this Friday.

    When is the Obama Administration going to stop ignoring the real drivers of health care costs and start actually protecting patients as the law was originally intended?
    http://townhall.com/columnists/davidwilliams/2015/11/19/draft-n2082964/page/fullPosted 19th November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  86. NOV15
    ClosePosted 15th November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  87. NOV25 Big Obama Lied About Care ProblemsPosted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  88. NOV2Posted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  89. NOV25 Big Obama Lied About Care ProblemsPosted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  90. NOV25 Big Obama Lied About Care Problems Posted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  91. NOV25 Big Obama Lied About Care Problems


    1.Far Below ExpectationsIn 2014, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the biggest surge in enrollment would come in 2016 when exchanges were expected to reach 20 million enrollees. The CBO projected the number would keep increasing before leveling off at 22 million in 2025.Even after an adjusted prediction in March, the CBO said the 2016 number would be 11 million, which is even above what the administration is now predicting.The Obama administration is projecting 10 million will sign up for 2016, an increase of 100,000 from the previous year.Health care analyst Robert Laszewski told the New York Times, ”Enrollment of 10 million people is not sustainable. You need almost twice that number to have a viable pool of policyholders with enough healthy people to pay for the sick.”In 2014, the administration had touted 8 million enrollees, only to see it reduced to 6.3 million by the end of the year.The five largest health insurers reported in their third-quarter earnings for 2015 an 8.3 percent decline in Obamacare exchange enrollees.The CBO previously was more enthusiastic than reality, projecting 13 million enrollees for 2015, when only 9.1 million signed up.Still, one incentive (something many critics call a coercive tactic) that will keep the number of enrollees from dipping too low is an increased fine for not purchasing insurance. For 2015, the fine was $325 or 2 percent of income, whichever was greater. For 2016, the fine will be $695 or 2.5 percent of income, whichever is greater.2. Costs Still RisingOne key promise of the Affordable Care Act was that it would make health insurance affordable.Nevertheless, premiums increased an average of 7.5 percent for a benchmark plan across the 37 states that use the federal exchange, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.The HHS report focused primarily on premiums for the silver plan, which is most widely purchased. The price hikes are hitting Oklahoma the worst, with a 36 percent increase. Meanwhile, Alaska, Montana and New Mexico are expected to see a 25 percent increase. Indiana, though, is actually expected to go down by 13 percent.3. Collapsing Co-OpsThe House Energy and Commerce Committee will conduct a hearing Thursday looking at the failure of 11 out of 23 health co-ops that were set up across the country with the promise of saving money and creating competition but wound up costing taxpayers $1.1 billion after their implosion.The loss of these co-ops also means hundreds of thousands of Americans will have to enroll into higher-cost plans for 2016.When a “public option” was removed from the original Affordable Care Act legislation, the most liberal wing of the Democratic party, some who wanted a single-payer system, demanded something in its place. Thus, federally subsidized consumer operated health insurance plans were added to the final bill.On Sunday, a health care co-op in Arizona folded, the latest in a round to do so. This year, co-ops in Iowa, Nebraska, Louisiana, Nevada, New York, Kentucky, West Virginia, Tennessee, Colorado, Oregon, South Carolina and Utah also went under.The HHS Office of Inspector General recently reported that most of the remaining co-ops are losing moneyand have lower than expected enrollment.4. Facing Defunding Vote in SenateSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said the Senate will vote in November on the budget reconciliation bill that passed the House in October.Because reconciliation is not subject to regular filibuster rules, there is no need to persuade 60 senators to come along: The bill could clear the Senate with a simple 51-vote majority.The measure that passed the House repeals the penalties for the individual and employer mandate; eliminates the 40 percent excise tax on high-cost health plans, also referred to as the “Cadillac tax”; eliminates the medical device tax; and repeals the preventions and public health fund.The bill furthers prohibits federal funding — including Medicaid dollars — for one year to abortion providers while the House investigates Planned Parenthood, redirecting funding to community health centers.While President Barack Obama will almost certainly veto the defund measure, it could mark the first time Congress has been able to send a measure to his desk and some Republicans feel could force the president to the negotiating table.5. Limited Access to SpecialistsA study last week published in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that Obamacare exchange plans at both the federal and state marketplaces could significantly limit access to specialists,Reuters reported.About one in seven ACA health insurance plans didn’t provide access to a specialist inside the network. The study examined 135 health insurance plans in 34 state marketplaces. Researchers looked for in-network specialists, including OBGYN, dermatologists, cardiologist and oncologists in each plan. Out of this survey, researchers found that 18 plans in nine states did not provide coverage for at least one specialist within a 100-mile radius, while 19 lacked coverage for a specialist with in a 50-mile radius.Posted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  92. NOV2The Slow-Motion Implosion Of Obama Lied About CarePosted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  93. NOV2The Slow-Motion Implosion Of Obama Lied About Care
    Posted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  94. NOV2The Slow-Motion Implosion Of Obama Lied About CarePosted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  95. NOV2The Slow-Motion Implosion Of Obama Lied About Care
     






    Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell announced recently that she expects 10 million people to be enrolled in health-care coverage through ObamaCare’s exchanges by the end of next year. What she didn’t mention was that in March of last year the Congressional Budget Office predicted that 21 million people would be enrolled in 2016—more than double the new estimate.
    The administration says the difference can be explained away: For instance, fewer companies dropped coverage than expected, thus fewer employees are migrating from employer-sponsored plans to the exchanges. “We haven’t seen much of a shift at all,” Richard Frank, a health and human services assistant secretary, told USA Today.

    But the question isn’t where Americans are getting health insurance. It is whether ObamaCare will provide more Americans with affordable insurance for decades to come.


    Supporters credit ObamaCare with helping nine million uninsured Americans find coverage in 2014. But a new paper from the Heritage Foundation, however, suggests that nearly all of the increase came from adding nearly nine million people to the Medicaid rolls.
    In other words, ObamaCare expanded coverage in 2014 to the extent that it gave people free or nearly free insurance. That goal could have been accomplished without the Affordable Care Act. To justify its existence, ObamaCare must make affordable private insurance available to a broad cross-section of uninsured Americans who are ineligible for Medicaid.
    But with fewer people buying insurance through the exchanges, the economics aren’t holding up. Ten of the 23 innovative health-insurance plans known as co-ops—established with $2.4 billion in ObamaCare loans—will be out of business by the end of 2015 because of weak balance sheets.
    And while rates vary widely by state, the cost for private insurance through the exchanges is also increasing dramatically. An analysis by consulting firm Avalere Health released on Friday shows that some of the most popular insurance plans in the ObamaCare exchanges will experience double-digit premium hikes in 2016.

    One problem is that nearly half of the 10.5 million uninsured people eligible for ObamaCare are between the ages of 18 and 34—and young people tend to be healthy and unwilling to pay for pricey coverage they don’t need.

    But propping up ObamaCare requires this group’s subsidizing the medical costs of the aging and ill. So far, no luck. It makes sense for healthy young people to pay a penalty rather than purchase the insurance. And in 2015 that’s what 6.6 million people did, according to the IRS. Next year the minimum penalty increases to $695 or 2.5% of income above $10,000, whichever is greater. In many cases, that’s still much cheaper than insurance.

    At our company, CKE Restaurants, we offer eligible employees ObamaCare-compliant coverage. We used federal guidelines and set our employee monthly contribution for the least expensive Bronze plan at $1,116 a year, or about 25% of the annual premium. The company pays the rest, and the deductible is $5,500. But even when next year’s higher penalty kicks in—2.5% of income above $10,000—an employee would need to earn more than $50,000 a year for the penalty to exceed the premium.

    Then there is another problem: It is easy to avoid or limit exposure to the penalty with some simple tax planning, as there are 30 different exemptions (which 12 million people claimed last year) and the IRS collects the penalty by reducing an employee’s tax refund.

    The uninsured also know they can receive medical care at the emergency room. And if they fall ill, they can always purchase insurance during the next enrollment period, because ObamaCare eliminated existing conditions as a justification for denying coverage.

    Our employees are smart enough to figure this out. Of our company’s 5,453 eligible employees, only 420 enrolled. Our experience isn’t unique, according to press reports. A March survey by the consulting firm Mercer found “virtually no change between 2014 and 2015” in the average percentage of employees signed up for employer-sponsored health plans. Mercer found a 1.6% increase in the absolute number of enrolled employees, but that happened thanks to a growing workforce, not the law.

    How have things changed under ObamaCare? Wealthy Americans continue to have health insurance, albeit at a higher price. But they can afford it. Many middle-class Americans are paying higher premiums they can hardly afford. And then millions more low-income Americans have heavily subsidized insurance or Medicaid coverage.

    However, millions of other Americans who enjoyed good individual insurance before ObamaCare have found themselves forced out of affordable plans, with their new premiums rising rapidly. Other middle- and working-class Americans who were uninsured are still uninsured and paying the penalty or claiming an exemption. That isn’t affordable care. In many cases, it isn’t care at all.



    http://www.wsj.com/article_email/the-slow-motion-implosion-of-obamacare-1446417104-lMyQjAxMTA1ODA5MjUwNDIzWjPosted 2nd November 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  96. OCT28Obama Confirms Steep 2016 Obama Lied About Care Premium Hikes




    Obama administration is finally admitting what industry experts and state-level actuaries have been forecasting for months, based on factors such as underperforming bailout-style programs (expiring after next year) designed to artificially hold down rates, sicker-than-expected risk pools, and stagnating enrollment projections. The Wall Street Journal reports:

    The Obama administration said many consumers will see noticeable premium increases when buying health coverage on insurance exchanges in 2016, acknowledging for the first time what many health-care experts had predicted. Federal officials said Monday that the price of the second-lowest-cost midrange “silver plan”—a key metric for premiums around the country—will increase by 7.5% on average across the three-dozen states that rely on Washington to administer the health law for them. And 60% of enrollees—across 30 of the largest markets in the U.S.—will see the average rate for that benchmark plan rise by 6.3%, according to a Health and Human Services report on premium data that hasn’t yet been made fully public. The higher premiums are likely to intensify Republicans’ claims that the health law isn’t holding down costs… Some enrollees may see significantly higher or more modest rate increases. State insurance regulators around the country have largely approved all or most of the hefty premium increases sought by the largest health plans for 2016. Some have jumped by double digits: On average, premiums will rise in 2016 for the second lowest-cost silver plan by 31.5% in Alaska and 22.9% in Oregon, according to the report. Oklahoma will see a 35.7% hike…The administration is projecting about 10 million people will have paid up coverage through the federal and state exchanges by the end of 2009, only a slight bump from the 9.9 million with paid-up plans as of June.That means it will be increasingly important for the Obama administration to retain customers, a goal that could be more challenging amid the premium increases.
    The Journal piece goes on to remind readers of President Obama’s blithe prediction in July that rates wouldn’t jump too drastically, shrugging off the industry’s early projections.  Also, Obamacare’s chronic failure to hold down costs isn’t a “Republican claim.”  It’s an incontrovertible fact — for individuals, families and the federal government.  The law’s supporters continue to be dead wrong about cost curves.  The Hill adds context on the rising premiums: “The increase is far more than last year’s two percent jump among benchmark silver plans. Those plans, the second-lowest cost option among silver plans, are important because they determine healthcare subsidies for people living in that area, even if they pick a different tiered plan.”  They quote administration officials spinning the spike as less drastic than it could have been in Obamacare’s absence, a counterfactual that only reminds frustrated consumers of Democrats’ pledge that everyone’s rates would decrease under the law.  USA Today jumps in with a helpful reminder that premiums are only one piece of the health costs puzzle:

    The new report did not address the important issue of total out-of-pocket costs, which include deductibles, co-payments and other cost sharing.Many people who shop based on premium costs alone can be alarmed when they see how much they have to contribute to their health care on top of their monthly premiums. “Premiums are a part of the picture but not the whole picture,” says Eric Gashko, assistant vice president for government affairs at the National Health Council, which represents people with chronic conditions. For people like the council’s members, cost sharing is “often times a bigger driver of the cost than the premium would be,” he says.
    The average deductible under “bronze-level” plans last year was nearly $5,200.  That’s the amount of money a consumer would have to fork over in out-of-pocket costs before her insurance coverage — into which she contributes monthly premium payments — even kicks in.  I’ll leave you with nonpartisan investigators’ latest findings of widespread waste and mismanagement within the law.  As you read this, bear in mind that Obamacare was passed in 2010 and was implemented more than two years ago:

    Federal investigators from the Government Accountability Office said Thursday that they had discovered many errors in eligibility decisions under the Affordable Care Act that had led the government to pay for duplicate coverage for some people and an excessive share of costs for others. The investigators said some people were receiving subsidies for private insurance at the same time they were enrolled in Medicaid. In other cases, the investigators said, the government is probably overpaying because it cannot always distinguish between newly eligible beneficiaries under the Affordable Care Act and those eligible under the old rules…Moreover, the auditors said, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which runs the federal marketplace, “does not have procedures to automatically terminate subsidized exchange coverage when individuals are determined eligible for Medicaid.”
    In response, the Obama administration mumbled something about “intensifying efforts” to address and fix these bugs, pointing to a data-matching program HHS recently launched to curb these issues. To which GAO investigators repliednot good enough. “The accountability office said this was not enough to minimize the potential for duplicate coverage. In a separate study, undercover investigators from the accountability office created 18 fictitious identities and filed applications in their names.”  Guess how many of those 18 managed to obtain coverage?  Seventeen, “even though they used nonexistent Social Security numbers, invalid immigration document numbers, fictitious birth certificates and other counterfeit documents.”  The GAO’s conclusion: “Our undercover testing for the 2015 coverage year found that the health care marketplace eligibility determination and enrollment process remains vulnerable to fraud.”  The report cited one example of a fake consumer receiving taxpayer subsidies through the federal exchange and two state exchanges simultaneously. 
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/10/28/affordable-wh-confirms-steep-2016-obamacare-premium-hikes-n2072050Posted 28th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  97. OCT27Another One Bites the Dust: Ninth Obama Lied About Carecare Co-Op Implodes

    The “it’s working” file is getting pretty thick this month.  The latest addition, via the Associated Press:

    A South Carolina health insurer has become the ninth insurance cooperative formed nationwide under the Affordable Care Act to fold. Consumers’ Choice Health Insurance Co. said Thursday that it will not sell policies in 2016, a decision that will leave 67,000 individuals and business customers looking for new coverage. Ray Farmer, director of the South Carolina Department of Insurance, said Consumers’ Choice and state regulators reached a mutual decision to shut down the company’s business. He said the company was in a “financially hazardous condition.”
    It seems Mr. Farmer may have stumbled upon a solid new slogan for the entire law.  The New York Times analyzes the “cascading failures” of Obamacare co-ops across the country:

    The grim announcements keep coming, picking up pace in recent weeks. About a third, or eight, alternative health insurers created under President Obama’s health care law to spur competition that might have made coverage less expensive for consumers are shutting down. The three largest are among that number. Only 14 of the so-called cooperatives are still standing, some precariously. The toll of failed co-op insurers, which were intended to challenge dominant companies that wield considerable power to dictate prices, has left about 500,000 customers scrambling to find health insurance for next year…At a time when the industry is experiencing a wave of consolidation, with giants like Anthem and Aetna planning to buy their smaller rivals, the vanishing co-ops will leave some consumers with fewer choices — and potentially higher prices...The shuttering of these start-ups amounts to what could be a loss of nearly $1 billion in federal loans provided to help them get started. And the cascading series of failures has also led to skepticism about the Obama administration’s commitment to this venture. Some policy analysts say they were doomed from the beginning.
    Doomed from the beginning. So why flush a billion taxpayer dollars setting them up? Intraparty Democratic politics, the Times reports:  “Created as a concession to Democrats who wanted the health care law to include a government-run plan as an alternative to private insurers, the co-ops faced significant hurdles from the start.”  Liberal Democrats demanded a “public option” within Obamacare, which critics (and supporters) rightly predicted would directly facilitate the demise of America’s private health insurance industry.  With so many elected Democrats still peddling the “keep your plan” fiction at the time, Obamacare’s government option provision was deemed politically unviable and abandoned.  The co-ops were an expensive consolation prize to its supporters.  Ironically, now that this experiment is collapsing, even more Americans are being betrayed by the false assurance that they’d be able to maintain their preferred plans.  Democrats, predictably, are blaming Republicans for the shortcomings of a fatally flawed law that was crafted and passed exclusively by Democrats. Meanwhile, on top of high out-of-pocket expenses, monthly rates keep climbing:

    Premiums are expected to rise in many parts of the country as a new sign-up season under President Barack Obama’s health care law starts Nov. 1. But consumers have options if they shop around, and an upgraded government website will help them compare…Independent experts are forecasting bigger premium increases in 2016 than last year, averaging from the high single digits to the teens. Next week the government will release a master file that researchers use to piece together national trends. Averages won’t tell the story, because health care is local. Premiums can vary widely from state to state, and within a state.
    Obamacare supporters pledged that the “Affordable” Care Act would drastically reduce healthcare costs for all Americans.  But hey, at least consumers will be treated to an “upgraded government website,” two full years after Healthcare.gov crashed and burned on the launchpad.  I’ll leave you with a reminder that this law is packed with harmful unintended consequences — in addition to the intended ones — that often disproportionately impact those who can least afford it:

    Tens of thousands of people with modest incomes are at risk of losing health insurance subsidies in January because they did not file income tax returns, federal officials and consumer advocates say…Many of the people potentially affected have incomes so low that they would not otherwise have to file tax returns. But if they received insurance subsidies in 2014, they were required to file this year…In July, the Internal Revenue Service said 710,000 people who had received subsidies under the Affordable Care Act had not filed tax returns and had not requested more time to do so. If those people do not return to the marketplace this fall, they may be automatically re-enrolled in the same or similar health plans at full price. And when they receive an invoice from the insurance company next year, they may be shocked to see that their subsidies have been cut to zero…The I.R.S. also said 760,000 taxpayers had received subsidies and filed returns but had not attached the required form comparing the subsidies paid with the amount they were entitled to receive. Taxpayers describe that document, I.R.S. Form 8962, as daunting. “The premium tax credit form, the dreaded 8962, is really hard,” said Eileen P. Duggan, a piano teacher and freelance writer in Maplewood, Mo., outside St. Louis, who filed the form with her tax return. “It’s enough to make you cry, that form. It was almost impossible to figure out.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/10/27/another-one-bites-the-dust-ninth-obamacare-coop-implodes-n2071287?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=
    Posted 27th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  98. OCT26New Obama Lied About Care Appeal to Be Filed With the Supreme Court: ‘So Unconstitutional in So Many Ways’







    WASHINGTON (AP) — Opponents of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul are taking yet another challenge to the law to the Supreme Court, and say they will be back with more if this one fails.

    A new appeal being filed Monday by the Pacific Legal Foundation contends the law violates the provision of the Constitution that requires tax-raising bills to originate in the House of Representatives.


    Pacific Legal Foundation lawyer Timothy Sandefur said the problem with the law is just one example of how “Obamacare is so unconstitutional in so many ways.”Sandefur said the justices will face one challenge to the law after another until it is significantly changed or repealed.The court has twice turned back major challenges to the health care law, in opinions written by Chief Justice John Roberts in 2012 and in June. The court also has allowed family-owned businesses with religious objections to opt out of paying for contraceptives for women covered under their health plans. A related case involving faith-oriented colleges, hospitals and charities is pending.The new appeal, filed on behalf of small-business owner Matt Sissel, stems from the Constitution’s Origination Clause, which requires that the House be the first to pass a bill “for raising revenue.”The foundation said the health overhaul is expected to generate roughly $500 billion in a dozen separate new taxes by 2019, clearly making it a bill to raise revenue. The appeal said the legislation made its debut in the Senate when then-Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., gutted an unrelated bill that already had passed the House and inserted language that became the Affordable Care Act. The original measure was designed to help veterans buy homes.
    The House then adopted the revised measure. Both chambers were controlled by Democrats at the time.Lower courts have rejected the group’s argument. A unanimous three-judge panel of the federal appeals court in Washington said that while the health care law does contain tax-raising provisions, its primary purpose was not to raise revenue, but rather to expand health care coverage.When the full 11-judge appeals court considered whether to hear the case, the four Republican-appointed judges concluded that the legislation should qualify as revenue-producing. But they would have ruled in favor of the administration anyway. They said the bill properly originated in the House, even if the measure was stripped of its original language.Nicholas Bagley, a health law expert at the University of the Michigan Law School, said he doubts the court will intervene. “There’s disagreement on the appeals court about the rationale, but until there’s disagreement about the right outcome, the Supreme Court has no reason to take the case,” Bagley said.But Sandefur said he hopes the court will agree to hear yet another case. The meaning of the Origination Clause “has never been before the Supreme Court,” Sandefur said.Whatever the outcome, he said opponents of the law will keep fighting it in court. “Obamacare is so unconstitutional in so many ways that the court is going to be having Obamacare cases far into the future until the law is repealed or amended,” he said.Posted 26th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  99. OCT20Bamstercare exchanges in dem controlled states waste 4 Billion–poof


    2010 and 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) awarded $4.6 billion in Obamacare start-up grants to 16 Democrat-controlled states and the District of Columbia. $1.4 billion of this taxpayer largesse was spent on exchanges, many of which imploded upon launch or operated so inefficiently that enrollees have been left to the tender mercies of Obamacare.gov. The rest of these states also appear likely to abandon their exchanges in favor of federal “marketplaces.” Yet, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), they have kept all but $1 million of the grants. Where’s the rest of our money?What happened to the remaining $3.2 billion in taxpayer-funded grant money remains unknown, despite the valiant efforts of the GAO to solve the mystery. The nonpartisan agency released a report at the end of last month revealing that CMS oversight of the Obamacare grant process has been so inept that it is virtually impossible to gain more than a tenuous grasp on the expenditure amounts, much less where the money actually went. As the GAO points out, it was only able to get spending data through March 12, 2015. And even that stale information was woefully incomplete: “According to CMS… some states were two or more months late in reporting.”
    The stout-hearted reader able to wade through the turgid prose of the GAO report will be rewarded with some startling revelations. Not the least being that, of the $4.6 billion awarded to these 17 Democrat strongholds, the GAO was only able to glean enough data to identify about $3 billion in the “amount drawn down… from CMS’s account to the state’s account.” In other words, the reporting delays mean that the transfer totals reported by the GAO are of necessity far less than the actual total siphoned from CMS coffers. Thus, when the GAO reports that the “amount drawn down” by California was $709 million, the actual figure could well be $1 billion.
    And it gets worse. Neither the states nor CMS have been able to provide adequate information concerning where and on what the money was spent. CMS permitted these states to report spending in terms of vague categories such as “contracts, consultants, personnel, equipment, and supplies.” Thus, 89 percent of the money spent was reported to CMS as having been paid for nebulous services such as “systems integration, project management, and independent validation and verifications.” One hardly needs to be a criminal genius to see that such a sloppily run system of doling out cash to state politicians offers all manner of opportunities for graft.
    Moreover, considering the general lawlessness of the Obama administration and the Democrats in general, it’s probably not a coincidence that most of the Obamacare grants went to “blue” states. CMS awarded a total of $5.5 billion in start-up grants for the creation of exchanges, and Democrat-controlled states received about 85 percent of that federal loot. It is, of course, true that some Republican-controlled states initially applied for grants, and some of that money was actually spent before the GOP realized that state-run exchanges were a mug’s game. Oddly enough, 99 percent of the grant money that has been returned to CMS has come from those red states.
    Which brings us back to the $3.2 billion in grants that was never returned, even by states that abandoned their own exchanges. The poster child for this scenario is, of course, Oregon. The Beaver State was awarded $305 million in Planning, Early Innovator, and Establishment grants and, drew down at least $293 million from CMS, yet never made a serious attempt to launch its exchange. Oregon spent only about $78 million on IT contracts, according to the GAO report, but thus far has failed to return a penny to CMS. But Oregon is by no means alone among these states in its reluctance to return unspent grants to CMS, as the following table illustrates (**):StateGrants AwardedSpent on ITFunds ReturnedDue TaxpayersCalifornia$1,065,683,056$254,679,837$470,106$810,533,113New York$575,079,804$118,618,902$0$456,460,902Oregon$305,206,587$78,489,963$0$226,716,624Washington$302,333,280$116,991,593$0$185,341,687Kentucky$289,303,526$107,774,666$530,912$180,997,948Massachusetts$233,803,787$61,824,931$0$171,978,856Hawaii$205,342,270$89,466,694$0$115,875,576Vermont$199,718,542$71,007,937$0$128,710,605DC$195,141,151$53,869,056$0$141,272,095Maryland$190,130,143$86,988,256$0$103,141,887Minnesota$189,363,527$29,357,263$0$160,006,264Colorado$184,986,696$69,641,979$0$115,344,717Connecticut$175,870,421$76,832,735$0$99,037,686Rhode Island$152,574,494$51,567,415$20,019$100,987,060New Mexico$123,281,600$34,095,639$0$89,185,961Idaho$105,290,745$35,770,590$0$69,520,155Nevada$101,001,068$37,484,596$0$63,516,472Total$4,594,110,697 $1,374,462,052$1,021,037$3,218,627,608
    Only three of these Democrat strongholds bothered to return any money to CMS, and the amounts returned by two of these states are so small that they amount to little more than rounding errors. The funds returned by California and Rhode Island amount to far less than 1 percent of the grant money they received. The amount returned by Kentucky comes to a little more than 18 percent, presumably because its state legislature still contains a few Republicans. The remaining 13 states and D.C. haven’t bothered to return a dime. CMS claims that these figures are understated but that their records were not up to date due to a “manual entry process” (not verified by GAO).
    But even if the discrepancy is as much as $200 million, it makes little difference. The refund due to the taxpayers is still $3 billion. The grants were handed out so that these states would have the resources to plan and implement their exchanges. Obamacare was launched two years ago. And, despite the breathtaking ineptitude with which that launch was managed at both the state and federal level, and “reform’s” numerous subsequent pratfalls, its apologists still insist that the perversely titled “Affordable Care Act” has been a smashing success. If we take them at their word, it means that the Democrats who run these states have no further use for start-up grants, right?
    So, again, where’s the rest of our money? Have the states been illegally using the money for operations? Have Democrat officials diverted it to their campaign funds? Have crooked pols, like Oregon’s John Kitzhaber, moved it to their legal defense funds? Did state bureaucrats simply steal it and use it buy new houses and cars? If not, then where the hell is it?** Source: GAO Report, Appendix IIPosted 20th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  100. OCT19Obama COVERT CO-OPS: Hide 11 staggering Obamacare insurers

    Federal officials have a secret list of 11 Obamacare health insurance co-ops they fear are on the verge of failure, but they refuse to disclose them to the public or to Congress, a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation has learned.Just in the last three weeks, five of the original 24 Obamacare co-ops announced plans to close, bringing the total of failures to nine barely two years after their launch with $2 billion in start-up capital from the taxpayers under the Affordable Care Act.All 24 received 15-year loans in varying amounts to offer health insurance to poor and low income customers and provide publicly funded competition to private, for-profit insurers. Among the most recent co-ops to announce closing were those in Iowa, Nebraska, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisiana, Nevada, Tennessee, Vermont, New York and Colorado.Nearly half a million failing co-op customers will have to find new coverage in 2016. More than $900 million of the original $2 billion in loans has been lost.The 11 unidentified co-ops are still operated but are now on “enhanced oversight” by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, which manages the Obamacare program. The 11 recently received letters from CMS demanding that they take urgent actions to avoid closing.
    Aaron Albright, chief CMS spokesman, said 11 co-ops “are either on a corrective action plan or enhanced oversight. We have not released the letters or names.” He gave no grounds for withholding the information from either the public or Congress.CMS officials have stonewalled multiple congressional inquiries into the co-op financial problems.  The latest congressional inquiry came in a September 30 letter to CMS acting administrator Andy Slavitt demanding transparency over the troubled program.“We have long been concerned about the financial solvency of CO-OPs,” three House Ways and Means committee members wrote to Slavitt.  “Which plans have received these warnings or have been placed on corrective plans,” the congressmen asked.  To date, they have received no reply.Insurance commissioners in Vermont refused in 2013 to license the federally approved co-op there because they feared those financial plans were unrealistic. And if CMS officials are to be believed, more failures may be on the way.Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-IA, a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee who has been an outspoken critic of the troubled co-op program, said transparency should be a top priority for the faltering program.“Since the public’s business generally ought to be public, CMS should have a good reason for not disclosing which co-ops are troubled,” he said.Rep. Adrian Smith, R-NE, chairman of the House Ways & Means oversight subcommittee on health wants to know which co-ops are in trouble.“It’s time for CMS to stop shielding these failures from the public and start identifying faltering co-ops.  Taxpayers deserve more accountability and consumers deserve to know whether the insurance they are forced to buy will still exist at the end of next year,” he said.In creating the co-ops under Obamacare, Congressional Democrats exempted the co-ops from public disclosure rules that apply to publicly traded insurance companies and other publicly traded corporations on the New York Stock Exchange. Those rules require disclosure of materially important financial details.Any materially “significant event” by publicly traded corporations have to be disclosed in “real time,” according to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.The Securities and Exchange Commission identifies 18 “mandatory disclosure items,” for private corporations including “any material impairment of a company’s asset.”The double standard rankles critics of the co-op experiment undertaken by the Obama administration. “The nonprofit co-ops “advertise themselves as having a ‘market approach,’” said Sally Pipes, president of the Pacific Research Institute. “But if it’s a market approach, they are responsible to their shareholders and to the taxpayers to reveal the status of their business.”Grassley agreed, saying “disclosure requirements on publicly traded companies would be a good guidepost for CMS on co-ops.”Pipes said taxpayers are stockholders in the non-profit health insurance co-ops. “We are paying for it.  We have a right to know. They don’t like to release things unless they’re forced to, particularly if it shows them in a bad light or their program to be in a bad light.”Taxpayer groups also expressed anger over the government secrecy.“There is no excuse why taxpayers should not know the names of the people and groups who misspent and wasted tax dollars on publicly financed health insurance co-ops,” said David Williams, president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.“When anybody receives tax dollars, they have a responsibility to  spend those dollars wisely and be held accountable for the expenditures.  Transparency is the first step. CMS has a responsibility to all Americans to publish this information,” Williams said.Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said “as Obamacare continues to fail, those failures point right back to CMS.  They don’t want people to see that failure and think if they hide it somehow we won’t hear about it.”Federal officials have a secret list of 11 Obamacare health insurance co-ops they fear are on the verge of failure, but they refuse to disclose them to the public or to Congress, a Daily Caller News Foundation investigation has learned.Just in the last three weeks, five of the original 24 Obamacare co-ops announced plans to close, bringing the total of failures to nine barely two years after their launch with $2 billion in start-up capital from the taxpayers under the Affordable Care Act.All 24 received 15-year loans in varying amounts to offer health insurance to poor and low income customers and provide publicly funded competition to private, for-profit insurers. Among the co-ops to announce closings were those in Iowa, Nebraska, Kentucky, West Virginia, Louisiana, Nevada, Tennessee, Vermont, New York and Colorado.Nearly half a million failing co-op customers will have to find new coverage in 2016. More than $900 million of the original $2 billion in loans has been lost.The 11 unidentified co-ops appear to be still operating but are now on “enhanced oversight” by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, which manages the Obamacare program. The 11 received letters from CMS demanding that they take urgent actions to avoid closing.Aaron Albright, chief CMS spokesman, said 11 co-ops “are either on a corrective action plan or enhanced oversight. We have not released the letters or names.” He gave no grounds for withholding the information from either the public or Congress.CMS officials have stonewalled multiple congressional inquiries into the co-op financial problems.  The latest congressional inquiry came in a September 30 letter to CMS acting administrator Andy Slavitt demanding transparency over the troubled program.“We have long been concerned about the financial solvency of CO-OPs,” three House Ways and Means committee members wrote to Slavitt.  “Which plans have received these warnings or have been placed on corrective plans,” the congressmen asked.  To date, they have received no reply.Insurance commissioners in Vermont were the first to refuse to license the federally approved co-op there in 2013 because they feared those financial plans were unrealistic. But then the dominoes began to fall this year, resulting in at least eight co-op failures. And if CMS officials are to be believed, more failures may be on the way.Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-IA, a senior member of the Senate Finance Committee who has been an outspoken critic of the troubled co-op program, said transparency should be a top priority for the faltering program.“Since the public’s business generally ought to be public, CMS should have a good reason for not disclosing which co-ops are troubled,” he said.Rep. Adrian Smith, R-NE, chairman of the House Ways & Means oversight subcommittee on health wants to know which co-ops are in trouble.“It’s time for CMS to stop shielding these failures from the public and start identifying faltering co-ops.  Taxpayers deserve more accountability and consumers deserve to know whether the insurance they are forced to buy will still exist at the end of next year,” he said.In creating the co-ops under Obamacare, Congressional Democrats exempted the co-ops from public disclosure rules that apply to publicly traded insurance companies and other publicly traded corporations on such exchanges as the New York Stock Exchange. Those rules require immediate disclosure of materially important financial details.Any materially “significant event” by publicly traded corporations have to be disclosed in “real time,” according to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.The Securities and Exchange Commission identifies 18 “mandatory disclosure items,” for private corporations including “any material impairment of a company’s asset.”The double standard rankles critics of the co-op experiment undertaken by the Obama administration. “The nonprofit co-ops advertise themselves as having a ‘market approach,’” said Sally Pipes, president of the Pacific Research Institute. “But if it’s a market approach, they are responsible to their shareholders and to the taxpayers to reveal the status of their business.”Grassley agreed, saying “disclosure requirements on publicly traded companies would be a good guidepost for CMS on co-ops.”Pipes said taxpayers are stockholders in the non-profit health insurance co-ops. “We are paying for it.  We have a right to know. They don’t like to release things unless they’re forced to, particularly if it shows them in a bad light or their program to be in a bad light.”Taxpayer groups also expressed anger over the government secrecy.“There is no excuse why taxpayers should not know the names of the people and groups who misspent and wasted tax dollars on publicly financed health insurance co-ops,” said David Williams, president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.“When anybody receives tax dollars, they have a responsibility to  spend those dollars wisely and be held accountable for the expenditures.  Transparency is the first step. CMS has a responsibility to all Americans to publish this information,” Williams said.Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said “as Obamacare continues to fail, those failures point right back to CMS.  They don’t want people to see that failure and think if they hide it somehow we won’t hear about it.”http://freedomforce.com/7010/covert-co-ops-feds-hide-11-staggering-obamacare-insurers/Posted 19th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  101. OCT16CO-OP FLOP: The Biggest Obama Lied About Care Disaster You’ve Never Heard About


    It’s an Obamacare story with every imaginable outrage — blatant conflicts of interest, millions of tax dollars going to political cronies, thousands of Americans left without health insurance, lavish pay for incompetent executives, federal funds diverted illegally, multiple congressional investigations, insider trading convictions and big decisions made behind closed doors.Tragically, there is even a child abuser. But search the New York Times web site for “Obamacare co-ops” and nothing comes up. Just three entries appear for the same search on the Washington Post web site.Not so, Richard Pollock of the Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group. Pollock has filed dozens of stories about the Obamacare co-ops since 23 of the tax-funded groups were created in 2011 at a cost of $2 billion. President Obama promised the co-ops would help lower medical costs by competing with profit-driven private companies.Seven of the co-ops have closed. A recent report by the Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General said the rest of the co-ops are in deep financial trouble and more are expected to close.

    None of these dismal developments come as a surprise to those following Pollock’s byline for the past four years. Here are a dozen of his most significant co-op stories, some of which were reported when he worked for the Washington Examiner.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/16/co-op-flop-the-biggest-obamacare-disaster-youve-never-heard-about/#ixzz3oll1SrNHPosted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  102. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  103. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  104. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  105. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  106. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  107. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  108. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  109. OCT16Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  110. OCT16It’s Working: WH Forecasts Low Obama Lied About Care Enrollment Next Year


    Maybe I published this post a day too soon. The Huffington Post reports on new projections from the Obama administration predicting that relatively few uninsured Americans will obtain coverage through the “Affordable” Care Act’s exchanges in 2016.  This is just the latest instance of federal enrollment expectations being adjusted downward, a troublesome trend driven by a combination of factors.  First, the basics:

    Fewer than 1 million new customers nationwide will have health insurance from the Obamacare exchanges next year, according to a federal report published Thursday. The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that 10 million people will be covered by private health insurance policies obtained via the Affordable Care Act’s exchange marketplaces in 2016, an increase of just 900,000 from the 9.1 million people the department estimates will have such plans by the end of this year…Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell acknowledged last month that those uninsured most eager to enroll have already done so, and that the remaining millions would be difficult to reach.
    The uninsured people “most eager to enroll,” predictably, were older, sicker consumers, many with pre-existing conditions.  This phenomenon has produced a risk pool that’s more expensive to cover — without the needed legions of younger, healthier enrollees in the mix to defray and absorb those increases.  Thus, the coming rate shockthat will accompany rising out-of-pocket costs for consumers within both the individual and employer-basedmarkets.  HuffPo goes on, explaining that many previous “enrollees” who selected plans didn’t follow through with payments, while others were dropped due to ineligibility:

    Attrition on the health insurance exchange has been a factor. After the the 2015 sign-up period that ended in February, 11.7 million people had selected insurance plans from the marketplaces. That number declined throughout the course of the year, as consumers either failed to pay premiums or dropped coverage for reasons including affordability concerns and switching to health benefits provided by an employer. Nearly 1 million people dropped off the exchange because they failed to provide accurate documentation of their incomes to prove they qualified for subsidies, and more than 400,000 others lost their coverage because they did not verify they were legal U.S. residents…While the health insurance exchanges have made significant strides since their rocky rollout two years ago, new challenges await during the upcoming sign-up period. Premiums for coverage that begins next year appear to be rising faster than they did prior to the last round of enrollment. Other indicators suggest that the prices for the “benchmark” plans used to set the value of premium subsidies aren’t going up as much, but consumers will have to shop around if they hope to find coverage at a cost comparable to what they’re paying now. In a number of states, enrollees will be forced to find new plans because of the financial collapse of nonprofit “co-op” insurance companies funded by the Affordable Care Act. One factor that could boost enrollment — at the risk of public backlash — is heftier fines for those who go without health insurance but aren’t exempt from the law’s individual mandate.
    Points: (1) It’s worth reiterating that the top reason cited by uninsureds for not signing up for the Affordable Care Act is…lack of affordability.  (2) Rates are jumping faster than in the past few years as certain bailout-style provisions designed to cushion insurers’ losses expire and fall short (3) The “benchmark” plans’ premiums are also rising, just not as fast — but more importantly, the plans with that designation are changing.  If people want to pay “benchmark” rates, many will have to go through the hassle of switching plans, due to this effect.  (4)The implosion of Obamacare co-ops continues apace, with Tennessee joining Kentucky and the rest of the list within the last 24 hours. (5) One way the feds hope to boost enrollment is through sticks, not carrots.  The Obamacare mandate tax is sharply increasing this year, punishing people who decline to buy compulsory government-approved insurance.  That’s unlikely to impress many voters.  Then again, there are broad exemptions to the mandate tax available to people who can’t afford Obamacare’s high costs; the administration has all but admitted that the law itself is a exemption-worthy “hardship.”  I’ll leave you with this, for which Democrats are reflexively trying to blame Republicans.  But the record is clear: Democrats own Obamacare-related healthcare disruptions and fallout — lock, stock and barrel:
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/10/16/its-working-wh-drastically-curtails-2016-obamacare-enrollment-forecast-n2066555Posted 16th October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  111. OCT2‘Unacceptably High’: Minnesota Sees Major Obama Lied Abou Care Rate Hikes 




    In the latest case of soaring health care rates since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, Minnesotans will pay up to nearly 50 percent more for the health insurance plans they buy on the state’s Obamacare insurance exchange.

    The Minnesota Commerce Department said Thursday that Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans purchased on the MNsure – the state’s marketplace – will go up by 49 percent. Other plans will increase by 14 percent to 39 percent for the other four insurance companies in the state exchange, the Star-Tribune reported.



    Only about 6 percent of the state’s residents – or 300,000 people – are insured on the marketplace, where they are eligible for tax credits to buy insurance. The Minnesota Commerce Department approved the rate hikes.

    “Even though Minnesota rates remain among the nation’s lowest, the rate increases by the insurance companies are unacceptably high,” Minnesota Department of Commerce Commissioner Mike Rothman said, according to WCCO-TV.

    Every health insurance company in Minnesota asked for a rate increase of at least 10 percent, the Star-Tribune reported. Blue Cross and Blue Shield asked for an increase in the mid-50s.
    “When Blue Cross and Blue Shield filed higher rate increases in the mid-50 percent range, it made all the other insurers want to change and increase their rates, too,” Rothman said. “This effectively tied our hands, in some respects.”

    Blue Cross and Blue Shield said in a statement that the hikes will “mitigate” the cost to the company, but added, “Even with these increases, Blue Cross is likely to experience continued significant financial losses through 2016.”

    Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton, a Democrat, said that, if companies make insurance unaffordable, he will demand “that they be removed as the providers of health insurance.”
    The state’s Republican House Speaker Kurt Daudt said that, instead of adding another bureaucracy, the state should have joined the federal exchange.

    “It’s time now that we take real action, before one or two more years of huge rate increases that Minnesotans can’t afford,” Daudt told reporters Thursday. “The time for action is now.”
    MNsure’s interim chief executive, Allison O’Toole, said in a statement that the hikes didn’t reflect so well on the Obamacare law as a whole, not just MNsure.

    “The fact of the matter is that today’s news would be the same regardless of whether Minnesotans use MNsure or healthcare.gov,” O’Toole said.
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/10/02/unacceptably-high-another-state-sees-major-obamacare-rate-hikes/
    Posted 2nd October 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  112. AUG27By the Way, Obama Lied About Care is Still Raising Costs and Breaking Promises,




    Sure, that’s a ‘dog bites man’ headline, for reasons I’ve expanded on at greater length herehere, and here.  Massive “Affordable” Care Act rate increases are on the way across the country in 2016, as the insurance industry adjusts to the law’s coverage requirements and the older-and-sicker-than-expectedindividual market risk pools.  There are many reasons why Obamacare has remained consistently and enduringly unpopular for years, including its raft of broken central promises.  A few updates from across the country:

    (1) Premium spikes in Florida:

    Health insurance premiums for Floridians who buy their own plans will rise 9.5 percent on average for 2016, though some consumers will pay less for their coverage than they did this year, state insurance regulators reported Wednesday. A total of 19 health insurance companies submitted rate filings to Florida’s Office of Insurance Regulation…Florida regulators denied proposed rate increases for more than half of the issuers in the state for 2016. The majority of health plans received approval for single-digit increases, and four decreased their rates from 2015. Average rate changes for 2016 plans sold on the ACA exchange will range from a decrease of nearly 10 percent for some plans, and an increase of as much as 16 percent for others…Ben Wakana, HHS press secretary, issued a written statement noting that this year Florida regulators “significantly reduced” rates for consumers. “We are pleased that Florida was able to reduce rates,” Wakana said. The largest rate increase approved by Florida regulators for plans sold on the ACA exchange went to UnitedHealthcare of Florida, which had requested an average increase of 18.2 percent. The average monthly premium per person for that UnitedHealthcare plan will rise from $398 in 2015 to about $463 in 2016.
    Even after regulators rejected insurers’ requested rate increases derived from actuarial data, the artificially-held-down spikes are still nearly 10 percent, on average.  Because these large increases are less than what was requested, HHS is referring to them as “reduced rates.”  Orwellian, and unlikely to fool anyone actually paying their bills.  Higher rateshigher out-of-pocket costs, and access shock are national trends under Obamacare.

    (2) Failure in Nevada, and elsewhere:

    The Nevada Health Co-Op created as part of the Affordable Care Act is ending operations at the end of the year due to continued high costs. The nonprofit’s board of directors announced Wednesday that they’d made the “painful” decision to phase out the program rather than continue investing in an uncertain market. Participants will be covered through the end of 2015, but are asked to choose other insurance providers when an open enrollment period beings in November…Co-ops around the country are struggling. Regulators shut down one covering Iowa and Nebraska, and one in Louisiana announced plans to shut down.
    (3) The national healthcare cost curve is still pointed in the wrong direction:

    After years of slower growth, Medicare and Medicaid are growing more rapidly again. Following news earlier this year that national health spending growth had started to quicken once again, the CBO estimates that major health programs—mostly Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare—will cost 13 percent more this year than last, adding up to about a $106 billion difference. The biggest contributor to the boom in federal health care spending? Medicaid, which, will cost $49 billion more this year, a year-over-year increase of about 16 percent, thanks largely to the expansion of Medicaid coverage under Obamacare.
    (4) Higher Obamacare taxes ensnaring more Americans, leading to scaled back coverage and reduced access:

    Obamacare’s “Cadillac tax” will hit one in four employers that offer health care benefits, a leading industry analyst says in a report being released Tuesday, socking companies with a massive levy that Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill say is unfair to those who have negotiated high-quality plans as part of their jobs. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that 26 percent of companies will be affected by the tax when it takes effect in 2018 and 42 percent of employers will be paying the levy a decade later, signaling just how quickly health care costs are expected to rise — and how valuable the Cadillac plans are…Kaiser said some employers probably will cut back on the scope of their plans to duck the tax, resulting in coverage with higher deductibles or networks with fewer doctors. “For the most part, these changes will result in employees paying for a greater share of their health care out-of-pocket,” the study authors wrote.
    Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber bragged that the president’s rhetoric about the so-called ‘Cadillac tax’ was a ruse, deliberately “mislabeled” to convince the public that it would only impact a small number of plans.  In fact, Gruber argued, the tax would expand over time to cover all employer-based plans, with the goal of destroying the status quo, with which tens of millions of Americans are satisfied.  “Keep your plan,” etc.  I might as well leave you with this:
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/08/27/by-the-way-obamacare-is-still-failing-n2044281?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=Posted 27th August 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  113. AUG25Covered -Less California Facing Administrative Collapse  

      The Health Consumer Alliance filed a blistering letter just before Covered California’s Board meeting on Thursday accusing the state’s Obamacare exchange of failing to resolve member issues promptly, including blocked access to care and the inability for individual members to finalize their tax returns.Despite Covered California plowing through $1.06 billion in federal dollars, HCA warns the program is near administrative collapse.

    Earlier this year, California’s health insurance exchange, established under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, was touted as a model for other states to follow. But the program has since been under a barrage of attacks for a myriad of failures, including abysmal enrollment performance and sending out over 100,000 inaccurate tax forms.

    HCA’s letter to the Board warns, “We are concerned that public support for the (Affordable Care Act) will erode as more and more consumers encounter these types of tax problems and face exposure to IRS debts and penalties.” The group also alleges that Covered California’s failure to correct subsidy forms has caused some consumers to not be able to receive tax credits or amend their tax returns.
    Many of Covered California problems began when it awarded $360 million to Accenture in 2012 to design coveredca.com as a supposedly automated exchange and enrollment system. But the Health Consumer Alliance claims that after two years, staff still have only limited ability to update the computer program used to determine consumers’ eligibility for exchange coverage under Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program.

    When coveredca.com first launched in September 2013, there were major usability problems, including: 1) lack of login link on the landing page; 2) five different sets of security questions; 3) demanding tax returns for young children; 4) inability to go back and forward through the application without being closed out; and 5) demands to verify income without a way to file proof, according to Chilmark Research.

    With only about 1.2 million people signing up for Covered California in 2014, versus a 2 million enrollee expectation, the exchange responded to its system failures by obtaining an additional $155 million in federal dollars to use mostly humans to process enrollments.

    But the health plans on the Covered California exchange, like Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of California, had also overstated the size of their provider networks. Over a quarter of the physicians listed as in-network were not taking Covered California patients, or were no longer at their supposed network location, according to state reports. As a result, errors led to big unforeseen medical bills charged to patients when they unwittingly ventured to out-of-network doctors for surgery or medical tests.

    After a year of pain for consumers, only 65 percent of Covered California’s 2014 customers re-enrolled in 2015. The rest bailed out, despite state penalties for not carrying health insurance. Although Covered California claimed it would add 500,000 more members, only 7,098 additional members “selected a plan” in 2015.

    During a raucous board meeting on Thursday, Covered California Executive Director Peter Lee promised that the exchange has re-committed to resolving the issues quickly by adding staff. He also noted that “a very small percentage” of consumers file appeals when rejected.
    “The challenges with big IT, it does not necessarily mean nimble IT,” Lee said. “We’re working to speed those up. But the issue of having effective and as prompt as possible resolution to appeals is something we take very seriously.”

    Despite all the administrative failures and network disasters, Breitbart News reported last month that Covered California would increase its rates by 4 percent next year–at least three times the rate of inflation.

    Obamacare was sold to the American public as an opportunity to save $2,500 a year for a family of four. But family members enrolled in Covered California will each be paying another $384 in Northern California and $296 in Southern California in 2016.
    http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/08/23/covered-california-facing-administrative-collapse/Posted 25th August 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  114. AUG21Posted 21st August 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  115. AUG2140 Percent Of Households Could Lose Obamacare Subsidies Due To Tax Law Confusion
     


    Well, this is happening (via AAF):
    According to preliminary data released by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in a letter to Congress on July 17, 2015, about 40 percent of households that received subsidies in 2014 are currently at risk of losing their subsidy eligibility because of complications with their 2014 tax returns. To date 1.8 million heads of households have not submitted the appropriate Affordable Care Act (ACA) related tax forms to reconcile the $5.5 billion in subsidies paid on behalf of these households.

    Brittany La Couture, a lawyer from Georgetown University who specializes in health care policy, wrote that 360,000 taxpayers have filed extensions to get their paperwork in order. They have until October 15. But wait–there are two more groups.

    The second bloc of people–760,000–failed to turn in their new Premium Tax Credit form (form 8962), which she says looks similar to a typical 1040 income tax form. La Couture adds that this is an extraneous addition to the already tedious tax filing process. Then, there are the 710,000 people who didn’t file any tax paperwork due to their level of income, which historically might have not been necessary. Yet, with this new law, their subsidies are on the chopping block.
    The Affordable Care Act has been riddled with technical glitches and premium hikes that have been documented by Guy. Read more about them herehere, and here. This was a big government health care overhaul. Of course, the laws stemming from it were going to be botched, as are most things that come out of Washington, especially from this administration.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/08/20/40-percent-of-households-could-lose-obamacare-subsidies-due-to-tax-law-confusion-n2041782Posted 21st August 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  116. AUG6Obama Promised He Wouldn’t Raise Taxes On the Middle Class. He Lied. The 2015 Tax Changes Created By Dems and Obama Lie About Carer 


     When he was asking for our vote in 2008, then candidate Barack Obama famously promised the American people, “I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”   But as the Supreme Court has now authoritatively ruled, the Obamacare individual mandate, requiring workers to purchase the health insurance the government specifies each family must buy, is a tax.  And that tax applies to the middle class and working people.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/07/19/obama-promised-he-wouldnt-raise-taxes-on-the-middle-class-he-lied/

    Tax on capital gains, dividends goes up to 20 percent for families earning $450,000 or more The fiscal cliff bill, passed by the House and Senate on Jan. 1, 2013, did raise taxes to 20 percent, but only for taxpayers earning $400,000 (for individuals) or $450,000 (for couples). Taxing capital gains at 20 percent returns taxation to the level under President Bill Clinton. Under Clinton, dividends were taxed as ordinary income, meaning rates as high as 39.6 percent.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/1/increase-the-capital-gains-and-dividends-taxes-for/
     I have a friend and colleague emergency physician who was previously a Sniper as an enlisted man, then an officer before he decided to be a physician–remarkable Mike. 
    He sent me this list enough to piss off the most cooperative citizen.


    Thanks Mike, for the reminder that we are screwed by these socialist statists:
    Subject: Hello 2015

    Hello 2015

    As a brief reminder for those who forgot or for
    many that didn’t know

    Here is what happened, quietly, on January 1, 2015:

    1.Medicare tax went from 1.45% to 2.35%

    2.Top Income tax bracket went from 35% to 39.6%

    3.Top Income payroll tax went from 37.4% to 52.2%

    4.Capital Gains tax went from 15% to 28%

    5.Dividend tax went from 15% to 39.6%

    6.Estate tax went from 0% to 55%

    7.A 3.5% Real Estate transaction tax was added.

    Remember this fact:

    These taxes were all passed solely with Democrat votes, Not a single Republican voted for these new taxes.

    These taxes were all passed in the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.
    http://junkscience.com/2015/08/05/the-2015-tax-changes-created-by-dems-and-the-bamster/Posted 6th August 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  117. AUG4First Obama Lied About Care Co-Op To Fail Could Cost Taxpayers Over $140 Million


    The first Obamacare-created insurer to go under could cost federal taxpayers up to $140 million, according to a new court filing.CoOportunity Health, a nonprofit insurer created with $147 million in federal taxpayer loans as a result of the Affordable Care Act, was taken over by the state of Iowa in 2014 and declared insolvent in March of this year. Now the company’s ability to repay its loans may be looking grim, The Des Moines Register reports.Daniel Watkins, a lawyer designated as the special deputy liquidator charged with helping dissolve CoOportunity Health, which formerly served Iowa’s and Nebraska’s Obamacare exchanges, filed a status report Friday in Iowa’s Polk County District Court, raising more questions about CoOportunity’s financial status.While CoOportunity retains just $109 million in assets, it has over $282 million in liabilities, according to Watkins. Some of that money will be offset by a trio of risk mitigation policies in place at Obamacare exchanges — the reinsurance, risk adjustment and risk corridor mechanisms. CoOportunity is still negotiating the process with the federal Obamacare agency, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, but the pools are unlikely to meet the total funding the company requires.

    After coming up with a $163 million operating loss during its first year as an nonprofit insurer, CoOportunity still owes federal taxpayers $147 million in start-up loans originally doled out by the Obama administration as part of the health-care law.Watkins believes CoOportunity will bring in another $97 million for its services this year — but most of that will be owed to guaranty associations who have been covering medical bills for the company’s customers. Watkins doesn’t believe the new income will even begin to cover federal taxpayer loans.Part of CoOportunity’s debts, however, include payments to insurance agents who sold the company’s policies but have yet to be paid for their services. Doctors, hospitals, clinics and other health-care providers have been paid, however, Watkins maintained.Some customers faced financial difficulties as a result of the co-ops collapse as well. As CoOportunity’s customers switched coverage after the company was officially declared insolvent in March 2015, some had to begin paying their deductibles all over again after already making headway on the payments in January.CoOportunity is the first Obamacare co-op to go under, but it will already be joined by a second this year. Louisiana Health Co-operative will shut down Dec. 31, 2015, according to Modern Healthcare. In all, at 19 of 23 nonprofits created by the law, losses exceeded the companies’ own projections for the first year of Obamacare’s operation. (RELATED: After Billions In Loans, Almost All Obamacare Co-Ops Were In The Red After Obamacare’s First Year)Six co-ops are in especially deep financial trouble due to low enrollment and other pressures — but those haven’t yet been identified by federal officials. (RELATED: Obama Administration Refuses To Identify Troubled Healthcare Co-Ops)

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/04/first-obamacare-co-op-to-fail-could-cost-taxpayers-over-140-million/#ixzz3ht0atMZiPosted 4th August 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  118. JUL6Why, It Looks Like Obama Lied About Care is Causing Massive Rate Hikes







    Two stories on “progressive” welfare states collapsing under the crush of reckless, unsustainable profligacy — and one on Obamacare’s double-digit rate increases: Health insurance companies around the country are seeking rate increases of 20 percent to 40 percent or more, saying their new customers under the Affordable Care Act turned out to be sicker than expected. Federal officials say they are determined to see that the requests are scaled back. Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans — market leaders in many states — are seeking rate increases that average 23 percent in Illinois, 25 percent in North Carolina, 31 percent in Oklahoma, 36 percent in Tennessee and 54 percent in Minnesota, according to documents posted online by the federal government and state insurance commissioners and interviews with insurance executives…Jesse Ellis O’Brien, a health advocate at the Oregon State Public Interest Research Group, said: “Rate increases will be bigger in 2016 than they have been for years and years and will have a profound effect on consumers here. Some may start wondering if insurance is affordable or if it’s worth the money.”
    “It’s working,” they insist, as the ‘Affordable’ Care Act slams Americans with higher costs.  President Obama, who continues to claim that his unpopular law is surpassing his wildest expectations, has nothing but anti-reality tantrums to offer:

    President Obama, on a trip to Tennessee this week, said that consumers should put pressure on state insurance regulators to scrutinize the proposed rate increases. If commissioners do their job and actively review rates, he said, “my expectation is that they’ll come in significantly lower than what’s being requested.” The rate requests, from some of the more popular health plans, suggest that insurance markets are still adjusting to shock waves set off by the Affordable Care Act. It is far from certain how many of the rate increases will hold up on review, or how much they might change. But already the proposals, buttressed with reams of actuarial data, are fueling fierce debate about the effectiveness of the health law.
    Alas, Obama speeches cannot alter the laws of economics. But wait, the Timesnotes, there is a way for consumers to mitigate the effects of huge 2016 premium increases: People can go through the headache of dropping their current plans in pursuit of arrangements with less steep hikes — which, in turn, could threaten access to doctors and care:

    A study of 11 cities in different states by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that consumers would see relatively modest increases in premiums if they were willing to switch plans. But if they switch plans, consumers would have no guarantee that they can keep their doctors. And to get low premiums, they sometimes need to accept a more limited choice of doctors and hospitals.
    Keep your plan, keep your doctor, etc. Please recall that the president and his allies repeatedly pledged that everybody’s rates would drop under Obamacare. Comprehensively, spectacularly false. Why the huge spikes? Simple cause and effect:

    In their submissions to federal and state regulators, insurers cite several reasons for big rate increases. These include the needs of consumers, some of whom were previously uninsured; the high cost of specialty drugs; and a policy adopted by the Obama administration in late 2013 that allowed some people to keep insurance that did not meet new federal standards…Insurers with decades of experience and brand-new plans underestimated claims costs…The rate requests are the first to reflect a full year of experience with the new insurance exchanges and federal standards that require insurers to accept all applicants, without charging higher prices because of a person’s illness or disability…In financial statements filed with the government in the last two months, some insurers said that their claims payments totaled not just 80 percent, but more than 100 percent of premiums. And that, they said, is unsustainable.
    Behold, a peek at Oregon’s approved — i.e., finalized — 2016 premium increases:


    Costs are jumping drastically because Obamacare’s provisions are driving a price spiral, fueled by an older, sicker risk pool. It’s almost as if the law’s critics were right. About almost everything. 
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/07/06/nyt-it-seems-as-though-obamacare-is-causing-massive-rate-hikes-n2021531?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=Posted 6th July 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  119. JUL1Starting Wednesday, Obama Lied About Care will punish businesses who help employees with health care

    Employers who reimburse their workers for health care costs will face massive tax penalties beginning Wednesday.Prior to the passage of the  UN-Affordable Care Act, with its mandate that all Americans purchase insurance and requirement for businesses to offer employees insurance plans, many small companies provided coverage by directly reimbursing medical costs or for the cost of private insurance plans. Businesses do it because that’s a less complicated process than dealing with an official health insurance plan, but continuing to do so after July 1 could cost them hundreds of dollars in fines each day.

    Business groups are calling attention to what they say is an obscure part of Obamacare that could crush small businesses who are unaware of it.“It’s the biggest penalty that no one is talking about,” said Kevin Kuhlman, policy director for the National Federation of Independent Businesses, on Tuesday.The penalties will only affect businesses with less than 50 employees. Those with more than 50 employees are already required to offer a health insurance plan.The new rule is the result of an Internal Revenue Service interpretation of part of the ACA. It seems intended to force employers to offer a group health insurance plan (or leave their employees to fend for themselves on the health insurance exchanges).The IRS says those reimbursements — technically known as “employer payment plans” — are “considered to be group health plans subject to the market reforms, including the prohibition on annual limits for essential health benefits and the requirement to provide certain preventive care without cost sharing.”The end result?“Such an arrangement fails to satisfy the market reforms and may be subject to a $100/day excise tax per applicable employee (which is $36,500 per year, per employee) under section 4980D of the Internal Revenue Code,” according to the taxmen.Business groups say the punishment doesn’t fit the crime.Even though the total fine is capped at $500,000 per year, that’s still miles ahead of the $2,000 fine that could be waiting for larger companies (those with more than 50 employees) that fail to comply with the individual mandate part of the ACA.The NFIB says 14 percent of their members do not provide health insurance plans, but instead offer reimbursement.The owner of a Minnesota-based company with 17 employees told NFIB the new rules would require health benefits to go through the payroll process. That means it is subject to taxes, which reduces employees’ benefits and increases the business’ costs.“Reimbursing employees for the cost of insurance or medical services is a way for small businesses to help their workers without the administrative headache of setting up a costly group plan,” said Kuhlman.  “Most small employers don’t have HR departments or benefits specialists, so this is a simpler, easier way to help their employees.”The prohibition on employer reimbursement was supposed to start last year, but the IRS postponed implementing it until July 1.There has been bipartisan support in Congress for eliminating the harsh penalty on small businesses, but bills have not advanced.“This would be devastating to small businesses and impose hardships on their employees,” said U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in January, referring to the potential $100-per-employee-per-day fine. “Congress has to fix this problem.”Posted 1st July 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  120. JUN25Scalia leads scathing dissent on Obama Lied About Care ruling, dubs law ‘SCOTUScare’Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia issued a scathing rebuke of the Affordable Care Act and its handling by the court on Thursday, as a majority of his colleagues once again upheld a key plank of the law. “We should just start calling this law SCOTUScare,” Scalia wrote, referring to the several times the high court has ruled on controversial parts of ObamaCare. Scalia was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in his dissent. The case itself centered on language in the original law that technically limited subsidies to people buying insurance in insurance exchanges set up by the states. The majority nevertheless upheld subsidies everywhere, suggesting that is what Congress intended. Scalia blasted that reading. “The court holds that when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act says ‘Exchange established by the State’ it means ‘Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government,’ Scalia wrote. “That is of course quite absurd, and the court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so.”He also complained that, “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’ … Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved.”He noted the other justices have stepped in twice now to save what he considered worthy challenges to the law, including the 2012 case challenging the individual mandate. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/25/scalia-scathing-scotuscare-dissent/?intcmp=trendingPosted 25th June 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  121. JUN25Steep Obama Lied About Care Insurance Premium Hikes Indicate ‘Death Spiral’ Has Begunreports major insurers in some states are proposing hefty rate boosts for plans sold under Obamacare, setting the stage for an intense debate this summer over the law’s impact.Here are some of the health plans’ rate filings in Obamacare exchanges for 2016.In New Mexico, market leader Health Care Service Corp. is asking for an average jump of 51.6 percent in premiums for 2016. The biggest insurer in Tennessee, BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee, has requested a 36.3 percent increase, on average, for its plans. In Maryland, market leader CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield wants to raise rates 30.4 percent across its products. Moda Health, the largest insurer on the Oregon health exchange, seeks an average boost of around 25 percent.Health insurance companies cite high medical costs incurred by people newly enrolled under the Affordable Care Act.The Journal’s article notes insurance commissioners in some states have the power to roll back rates if they judge them to be too high. The U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services also claims to have a similar power, although there is no legal basis for it. It is unlikely insurance commissioners will be able to protect people from these rate hikes, because excessive rollbacks will merely cause health plan providers to exit the market, which would be catastrophic for Obamacare’s political future.Unexpectedly Early ArrivalMany health insurance experts predicted a coming death spiral, but it is remarkable the collapse of Obamacare is happening now. The situation must be worse than insurers are publicly disclosing to convince them to raise rates at such a high rate in such a short period.Obamacare is the best possible scenario for health insurers—a guaranteed market for their product. It is still very much at risk from the upcoming Supreme Court decision in King v. Burwell, however, and from Republican politicians who remain united in pledging to repeal and replace it with patient-centered health reform.In light of those threats, health insurance plan providers should want to move public opinion in favor of Obamacare by keeping rate hikes low. They should even be willing to lose money in the insurance exchanges until Obamacare is secure. The exchanges are still a small part of their book of business, so they can subsidize losses in exchanges for a while without risking solvency.Much of the cost of the rate hikes will be borne by taxpayers instead of enrollees, because Obamacare’s tax credits to insurers operating in exchanges are based on the benchmark (the second-cheapest silver plan) and limited by beneficiaries’ household income. That too is hardly good news for Obamacare’s political future.Announcing these rate hikes in  summer 2015 indicates health plan providers’ experience in Obamacare exchanges must be painfully expensive.http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2015/06/15/steep-obamacare-insurance-premium-hikes-indicate-death-spiral-has-begunPosted 25th June 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  122. APR8Posted 8th April 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  123. MAR13Posted 13th March 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  124. MAR12Posted 12th March 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  125. MAR11Posted 11th March 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  126. MAR9





    Posted 9th March 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  127. MAR4
    Posted 4th March 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  128. MAR2Posted 2nd March 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  129. FEB21An Atheist Reads the Koran – Chapter 001 Sentence 001Posted 21st February 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  130. FEB21
    Posted 21st February 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 1 View comments
  131. FEB10Posted 10th February 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  132. FEB9Obama Lied About Care’s Neglect of the Middle Class The left falsely portrays Obamacare while attacking Burr-Hatch-Upton. 





    The Huffington Post’s Jeffrey Young and Jonathan Cohn declare that “putting together a real Obamacare alternative will take more time — and more genuine interest — than Republicans have.”  In truth, such Obamacare alternatives are already available to Republicans.  These include the 2017 Project’s “Winning Alternative to Obamacare,” which helped Ed Gillespie almost pull off a huge upset victory in last year’s Virginia Senate race, and the newly released Burr-Hatch-Upton alternative, an updated version of last year’s Burr-Coburn-Hatch proposal.
    Young and Cohn criticize the Burr-Hatch-Upton proposal (advanced by Senators Orrin Hatch and Richard Burr and House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton) in a variety of ways, but I want to focus on just one.  Echoing other liberal writers, they assert, “Relative to Obamacare, the Republican proposal would provide financial assistance to fewer people and cut off aid at a lower income level.”  While this critique highlights a political downside to offering income-tested tax credits — rather than offering tax credits to everyone in the individual market and thereby fixing the longstanding inequality in the tax code (between employer-based and individual-market insurance) — Young and Cohn aren’t painting an accurate picture.  In fact, their statement makes one wonder whether they really understand how Obamacare works.
    Young and Cohn’s assertion is based on the false perception, widely perpetuated on both the left and right, that Obamacare provides subsidies to everyone whose income is less than 400 percent of the poverty level.  But that’s merely the ceiling beyond which one absolutely cannot get an Obamacare subsidy.  In truth, Obamacare’s subsidies are as byzantine as one would expect from a 2,700-page effort to take over American medicine.  They are different in each of the 3,000 or so counties in the United States.  So, where you live, as well as each dollar of your income and each year of your age, alters your subsidy.  The subsidies are also altered each time one of President Obama’s insurance company allies offers a new policy that becomes the new lowest-cost or 2nd-lowest-cost “silver plan” in a given county, as the subsidy formula is based on the price of each county’s 2nd-lowest-cost “silver plan.”  (Who says Obamacare is complicated?)
    The upshot of all this is that, far from going to everyone who makes less than 400 percent of the poverty level (liberals like to speak in terms of percentages of poverty), Obamacare’s subsidies go almost entirely to the near-poor and near-elderly, while neglecting the middle class and the young. The 2017 Project completed a comprehensive study of Obamacare’s subsidies for 2014 and found that, based on America’s 50 largest counties (composing about 30 percent of the U.S. population), the typical 41-year-old (or younger) person making $35,000 a year (or less) got $0 in Obamacare subsidies.  That’s even though $35,000 is less than 300 percent of the official poverty level.Fairfax County, Virginia was near the middle of the pack in that study.  It’s also the largest county in the nation’s most down-the-middle state, so let’s use it to examine Young and Cohn’s claim in the context of 2015 — their claim that, versus Obamacare, Burr-Hatch-Upton “would provide financial assistance to fewer people and cut off aid at a lower income level.” 

    Posted 9th February 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  133. JAN31Good Job Mike MacPosted 31st January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  134. JAN23
    Posted 23rd January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  135. JAN23
    Posted 23rd January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  136. JAN20Posted 20th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  137. JAN17Posted 17th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  138. JAN12
    Posted 12th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  139. JAN12Lies Are the Life-Support for Obama Lied About Care



    The news got somewhat lost amid all the headlines about Jonathan Gruber duping the American voters, but the Obama administration lied about the number of people who are enrolled under Obamacare. Well, maybe “lied” is a strong word. But we were definitely “Grubered” over the number. In their desperate attempt to inflate the number of Obamacare enrollees to 7 million, the administration included enrollees who merely applied for dental coverage.Yep, dental coverage. The administration included almost 400,000 dental plans when they announced the official number of Obamacare enrollees. Of course, these dental plans aren’t exactly the contraception-including health coverage that is required to avoid an IRS penalty under the Affordable Care Act, but I guess it’s close enough for government work.Officials have since acknowledged their “mistake” and have promised to do things differently moving forward. And obviously we have no reason to doubt that this was all one big misunderstanding, right?I mean, it was most likely coincidental that these dental (non-qualifying plans) were deceptively added to the official tally of enrollees, just as the sign-ups were leveling off and drop out rates were increasing. As Darrell Issa (R-CA) pointed out to Bloomberg News:“After touting 8 million initial sign-ups for medical plans, four months later they engaged in a concerted effort to obscure a heavy drop-out rate of perhaps a million or more enrollees by quietly adding in dental plan sign-ups to exchange numbers.”In other words: It almost seems like the administration doesn’t really want to be honest about Obamacare enrollments. And there’s probably a good reason. They convinced the American people that enrollments would be the major test for the law’s success. A less-than-stellar performance is likely to deteriorate the already anemic support it has among the citizenry. You can probably bet that things would be a bit different if Obamacare was a rousing success. Heck, the monthly enrollment numbers would likely be the headline story on most media outlets, and the White House would be trumpeting testimonials every chance they got.Instead, we have continued efforts to obscure and conceal the impact of the law. In November, Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell told the Center for American Progress that 7.1 million people were signed up through Obamacare. That number was roughly 200,000 less than her department reported in August; and it still included those non-qualifying dental plans. Even more important is that her comments came after the department was made aware of their impropriety.In addition to questionable advertising techniques, and numeric tinkering, the Obama administration has been engaged in a relentless campaign to redefine what “success” means for the law. Knowing full well that the law is incapable of lowering health care spending, the White House has repeatedly pointed out that healthcare prices are rising “the slowest rate in 50 years.”Unfortunately for Obamacare fans, this isn’t exactly attributable to the Affordable Care Act. Health care inflation was slowing down before Obamacare, in large part because of a gradual shift toward high-deductible insurance plans, and because of a lagging economy. Inflation in almost all areas has slowed mainly because of an economic environment where consumers are experiencing zero wage growth and anemic job creation. In other words, Obamanomics is more responsible for the slowdown in health care costs than the ACA.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/townhallmagazine/2015/01/12/lies-are-the-lifesupport-for-obamacare-n1941576Posted 12th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  140. JAN7How the Obama Lied About Care Death Panel Defies the Constitution





    Former Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously said about the Affordable Care Act (ACA), i.e. ObamaCare, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” That has turned out to be so true. We did have to pass it to find out that what Sarah Palin said about it was right after all.
    The Death Panel in Obamacare is named the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). What the law says about the powers of IPAB is horrific, worthy of a Third World, authoritarian autocracy, rather than the world’s leading democratic republic.
    The Goldwater Institute, a free market think tank in Phoenix, Arizona, is suing to have IPAB declared unconstitutional. Last November 5, they filed a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari asking the Supreme Court to hear the case. On December 10, the American Civil Rights Union (ACRU), for which I serve as General Counsel, filed a brief in their support.In the ACRU brief, I stated that,
    The so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA” or “Obamacare”), involves the most comprehensive assault on the fundamental constitutional doctrine of Separation of Powers in the history of American law. The ACA, by its express terms, purports to exempt IPAB from any legislative, judicial, and even executive branch oversight. That makes IPAB the most authoritarian and anti-democratic institution in the history of American law, since slavery.”Implementing the doctrine of the Separation of Powers, the Constitution provides that Congress holds the Legislative Power to enact the laws; the President has the Executive Power to execute, or implement and administer the laws, and the Judiciary has the power to interpret the laws, and adjudicate disputes regarding them. This Separation of Powers was adopted by the Founding Fathers as a key insight arising from the European Enlightenment to provide for effective checks and balances in American government. It was intended, and has long worked, to protect the liberty of the American people from an authoritarian combination of powers in one branch of government, which could then override the rights and liberties of the people, and the operation of democracy.The most authoritative publication regarding IPAB was written by Diane Cohen and Michael Cannon, “The Independent Payment Advisory Board, PPACA’s Anti-Constitutional and Authoritarian Super-Legislature,” published by the Cato Institute in 2012. The authors write, “IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.”
    The IPA board comprises 15 unelected bureaucrats not personally accountable to the public. After they are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate, that is the end of any effective authority that any branch of government has over them.  While the ACA provides that board members may serve up to two consecutive terms, it also says, as Cohen and Cannon write, “If a board member reaches the end of his term and the President declines to appoint (or the Senate fails to confirm) a successor, he may serve indefinitely.”
    Moreover, ObamaCare provides that, “[T]he board may conduct business whenever half of its appointed members are present, and may act upon a majority vote by all members present. When there are no vacancies, therefore, the board will reach a quorum whenever as few as eight members gather, and any five members could wield IPAB’s considerable powers,” as Cohen and Cannon further write.
    Indeed, it is possible under the express terms of the ACA for the vast powers of IPAB to be vested in and exercised by just one unelected person — one. Cohen and Cannon explain, “If there are 14 vacancies on the board, the Act allows the sole appointed member to constitute a quorum, conduct official business, and issue ‘proposals.’”
    The president, therefore, could appoint just one party loyalist, who can serve for life, to carry out all of IPAB’s vast powers. Cohen and Cannon add, “Or none: if the President fails to appoint any board members (or the Senate fails to confirm the president’s appointments, or a majority of the board cannot agree on a proposal) the Act authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to exercise the board’s powers unilaterally.” And who does the Secretary of HHS answer to? President Obama.Those powers, moreover, would include the power of the HHS Secretary to assume legislative authority and appropriate funds to his or her own department to administer his or her own directives.Quality Health Care for All – or Quality Health Care for None?
    In order to help finance its new health care benefits, ObamaCare provides for cuts to future Medicare spending of $716 billion over the first 10 years alone, as officially scored by CBO and Medicare’s actuaries. To further ensure funding for its new benefits, ObamaCare created IPAB to adopt further cuts to Medicare to the extent necessary to keep Medicare spending within certain target limits. Beginning in 2018, that target limit will be the rate of growth of the economy per capita plus one percentage point.For every year that the Medicare actuaries project Medicare spending will exceed the specified limits, the ACA requires IPAB, no later than January 15 of the preceding year, to issue a “detailed and specific… legislative proposal… related to the Medicare program” that “shall… result in a net reduction in total Medicare program spending… that is at least equal to the applicable savings target.” Further, it authorizes IPAB to “propose” even greater reductions in projected Medicare spending.
    I informed the Supreme Court in the ACRU brief, “If this Court does not act to consider this case, IPAB will be busy rewriting the Medicare Act for many years. Historically, per capita Medicare spending has grown an average of 2.6 percentage points higher each year than per capita GDP. At those current, long term trends, IPAB will be cutting at least 1.6% of Medicare spending each and every year, for many years.” Of course, an Executive Branch board of unelected bureaucrats is not the way to reduce Medicare spending.Moreover, IPAB’s powers are not limited to Medicare under the language of the Obamacare law. IPAB can issue any proposal “related to the Medicare program.” The board can reason that if it is restricting spending on health care under Medicare, then it must also restrict spending on health care throughout the economy, or doctors and hospitals will flee Medicare and the seniors it is supposed to be serving, to provide better compensated health care to others. Indeed, Medicare’s actuaries are already effectively making just this argument about the impact on Medicare from Obamacare’s restrictions and cuts for Medicare.
    As Cohen and Cannon report, ObamaCare “requires IPAB” to produce proposals to “slow the growth in national health expenditures” and “Non-Federal Health Care Programs.” Cohen and Cannon further explain that ObamaCare,“‘provides that if the Medicare actuaries project that the growth rate of national health expenditures will exceed that of per-enrollee Medicare spending, IPAB’s ‘proposals shall be designed to help reduce the growth rate [of national health expenditures] while maintaining or enhancing beneficiary access to quality care under [Medicare].’ This is a clear mandate to reduce both government and private sector health care spending.  Indeed, the simplest way to reduce overall health care spending while maintaining access to care for Medicare enrollees is to limit spending on patients outside of Medicare.”Limiting private medical spending is one of the most effective ways for the government to ration health care. With their compensation so sharply slashed, doctors and hospitals will start to withdraw health care from the market. Investors will begin to divert capital elsewhere for better returns, so health care will not be there when you need it. Investors will increasingly shun innovative health care breakthroughs that the state of health care science could support. When your doctor delivers the bad news that there is nothing further that can be done to save the life of your child or beloved aging parent, you won’t know if that is because of the current state of medical care, or because of all the busybody Obamacare “Progressives.” Your doctor probably will not know either. Most Democrats will not remotely understand this, or what their political party has done to the rest of us.
    This is exactly what conservatives have feared all along, and exactly what Sarah Palin warned us about. Obama and his Democrats sold Obamacare on the grounds that it meant health care for all. But what they are doing with Obamacare in redistributing health care is analogous to what always happens with such government redistribution — lowering the standard of health care for all in the process. And we don’t even get health care for all under ObamaCare, as even the Establishment CBO projects that 30 million Americans will still be uninsured 10 years after this hideous law is fully implemented. In fact, it is not even clear yet whether the net effect of ObamaCare will be to lower or raise the number of uninsured. So, conceivably, we could end up spending far more money while providing far less health care to far fewer people.Worst of all, under the ObamaCare statute, IPAB’s so-called proposals are not proposals at all. ObamaCare’s language provides for them to automatically become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or possible subjection to a presidential veto.As Cohen and Cannon explain,“IPAB’s proposals will have force of law. The reasons for this are twofold. First,  
    [the Obamacare statute] requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to
    implement them. Second, it severely restricts Congress’ ability to block their
    implementation by rejecting them or offering a substitute proposal. These
    provisions will effectively make IPAB’s proposals law without the approval of
    Congress or the signature of the President.”Under the ObamaCare statute, Cohen and Cannon add, “To prevent an IPAB proposal from becoming law, Congress must offer substitute …legislation that achieves the same budgetary result.  [Alternatively], the Act requires a three-fifths vote of all the members of the Senate to waive [this requirement].” Otherwise, “IPAB’s legislative proposal automatically becomes law, and the Act requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it.”
    Moreover, ‘after 2020, Congress loses the ability even to offer substitutes for IPAB proposals,” Cohen and Cannon add. “[I]n that case, the Act requires the Secretary to implement IPAB’s proposals even if Congress does enact a substitute.”
    Constitution? What Constitution?Most outrageously, the law also purports to sharply limit the legislative power of the Congress of the United States to ever repeal IPAB. Under the ACA, Congress can only ever repeal IPAB by introducing a specifically worded “Joint Resolution” in the House and the Senate between January 1, 2017 and February 1, 2017. Then it must pass that resolution with a three-fifths vote of all members of each house by August 15, 2017.As Cohen and Cannon summarize:“Congress has only about 15 business days in the year 2017 to propose [a] joint
    resolution of repeal [of IPAB]. Otherwise, the Act forever precludes repeal [of
    IPAB]. Congress must then pass that resolution with a three-fifths supermajority
    by August 15, 2017, or the Act forever precludes repeal…. If Congress fails to
    follow these precise steps, then [the ObamaCare statute] states the American
    people’s elected representatives may never repeal IPAB, ever.”So the ObamaCare law not only shifts the legislative power of Congress to an Executive Branch agency under Obama, it also sharply restricts the legislative power of Congress itself. I wonder what the Democrat staffers must have been drinking and smoking when they came up with this.
    In a final insult to constitutional injury, the law provides that, “Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB’s edicts in court.” Cohen and Cannon state, “Finally, [the ACA] gives IPAB and the Secretary the sole authority to judge their own actions by prohibiting administrative or judicial review of the Secretary’s implementation of an IPAB proposal.”Cohen and Cannon conclude,“The Independent Payment Advisory Board is worse than unconstitutional — it is
    anti-constitutional.  Congress’s legislative powers do not include the power to
    alter the constitutional procedure required for passage of laws.  Nor does it
    include the power to entrench legislation by preventing it from being altered by
    future Congresses.”Note that President Obama has not made any appointments to IPAB. That means that the Secretary of HHS, Sylvia Matthews Burwell, who has held office since last June and reports directly to President Obama, now personally holds all the powers of that board. That includes plenary powers to reorder anything related to health care, as if property rights, freedom of contract, the rule of law, the Constitution, and democracy do not apply to any business or transaction related to health care. In other words, within the Affordable Care Act, President Obama has set himself up as a health care dictator.
    Perhaps it’s time to officially rename the Department of Health and Human Services the Department of Health and Human Suffering.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/01/how_the_obamacare_death_panel_defies_the_constitution.html#ixzz3OAXj6bRe
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on FacebookPosted 7th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  141. JAN7House bill: Firms could skirt health law by hiring vets?On the new Congress’ first day, the House unanimously approved Republican legislation Tuesday making it easier for smaller companies to avoid providing health care coverage to their workers by hiring veterans.


    The measure was approved 412-0 and is the first of many expected GOP bills aimed at President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, which was enacted over uniform Republican opposition.

    That 2010 law is phasing in a requirement that companies with more than 50 full-time workers provide medical coverage for their workers. The House bill, sponsored by Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill., would exempt from that threshold veterans who already get health care from the Veterans Affairs Department or the military.


    Supporters say the measure would encourage employers to hire veterans. That’s a goal backed by members of both parties, even as federal figures show unemployment among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans dropped from 9.9 percent in November 2013 to 5.7 percent last November.


    Critics say the measure’s effect on companies and veterans is overstated. They say only modest numbers of firms are close to the 50-worker level and would be motivated to hire veterans to avoid providing medical insurance for their employees.
    In a written statement, the White House said it backed the measure, saying it supports “commonsense improvements” in the law.


    “We want to work with Congress on policies that strengthen and simplify the Affordable Care Act, protecting coverage and taxpayers alike,” the White House said.


    Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said he considered the bill “one piece of our ongoing efforts to fully repeal and replace” Obama’s health care law.


    Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, an Army National Guard member who has served in the Middle East, said the measure would help two important constituencies: veterans and small business.


    “It’s a great message and exactly the right tone” for the new Congress, Gabbard said.
    A similar bill passed the House last year by 406-1, but went nowhere in the Democratic-run Senate. Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., has introduced the same legislation in the Senate, which is now controlled by Republicans.
    The House plans to debate a far more controversial bill later this week.


    It would change the health care law’s definition of a full-time worker from those who work 30 hours weekly to people working 40 hours.


    Republicans say the health law’s 30-hour requirement is encouraging companies to cut workers’ hours.
    Democrats say raising the law’s threshold to 40 hours would put far more people at risk. That’s because more employees work around 40 hours weekly than 30 hours, meaning that more of them could be targeted for fewer hours by companies looking to save money by reducing health coverage.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/01/07/house-bill-firms-could-skirt-health-law-by-hiring-vets/?intcmp=latestnews

    Posted 7th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  142. JAN7Posted 7th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  143. JAN5Obama Doing A Bang Up Job.


    Posted 5th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  144. JAN4Obamacare Protocols Fail Flu-Stricken Boy Who Dies In Father’s Arms In Waiting RoomMikey Guallpa died within 3 days of coming down with flu symptoms.



    A doctor prescribed tamiflu for Mikey during an urgent care visit on the second day.The next day, his temperature had dropped but he still vomitted and had uncontrollable dirreaha.He was taken to the emergency room at St Elizabeth Hospital in Florence, Kentucky. His father begged for the medical staff to look at him and give him an IV.They were responded to as if they “were crazy” and told to wait in line.About 20 minutes later, Mikey vomited again and passed out in his father’s arms. A short time later, he was pronounced dead.The hospital released a statement offering condolences to the family, an also read: “We are unable to comment or release any specific information. As an organization, St Elizabeth takes protecting the privacy of our patients’ protected information very seriously.”The boy may have had health issues that amplified the flu symptoms.http://viral.buzz/video-obamacare-protocols-fail-flu-stricken-boy-who-dies-in-fathers-arms-in-waiting-room/Posted 4th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  145. JAN4Fuzzy Obamacare Subsidies Could Leave Half Of Obamacare Customers Owing The IRS.

    Up to half of the 6.8 million Americans who received premium subsidies in 2014 could end up owing the federal government money because of it this tax season, The Wall Street Journal reports.According to an analysis by top tax firm H&R Block, as many as half of the customers who got premium subsidies may end up owing the federal government money after being overpaid throughout the year.The problem is that customers have to estimate their income for the upcoming year when applying for Obamacare subsidies — and any mistakes or changes could mean that the IRS actually overpays them.“The ACA is going to result in more confusion for existing clients and many taxpayers may well be very disappointed by getting less money and possibly even owing money,” Charles McCabe, president of Peoples Income Tax and the Income Tax School, told WSJ. “The whole implementation of Obamacare will be frustrating for tax preparers.”On the upside, however, the mass confusion at the IRS and amongst tax preparers could leave the agency without adequate resources to fully enforce the individual mandate. And because the White House is behind on approving paperwork for the IRS’ implementation already, according to a report last month from the American Action Forum, the tax on the uninsured is likely to be only lightly enforced this year. (RELATED: White House Still Dodging IRS On Individual Mandate Paperwork)
    he uninsured will get even more of a break during this tax season because the Obama administration is taking tax filers at their word about whether they actually had health insurance. The IRS has said it won’t reject tax returns if customers don’t answer questions about health insurance and will accept tax filers’ calculation for the penalty they owe the government if they admit they went without health coverage.This tax season, customers will owe $95 or 1 percent of household income. Those totals can get fairly pricey — WSJ calculated that a single adult earning $60,000 a year could owe almost $500 for the tax, while a family with two adults and two children that makes $250,000 would owe $2,297. And the tax for going uninsured in 2015 climbs to $325 or 2 percent of income.While tax preparers will be hard put-upon to cover customers’ bases with a load of new requirements this season, they’re also likely to see their bottom lines grow. As filing taxes grows more complicated for the average American, and especially those 6.8 million Obamacare customers, more people may choose to turn to a tax preparation service rather than attempting to figure out the forms on their own.Industry experts may be calling 2014 the worst tax season yet, but 2015 is already set to grow even more complicated. This year, the employer mandate begins to take effect. Employers will have to report to the IRS who has health insurance through their job and who doesn’t, beginning in 2014, after the Obama administration delayed the reporting requirements in July 2013 due to the business community’s outcry.The reporting requirements will likely make the IRS’ job more difficult and they’ll have to check tax filers’ reported health insurance status with employer records, giving the agency a way to charge customers more strictly for the individual mandate tax.http://dailycaller.com/2015/01/02/fuzzy-obamacare-subsidies-could-leave-half-of-obamacare-customers-owing-the-irs/Posted 4th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  146. JAN4

    NEXTPosted 4th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  147. JAN4
    Posted 4th January 2015 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  148. DEC29Posted 29th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  149. DEC27Obama Lied About CarePosted 27th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  150. DEC27Posted 27th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  151. DEC27Posted 27th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  152. DEC24Obama Don’t CarePosted 24th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  153. DEC23Jonathan Gruber Pops Up in Obamacare Supreme Court Briefonathan Gruber is on the record in a Supreme Court case that could unravel parts of Obamacare.Gruber’s name is mentioned six time in a brief filed by the plaintiffs challenging the health care law in King v. Burwell. The plaintiffs argue that Obamacare subsidies can only go to people in states that created their own state exchanges, which would mean millions of people who get an insurance plan from the federal healthcare.gov exchange would be ineligible.
    The Obama administration and other Democrats contend the language was just a drafting order. But recently unearthed comments by Gruber, an MIT economist who consulted in drafting the Affordable Care Act, imply a more literal meaning.“If you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits … I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges, and that they’ll do it.” Gruber said in January 2012.The court documents refer to a YouTube video at the 32-minute mark:
    The plaintiff brief goes on to identify how Gruber is characterized by media reports as a “key architect” of the Affordable Care Act who was paid “close to $400,000 as a consultant” by the Department of Health and Human Services during 2009 and 2010, according to a Nov. 15 New York Times story. Another Times article on March 29 said Gruber helped congressional staff “draft the specifics of the legislation.”Gruber made news earlier this year about for talking about the “stupidity of the American voter” in selling Obamacare.Democrats have warned that $65 billion in funding could be at stake in the lawsuit, The Hill reported.The high court will hear the case on March 4, 2015.“From the outset of this case we have argued that the Obamacare statute clearly limits subsidies to exchanges established by states,” Michael Carving, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said in in a statement, according to The Hill. “[Our position] is further supported by factors ranging from the law’s legislative history and lower court rulings to Jonathan Gruber’s recently rediscovered statements.”Posted 23rd December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  154. DEC23SCOTUS: Second Obama Lied About Care Challenge Gets Its Court Date





    Well, the day has arrived! On March 4, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on King v. Burwell, which will determine the fate of Obamacare. The King case was decided around the same time as Halbig v. Burwell, which argued similar points over health care subsidies for exchanges “established by the state.”


    The Fourth Circuit of Appeals sided with the government, while the D.C. Court of Appeals sided with Halbig, which Guy mentioned would increase the likelihood that this case will head to the Supreme Court (via WSJ):

    The Supreme Court said it will hear oral arguments on March 4 in a lawsuit over whether the Obama administration is improperly providing tax credits to consumers who purchase health insurance through the federal exchanges.
    The case will determine the fate of the tax credits to millions of consumers who have obtained insurance coverage through HealthCare.gov, the federal marketplace. The Supreme Court decided Nov. 7 to hear the lawsuit from Virginia, King v. Burwell, that challenges a key part of the Affordable Care Act. In all, an estimated 4.7 million people receive billions of dollars in subsidies to buy health coverage on the federal exchange.
    Challengers claim the language in the health law only permits people who buy insurance from state-run exchanges to obtain the tax credits. Supporters of the law say it was always intended to provide the subsidies to people who bought coverage on the federal exchanges, too. HealthCare.gov, the federal exchange, now serves 37 states.
    On March 4, the Supreme Court will only hear arguments related to the King case.

    The tax credits are considered central to the law’s success. Under the ACA, most Americans must have health insurance or pay a penalty. The exchanges let individuals who don’t have insurance from their employer, Medicaid or Medicare to purchase insurance policies, with tax credits for lower-income consumers.So, mark your calendars fellow health care wonks, journalists, bloggers, and political junkies; the ACA is heading back to court.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2014/12/22/scotus-second-affordable-care-act-challenge-gets-its-court-date-n1934868Posted 23rd December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  155. DEC22Opening Brief in Major Obama Lied About Care Challenge Filed With Supreme Court(CNSNews.com) –  Attorneys challenging an Internal Revenue Service rule (IRS Rule) that authorizes the payment of federal tax subsidies to Americans who buy health insurance through federally-run Obamacare exchanges filed their first salvo with the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday.
    “From the outset of this case we have argued that the Obamacare statute clearly limits subsidies to exchanges established by states,” lead counsel Michael Carvin of Jones Day said in a statement announcing the filing in King v. Burwell.“As set forth in the merits brief we filed today with the Supreme Court, our position is based primarily on the language of the statute. It is further supported by factors ranging from the law’s legislative history and lower court rulings to Jonathan Gruber’s recently rediscovered statements. We are hopeful that our arguments will prevail.”On July 22, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), only individuals enrolled in federal exchanges available in 14 states and the District of Columbia were eligible for the subsidies. However, that same day, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond upheld the IRS Rule in a contradictory ruling.In November, the high court agreed to hear King v. Burwell, the case filed by David King, Douglas Hurst, Brenda Levy, and Rose Luck, four Virginia residents who claim that the “clear language” of the ACA restricts subsidies to state-run exchanges. Their appeal is being funded and coordinated by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI).Billions of dollars are at stake, since exchanges in the other 36 states are all operated by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).Experts say that if those subsidies are struck down, Obamacare enrollment could plummet by 68 percent, effectively killing the program, since 85 percent of those enrolled in the federally-run exchanges qualify for the subsidies.“The question presented is whether the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) may permissibly promulgate regulations to extend tax-credit subsidies to coverage purchased through Exchanges established by the federal government under section 1321 of the Affordable Care Act,” King plaintiffs state in their opening brief.Since Congress cannot compel sovereign states to set up state-run exchanges, the ACA offers various “carrots” in the form of federal funds, and “sticks” in the form of fines, to entice them to do so voluntarily, the brief notes.“Most importantly, the Act authorizes subsidies, in the form of refundable tax credits, for health coverage that is purchased through state-established Exchanges. These subsidies may be paid by the U.S. Treasury directly to a taxpayer’s insurer, to offset premiums owed.”The brief quotes MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, described as a “key architect” who helped congressional staff “draft the specifics” of President Obama’s signature legislation:“[I]f you’re a state and you don’t set up an Exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits.… I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these Exchanges, and that they’ll do it.”
    MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, who apologized for saying that Obamacare only passed due to the “stupidity” of American voters. (AP photo)However, even with such significant financial inducements, the majority of states refused to set up their own exchanges.In 2012, the IRS decided that people who purchased insurance though HealthCare.Gov would be eligible for the subsidy “carrot” as well.But the IRS Rule also “triggers ACA mandates and penalties for millions of individuals and thousands of employers in states served by HealthCare.Gov” who would otherwise be exempt from the law’s “sticks”, the King brief points out.“Context shows that Congress did not treat state and HHS Exchanges as indistinguishable; it referred distinctly to both types of Exchanges in another subsection,” the brief argues.“If Congress had wanted subsidies to be available in both Exchanges, there is simply no explanation for why it would have gone out of its way to specify that only coverage through Exchanges ‘established by the State under section 1311’ may be subsidized. Why would Congress add unnecessary words that, on any reading, say precisely the opposite of what it supposedly meant?”The IRS Rule “contradicts the plain and unambiguous text of the ACA…. At the risk of belaboring the obvious, HHS is not a ‘State.’  If there could be any doubt on that, the Act clarifies: ‘State’ means each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia’,” the plaintiffs maintain.“As statutory construction cases go, this one is extraordinarily straightforward. There is no legitimate way to construe the phrase ‘an Exchange established by the State under section 1311’ to include one ‘established by HHS under section 1321’,” the brief concluded.Therefore, the IRS Rule “purports to implement, but in fact contradicts, the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” and should be struck down, the brief argues.Plaintiffs conceded that “this case may be socially consequential and politically sensitive,” but say that “only heightens the importance of judicial fidelity to the rule of law and well-established interpretive principles.Posted 22nd December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  156. DEC18Single-payer health care dies in Vermont?





    This is just a temporary setback and minor embarrassment for socialized medicine – it’s going to be imposed on all of us, by force, soon enough.  Obama Lied About Care will collapse as planned by its designers, and we’ll be told total, direct government control over the medical industry is our only option.  Every American should consider the fate of Vermont’s single-payer scheme as a teachable moment, and a warning, but it’s not going to get a whole lot of national media coverage.  It will be spun the same way every leftist failure from Soviet communism on down has been spun: the wrong people tried it, at the wrong time.

    Politico reports
    Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin on Wednesday dropped his plan to enact a single-payer health care system in his state — a plan that had won praise from liberals but never really got much past the framework stage.“This is not the right time” for enacting single payer, Shumlin said in a statement, citing the big tax increases that would be required to pay for it.Shumlin faced deep skepticism that lawmakers could agree on a way to pay for his ambitious goal and that the feds would agree to everything he needed to create the first state-based single-payer system in 2017.Big tax increases to pay for free medicine?  Why, that doesn’t make any sense at all!
    Vermont’s status as a little socialist paradise – the landlocked Cuba of the Northeast – seemed to make it an ideal laboratory for the great experiment in single-payer, but the small size of the laboratory proved to be its undoing.  Socialism is a lie; it relies on deception and trickery to conceal its costs, fooling voters into surrendering their freedom in exchange for discounted goods that suddenly become far more expensive, once the need for deception ends.  In a small state, it’s just too hard to use Jonathan Gruber’s tactics to bury the costs inside the folds of flab lapping over the government’s belt.  Speaking of Gruber:And that was all before Shumlin, a Democrat, almost lost reelection last month in one of the country’s most liberal states. And it was before MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, the now notorious Obamacare consultant who also advised Vermont until his $400,000 contract was killed amid the controversy, became political poison.
    Shumlin had missed two earlier financing deadlines but finally released his proposal. But he immediately cast it as “detrimental to Vermonters.” The model called for businesses to take on a double-digit payroll tax, while individuals would face up to a 9.5 percent premium assessment. Big businesses, in particular, didn’t want to pay for Shumlin’s plan while maintaining their own employee health plans.
    “These are simply not tax rates that I can responsibly support or urge the Legislature to pass,” the governor said. “In my judgment, the potential economic disruption and risks would be too great to small businesses, working families and the state’s economy.”That’ll be how single-payer hustlers explain this embarrassing defeat away in years to come, should pesky conservatives bring it up: they’ll say Shumlin was unpopular and inept, bankrupt of the political capital needed to bring a single-payer god-child into the mortal world, while Gruber was too much of a toxic political liability.  In 2018 or so, when ObamaCare collapses into a fiscal black hole, rest assured the “right people” will be standing by to implement a genius single-player plan that showers “free” medicine upon everyone.


    And unlike Vermont, they’ll have oodles of freshly-printed deficit dollars to finance their scheme, which will hammer every aspect of medicine into a unified system of breathtaking scope and beautiful intricacy… designed by the same boobs who couldn’t launch a website with a billion-dollar budget, and break out in hives at the thought of being honest with the American people about anything they’re planning to do.  Vermont, by contrast, had to deal with some sizable exemptions from its nascent single-payer scheme – big self-insured corporations and Medicare – plus a shortfall of $150 million from the funds Shumlin wanted to squeeze out of taxpayers from other states.




    Without those pennies from federal heaven, every cobwebbed liberal nostrum crumbled to dust beneath the weight of Vermont’s single-payer plan.  Businesses are supposed to be piggy banks from which the Left can shake unlimited money without inconveniencing consumers and workers from the Sainted Middle Class, but Vermont balked at dropping a double-digit payroll tax on employers… and soaking employees with a 9.5 percent premium assessment on top of that.  Nobody even tried to float Barack Obama’s Big Lie by claiming you could keep your old plan if you liked your old plan.  A big left-wing scheme died because the governor had to admit it would cause “economic disruption and risks” that would be too much for small businesses and individual citizens to handle.


    (Note that he still had to cloak the latter point in threadbare lefty rhetoric about “working families” – a highly fungible abstract political concept only tenuously connected to actual families with working parents, which serves as both the justification for everything the Left wants to do, and their all-purpose escape hatch from failed efforts.  Rest assured that if you’re part of a family with working parents who pull down a bit too much cash for liberal tastes, Shumlin and every other Democrat in America will happily tax the hell out of you.  A great deal of their political capital is harvested by bringing the spoils of redistribution to people who are not working and do not preside over intact families.)


    Health insurance and medicine are commodities, subject to the same market forces as any other.  They’re also separate commodities, although obviously related to each other.  Politicians who seek control of important commodities are eager to obscure their connection to market forces, replacing the benefits of healthy competition – which requires consumers to have clear information about cost and supply – with the hollow promises of compulsory efficiency secured through government power.  Distribution occurs at gunpoint, while funding is siphoned from the great grey see of general taxation, completely obscuring the marketplace from blindfolded consumers… but the marketplace still exists.
     The money has to come from somewhere.  Limited supply must be handled through forcible rationing.  Tidal forces are still at work beneath the Sea of Taxes, and in the shallow waters of a small state’s budget, those forces cannot be hidden long enough to trick voters into surrendering their freedom.  Chin up, medicine socializers: you’ll have easier sailing across the red sea of the federal budget, trillions of fathoms deep, when you run the single-payer scam from coast to coast in a few years.Posted 18th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  157. DEC18Obama Lied About Care Shutting Down Free Healthcare Clinics for US CitizensUsually when I hear any reference to free healthcare it’s associated with illegal aliens mooching off the welfare of American taxpayers. The free healthcare they get is not from free health clinics but from regular hospitals and urgent care centers.
    In some parts of the southwest, small hospitals and urgent care centers have had to close their doors because of the amount of free medical care they were forced to provide to illegals. I have friends in Arizona who have told me of some places in the southern part of the state that no longer have any local emergency facilities, forcing US citizens to travel further to larger cities to get urgent care. The delay in treatment for things like heart attacks, strokes and auto accidents can mean the difference between life and death.
    However, in a few areas of our nation, there have been clinics that have been providing free healthcare to US citizens as well as illegals. These clinics have been a godsend for many lower income Americans, but that godsend may not last much longer.


    A few of these free clinics have closed their doors due to the fact many of the people they served were able to sign up for Medicaid under the Obamacare expansion. With most of their clientele now having coverage the need for free medical care no longer was necessary.


    Even more free healthcare clinics are having to close their doors due to Obamacare. The closings are not due to tyrannical regulations as you may first think, but to a lack of donations. When Obamacare was first implemented, the government kept telling everyone that they were required by the socialist law to obtain health insurance. Many of the donors that supported the free clinics assumed that everyone would get coverage so their checkbooks closed up and put away. With donations drying up, free clinics could no longer afford to operate and had no choice but to close their doors.

    One of the free health clinics that closed was the Community Health Mission in Savannah, Georgia. With people still waiting to be treated, the clinic was forced to shut their doors. Board member Colin McRae explained
    “As soon as there was the perception of universal healthcare, the likelihood of receiving donations goes down.”Statistics have shown that more people are now uninsured than when Obamacare first went into effect. Of the 6 to 8 million people who signed up, a large percentage of them previously had coverage and were either looking for better policies or had their old one’s cancelled.


    Obamacare has raised the cost of healthcare and reduced the quality and access to physicians, specialists and hospitals. More Americans need access to free healthcare clinics than ever before, but thanks to the false perceptions of Obamacare and the lies told by Obama and Pelosi, fewer Americans will have that access.

    Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/19220/obamacare-shutting-free-healthcare-clinics-us-citizens/#jDGE7YwPB445Tstu.99




    Posted 18th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  158. DEC15Another Obama Lied About Care blow to personal privacy 



    Get ready to fight back: Last week, the Health and Human Services Department announced a plan to share your medical records with over 35 federal agencies — all in the name of “health care,” of course. All in the name of “efficiency,” the favorite excuse used by fascists wherever they appear.
    Of Obamacare’s many assaults on our quality of life, financial security and personal privacy, there was a pre-Obamacare signal from the federal government that any expectation of medical privacy was quickly becoming a quaint, and dead, notion. Transferring your previously private medical records into “electronic” form has been eyed by Congress as early as 1996 and was ensconced in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the stimulus bill.
    The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act requires physicians and hospitals, under financial penalties, to transfer your secure paper-based medical records to an “electronic” system, i.e., the Internet.

    The argument is it’s going to somehow make the health care system more efficient, a remarkable and ironic claim from the same clowns who brought us the Obamacare and the Veterans Affairs debacles.
    What this really does is remove the privacy and control in your relationship with your doctor by removing your records from their office file cabinet and dumping them into the Internet “cloud” where everyone and anyone can access them.

    Now we have specifics of why the federal government is coveting this astoundingly dangerous act. Announced last week was the Health and Human Services’ Federal Health IT Strategic Plan 2015-2020. And what a plan it is.

    The Weekly Standard tells us it “details the efforts of some 35 departments and agencies of the federal government and their roles in the plan to “advance the collection, sharing, and use of electronic health information to improve health care, individual and community health, and research,” and offers a graph that shows exactly how this Kafkaesque scenario will unfold.
    They will indeed collect (via electronic health records), share (patient information with “the community”) and use (stating the vague notion of “advancing the health and well-being of individuals and the community” as well as “advance research, scientific knowledge and innovation”).
    Make no mistake about it: This is the start of a single-payer health care infrastructure. That alone is disturbing enough, as one of the main objections by citizens committed to maintaining personal freedom is governmental transition to fascism through the argument of making health care delivery more efficient, ergo, controlled by government.

    By listing the federal agencies that will be participating in this health care scheme, the Federal Health IT Plan illustrates exactly why this is such a serious concern, and how it has nothing to do with delivering health care. Your personal health care information will be shared with an astounding 35 agencies (at least), offices and individuals including the Department of Defense, NASA, the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Labor, the Federal Communications Commission, the HHS assistant secretary for legislation, the HHS office for civil rights, the HHS office for the general counsel, the Office of Personnel Management, the Social Security Administration, the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Prisons.

    Clearly, this is meant to establish the fact that every federal agency will be participating in this scheme and will have access to your health information. Not only should this be anathema to every American on principle alone, but having all of our personal information available in the cloud also poses ridiculously obvious general security threats to our personal security.

    In the past few months, we have learned the computer systems of the White House, the State Department and Obamacare have all been breached. At one point, the State Department had to close down its systems for three days to regain control.

    We know Obamacare was passed only because the Obama administration was comfortable with deliberately misleading the American people. We know that the federal government’s computer systems are not even remotely secure. Even under the circumstances of a government that knew what it was doing this would be unacceptable. But under one that has proved it has no regard for your security and has lied time and time again, and is run by glib, incompetent and malevolent fools, we must stand against this astoundingly shocking plan.

    With the release of the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan, the HHS is required to seek input from the public and has opened a two-month period ending Feb. 6, within which you can be heard. If there is one thing that represents everything dangerous about an expanding federal government, this is it. Take a stand and make sure they know you reject this unacceptable violation of your privacy and expansion of the federal government’s control of our lives.
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/15/tammy-bruce-health-care-records-to-share-with-fede/
    Posted 15th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  159. DEC12Obama Lied About Care: Medicaid and Primary Doctor ‘Access Shock,’ Tax Season Chaos



    The Obamacare losing streak continues apace, starting with another Associated Press story on why the law’s ‘access shock’ consequences are getting worse:Primary care doctors caring for low-income patients will face steep fee cuts next year as a temporary program in President Barack Obama’s health care law expires. That could squeeze access just when millions of new patients are gaining Medicaid coverage. A study Wednesday from the nonpartisan Urban Institute estimated fee reductions will average about 40 percent nationwide. But they could reach 50 percent or more for primary care doctors in California, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois — big states that have all expanded Medicaid under the health law. Meager pay for doctors has been a persistent problem for Medicaid, the safety-net health insurance program. Low-income people unable to find a family doctor instead flock to hospital emergency rooms, where treatment is more expensive and not usually focused on prevention.
    That’s right, say it with me: Medicaid expansion does not reduce uncompensated care. So how will these reimbursement cuts impact doctors and patients? Surprise:

    Doctors probably won’t dump their current Medicaid patients, butthey’ll take a hard look at accepting new ones, said Dr. Robert Wergin, a practitioner in rural Milford, Neb., and president of the American Academy of Family Physicians. “You are going to be paid less, so you are going to have to look at your practice and find ways to eke it out,” Wergin said.
    The Obama administration surveys this landscape and doggedly clings to its goal of expanding the failing program even further. Because they’re all about “what works,” or whatever:

    Medicaid covers more than 60 million people, making the federal-state program even larger than Medicare. The health care law has added about 9 million people to the Medicaid rolls, as 27 states have taken advantage of an option that extends coverage to many low-income adults. Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell says expanding Medicaid in the remaining 23 states is one of her top priorities. But the fee cut could make that an even harder sell, since it may reinforce a perception that the federal government creates expensive new benefits only to pass the bill to states.
    Perception is reality, literally in this case.  Meanwhile, a former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is predicting a chaotic and frustrating tax season for many Obamacare consumers:

    A former director of the Congressional Budget Office is predicting a rough tax season as a result of new provisions going into effect from the 2010 health care overhaul. Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who was head of the CBO from 2003 to 2005 and is currently president of the American Action Forum, said Dec. 5 that the Affordable Care Act’s subsidy payments made for 2014 are unlikely to have been accurate, which means some people will have to reimburse the government for over-payments. Holtz-Eakin spoke at a forum sponsored by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research on what the next Republican Congress will do on health care.The 2015 tax filing season “is going to be a disaster,” he warned, adding that the result may be more traction in Congress for major changes to the law.
    People are bracing to pay even more out of pocket next year, and then they’ll get slammed with an additional 2014 tax bill because the government couldn’t get a functioning web portal up and running on schedule. (That so-called “back end” is still under construction).  Click through to read Jim Capretta’s latest piece, which further debunks the ‘Obamacare is responsible for the cost slowdown’ myth, repeated by Kathleen Sebelius this week.  While hardened ideologues continue to insist that this law is working, the American people continue to disagree.  Vehemently. Katie wrote up the latest Fox News polling numbers yesterday, which demonstrate (again) that approximately twice as many Americans have been directly hurt by the law, compared to those who’ve benefited from it:



    As I wrote at Hot Air, many within the ranks of the “unaffected” will be in for a rude awakening over the coming years.  I’ll leave you with this, via the Free Beacon.  Happy Friday, America:
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/12/12/obamacare-medicaid-and-primary-doctor-access-shock-tax-season-chaos-n1930687Posted 12th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  160. DEC10Four Hours in Obamacare Hell: Gruber vs. Gowdy, and Other Highlights?


    American Thinker watched and live-tweeted Tuesday’s House Oversight and Government Reform hearing – all four hours of it.

    Led by outgoing chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the hearing featured MIT professor and Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services head Marilyn Tavenner.  This well-résuméd tag-team was joined shortly after the hearing started by Ari Goldman, a bearded millennial whose claim to fame is that he loves Obamacare, and who will get no more coverage here than he deserves.

    Gruber, who’s been getting consistently flogged in the media for the past few weeks, took center stage in this hearing, but Tavenner got her fair share of attention.  And the two took a similar tack – apologize profusely for their offenses, and then double down on them.  Tavenner did a better job than Gruber did at appearing contrite, mostly by flinching from her microphone.  (Issa and others had to exhort her several times to scoot closer to it.)  Gruber, for his part, smirked as Issa played his infamous comments on “the stupidity of the American voter.”  It wasn’t the last time he would smirk.

    A prominent theme for Tavenner, who spoke first, was the absurd insistence on using numbers to combat Republicans’ drawing attention to her bad numbers.  She admitted from the start to a “regrettable mistake” in double-counting Obamacare enrollees with dental plans.  Sometimes she stood by the revised number of 6.7 million enrollees, and sometimes she claimed that she did not have a number to divulge.  She insisted that Obamacare is now “streamlined,” “simpler,” and “faster”; by contrast, on multiple other occasions, she described Obamacare as a work in progress, needing improvement.  “There’s lots of other things that can change.”  She said “we have tried to be transparent” while her department provided Oversight with password-protected documents in six-point font.
    Gruber denounced his well-publicized comments as “arrogant,” “glib,” the result of “trying to make myself seem more important than I am.”  Ranking committee member Elijah Cummings [D-Md.] condemned the comments as well, but for a strange reason: not for their contemptuous tone or for the deception they revealed, but rather for giving a “PR gift to the Republican Party.”

    Gruber did not, however, denounce his words as false.  Several Republicans cut through his apology evasion, which he returned to over and over (doubtless Tuesday saw the most frequent use of the word “glib” in congressional history).  Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) in particular hit the point several times: “What I’m struggling with is whether your apology is because you said it, or because you meant it.”  “When did you realize that these comments were inappropriate?  ‘Cause it took you about a year to apologize.”  “Do you see a trend developing here, Mr. Gruber?”  Rep. Tom Rice asked him, “So what you’re saying is, you were lying then?”  Gruber responded, “I was conjecturing in an area where I shouldn’t.”  Rep. Tom DesJarlais (R-Tenn.) asked, “In terms of content, you were not lying, you had some basis?”  Gruber refused to answer.

    At the hearing’s closing, Rep. Issa told Gruber, “Most of us believe that you believed a lot of what you said.”
    Both Gruber and Tavenner oversaw multiple embarrassing seesaw exchanges with their questioners.  For Tavenner, the magical phrase was “I will get you that information.”  (She is not the first to use this tactic; Kathleen Sebelius, who resigned as head of the Department of Health and Human Services in June of this year, deferred in exactly the same way when Congress questioned her about Obamacare in October 2013.)  Tavenner used this phrase no fewer than ten times with Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.); Collins finally put a bow on the conversation, saying, “It must be difficult for you to say that over and over again.”
    Gruber’s go-to phrases were “I don’t recall” and “y
    ou can talk to my counsel.”  He used these especially when congressmen demanded information on exactly how much taxpayer money he had received for his work on Obamacare.  (Figures oscillated between $400,000 and $4 million, with much confusion on federal versus state compensation.)  Several congressmen expressed frank bewilderment over Gruber’s lapse in memory, including Reps. Gowdy, Justin Amash (R-Mich.), Blake Farenthold (R-Tex.),  and Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.).  In the words of Rep. Farenthold, “[d]o you feel bad taking all this money from the people you called stupid?”  Gruber at least could recall an answer to that one: “I think it was appropriate,” he said.

    The congressmen who took part in these embarrassing back-and-forths would finish visibly disgusted.  Tavenner would return to cringing from the microphone.  Gruber would smirk.

    There is so much more to take from this hearing that space restrictions forbid this author to explore.  There are Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)’s questions, so glowingly complimentary of Obamacare that one wonders if Tavenner herself wrote them.  There is the remarkable difference in specificity, from both Gruber and Tavenner, between when Republicans questioned them and when Democrats did.  There is Rep. Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich.)’s stentorian proclamation of “lies on top of lies,” and the sad tale of the death of Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)’s husband.  There is Rep. Cummings’s shocking closing, in which he ruled that the true lesson to take away from this hearing is that Democrats should watch what they say, lest they be quoted.

    And there is the extremely disturbing exchange between Gruber and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), in which Massie exposed Gruber’s advocacy for abortion as a social good and wondered if this same macabre mentality applies to the elderly and infirm.  “What did you mean by ‘positive selection’ in abortion?  If there are fewer elderly people, wouldn’t that save a ton of money, too?  Do you understand the dangerous implications?”  Gruber: “I have no philosophy of abortion.  I have no philosophy of end-of-life care.”

    The biggest takeaway from this hearing is that everyone should be watching these things.  Congressional hearings’ reputation for being boring keeps a lot of American eyeballs elsewhere.  This must stop.  The hearings are not boring, as evidenced by the fiery reactions to Trey Gowdy‘s explosive questioning.  These videos can be aired in the background, during daily chores.  They can be watched in installments over lunch.  They can be screened in groups, Mystery Science Theater 3000-style.

    And there is more to this point than just the reassurance that congressional hearings are sufficiently entertaining to avoid Americans’ disdain.  There is not just a should here, but a must: Americans are duty-bound to know how they’re being represented.  Voting as a “one and done” proposition is how republics get destroyed; it’s how unelected academics like Jonathan Gruber, with regulatory power they should never have been given, wind up in the congressional hot seat in the first place.  Americans of all stripes should be cognizant of hearings like this – and cognizant continuously of the substance of those they send to Congress.

    Gruber and Tavenner both should have come apart from cognitive dissonance on Tuesday.  That they kept straight faces is no surprise.  But hopefully the American people watching them did notice how little what they said squared with their own words – both in prior years and in the very same hearing – let alone with reality.  Mammoth, destructive, morally bankrupt Obamacare is the lie; here, before us and on video, are the liars.
    Now what will we do?

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/12/four_hours_obamacare_hell_gruber_gowdy.htmlPosted 10th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  161. DEC8OBAMA Lied About CARE ARCHITECT JONATHAN GRUBER: ABORTION OF ‘MARGINAL CHILDREN’ A ‘SOCIAL GOOD’
    Embattled MIT professor Jonathan Gruber has not only gotten in trouble for bragging about helping President Obama put one over on the American people with Obamacare, he’s also been uncovered as an abortion advocate—but not a run-of-the-mill advocate of “women’s rights.”No, Gruber’s abortion advocacy is of a particularly pungent eugenics variety. He’s on record repeatedly making the case from social science that abortion is a “social good” because it reduces the number of “marginal children,” by which he means urban poor—those he says can be counted on to commit crimes if they were ever born.Gruber co-authored a paper during the Clinton years which argued that legal abortion had saved the U.S. taxpayer upwards of $14 billion in welfare benefits and that it also lowered crime. Gruber’s work heavily influenced other researchers, including a paper called The Impact of Legalized Abortion by Steven Levitt of the University of Chicago, whose later bookFreakonomics and whose ongoing work makes the strongest case that abortion legalizations in the 1970s caused a dramatic drop in crime twenty years later.Pro-lifers have always wondered why the black community has not responded more aggressively to the fact that so many abortion clinics are located in poor neighborhoods and why the black abortion rate is so much higher than whites.A documentary called Maafa 21 argues that abortion is a part of what they called a “black genocide.”African-American marketing expert Ryan Scott Bomberger founded an organization calledThe Radiance Foundation that makes commercials for the unborn child with a special emphasis on the high incidence of black abortion. Emmy-wining Bomberger’stoomanyaborted.com campaign looks specifically at black abortion. One meme calls abortion a “civil wrong” and that blacks are “still not free at last” because of abortion. Bomberger is being sued by the NAACP for calling the group “pro-abortion.”  A group called 41 Percent tracks all abortions in New York City, which has an abortion rate at twice the national average, points out that the abortion rate in the largely black borough of The Bronx is an astounding 47%.

    These are the types of communities Gruber meant when he referred the “marginal children” who were the most likely to end up on welfare and committing crimes if they were allowed to be born.Posted 8th December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  162. DEC3VIDEO: Washington Health Care – 6,000 Accounts Cancelled “By Mistake”In yet another “Glitch” in the ongoing Washington Health Care debacle, 6,000 accounts of people who had enrolled for health insurance coverage next year have been mistakenly canceled, according to the head of Washington’s health care exchange:
    The “erroneous cancellation” affected both the customers’ enrollment and payment for coverage starting Jan. 1, 2015.Washington Health Benefit Exchange CEO Richard Onizuka said in a statement. “Early analysis indicates that our system integrator, Deloitte, ran an automated enrollment cancellation process in error,” Onizuka said.“We apologize for the inconvenience this has caused to our customers and do not take this issue lightly,” Onizuka said. “Exchange customer support representatives, staff members, navigators and registered insurance brokers are already working with impacted customers to help them reconfirm their 2015 coverage.”The 6,000 accounts represent “a portion” of the total number of customers enrolled for coverage beginning Jan. 1, he said. It wasn’t clear how sizeable a portion that was. According to the Exchange spokesperson Bethany Frey, the 6,000 accounts likely include both new and renewing customers. In an email she also stated that she didn’t have a total enrollment figure for 2015 yet, “we just know the 6,000 isn’t all of them.”On Monday, the board that oversees Washington Healthplanfinder approved a motion to conduct a complete review of the architecture behind the health insurance marketplace. Onizuka said.“We are committed to providing a better customer experience to Washington residents and are taking aggressive steps to ensure our IT vendors are delivering us a quality product and our customers are receiving an excellent online experience,” he said.http://viral.buzz/video-washington-health-care-6000-accounts-cancelled-by-mistake/?utm_source=Viral+Buzz+12%2F3%2F14+&utm_campaign=Viral+Buzz+12%2F3%2F14&utm_medium=email

    Posted 3rd December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  163. DEC3King Obama issued more rewrites of Obama Lied About Care law. Media doesn’t even notice 


    Almost completely unnoticed in the media, on Wednesday before Thanksgiving President Obama issued more unconstitutional rewrites of his signature legislation. Betsy McCaughey, perhaps our number one watchdog of the misbegotten health care law, did notice.
    Dropping the rules as most Americans were busy preparing for the holiday made a mockery (again) of President Obama’s promise to have “the most transparent administration in history.” The stunt has even worked to keep most of the media from reporting on the rules.
    Yet the changes these regulations make in the health-care law are substantial.
    For one, the president is redefining what health plans are “adequate” for larger employers (100-plus workers) to offer under the Affordable Care Act. He’s also “asking” insurers to pay for new benefits — while warning that, if they don’t, they may be forced to.
    Under the Constitution, Obama lacks any authority to make such changes to the health law, or any law. Only Congress has that power. But he’s doing it, and not for the first time.
    The president has made two dozen changes to his health law by executive fiat, from delaying the employer mandate to allowing people to keep health plans that don’t meet ObamaCare standards.
    These actions make a mockery of rule of law. And they choose winers and loosers, which is a recipe for corruption. McCaughey summarizes:
    •   Obama will require large employers to provide more coverage than the Affordable Care Act specifies. The move disqualifies plans now offered by 1,600 employers to 3 million workers, according to Kaiser Health News. Those employers will have to find a way to cover the higher costs — and some will surely do so by stopping coverage for spouses or part-time workers.

    •   The new rules suddenly treat state high-risk pools as adequate coverage under the Affordable Care Act — a 180 from what the law actually says.
When the ACA became law, these plans for people with chronic illnesses were offered in 35 states. Winners will be those who live in the 10 states that haven’t yet phased out their high-risk plans. Losers: the many thousands in 25 states that already gave up their plans to comply with the ACA’s mandates.

    •   The rules tell insurers to give new enrollees a 30-day grace period during which they can continue to use doctors not in their plan’s network. Winners: People who need time to switch to in-network doctors. Losers: Taxpayers — who’ll be obliged to bail out the insurers clobbered with the extra cost.

    •   Speaking of bailouts, Sec. 1342 of the law promises taxpayer-funded bailouts to insurers who lose money selling plans on ObamaCare exchanges. But the bailouts can’t happen unless Congress appropriates the money, something the GOP-controlled Congress won’t want to do. Yet the new Federal Register notices explicitly double down on the administration’s pledge to make insurers whole if losses are bigger than expected.
    In addition to wrecking our health care system and bankrupting families that cannot afford the huge deductibles necessary to make ObamaCare “affordable” while providing freebies for Obama’s selected beneficiaries, the president is now wrecking our constitutional form of government.Posted 3rd December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  164. DEC2Report: ‘Dark Days Ahead’ for Obama Lied CareThe Hill’s Elise Viebeck chroniclesObamacare’s continued losing streak, major elements of which were predictedmonths ago.  Viebeck’s story begins with a mention of the destruction Jonathan Gruber hath wrought, then outlines four categories of forthcoming Obamacare headaches.  They include pending legal challenges, the still-simmering threat of Ebola, as well as open Enrollment 2.0 challenges (“the back-end of HealthCare.gov remains partly unfinished”), dramatically scaled-back sign-up projections, and the fallout from the administration’s bogus enrollment figures: 

    A Republican investigation revealed Nov. 20 that ObamaCare enrollment figures at HHS were inflated by roughly 400,000 people after the department miscounted dental plans as medical coverage. The finding was a public relations setback for Burwell and the Obama administration, bringing back partisan strife over enrollment figures that had quieted since the spring. Seeking to contain the fallout, Burwell asked managers at HHS to report suggestions for strengthening the department’s “culture of increased transparency, ownership and accountability.” Still, Tavenner is expected to receive tough questions about the mistakes when she testifies before House Oversight on Dec. 9.The blunders are also likely to cloud any future enrollment figures the administration seeks to tout for 2015.
    Indeed, those “blunders” are likely to cloud the White House’s credibility even further.  Speaking of which, the editors of Nevada’s largest newspaper shredded Obamacare’s architects and champions in a Monday editorial, underscoring how rising costs for millions was an entirely intentional and cynically-hidden byproduct of the law:

    In one video, Mr. Gruber explains that his real goal was to reduce the tax breaks available to the roughly 170 million Americans who receive employer-sponsored health insurance…Mr. Gruber said individual Americans would feel the real impact of the tax. “We just tax the insurance companies, they pass on higher prices that offsets the tax break we get, it ends up being the same thing,” he said. “It’s a very clever, you know, basic exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter.” In yet another video, Mr. Gruber explained that the only way to remove the tax preference for employee-sponsored insurance was “by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people, when we all know it’s a tax on people who hold those insurance plans.” The kicker? While it’s called a “Cadillac” tax, Mr. Gruber said that, over time, the tax will apply to more and more health insurance plans, affecting an increasing number of Americans who don’t have top-flight benefits. If Obamacare hasn’t hurt your wallet yet, it soon will. It’s worth noting that many economists — and most Republicans — spent 2009 warning that the Affordable Care Act was a ruse, that it would increase health insurance costs for most Americans, not cut them.
    And therein lies the real story of the Gruber tapes; the economist’s sneering arrogance and misplaced glee over dishonest salesmanship is less important than his frank confirmation that critics of the law — who were attacked as liars and racists — were correct all along about Obamacare’s core, mendacious promises.  The Review-Journal’s opinion piece ends with this withering line: “Republicans no longer have to make the argument that Obamacare must, at a minimum, be dialed back, and preferably repealed outright. Mr. Gruber has done it for them.”  The truth hurts.  As Obamacare-related costs and premiums continue to follow their upward trajectory for many consumers, Gallup finds that the number of Americans who are putting off seeking medical treatment due to lack of affordability has spiked to a new post-2001 high:


    Unaffordable costs help explain the substantial percentage of uninsured Americans who are choosing not to buy coverage through Obamacare, as well as the law’s underwhelming enrollment performance. Gallup recently measured overall public support for the law near an all-time low.  Which is why Chuck Schumer is coming as close to disavowing the law as any senior Democrat ever has.  Jamming the unpopular measure through Congress rather than focusing on jobs was a political mistake that damaged the party, he admitted in a speech last week.  Four years ago, he was singing a very different tune on Meet the Press:

    “I feel great. There are going to be millions of calls like that. So I predict, David, by November those who voted for health care will find it an asset, those who voted against it will find it a liability.”
    Two midterm electoral poundings later, he no longer feels quite so “great.” Posted 2nd December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  165. DEC1Big Business Experiences Buyer’s Remorse Over Backing Obama Lied About Care  Obama administration’s recent challenge to Obamacare’s “workplace wellness” provisions has given Obamacare’s big business backers second thoughts about their support for the highly unpopular health care law. New lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) challenge so-called workplace wellness programs that seek to provide financial incentives for workers who take steps to reduce obesity, smoking, and other lifestyle factors that can may result in costly illnesses, reports Reuters. The EEOC lawsuit contends that employers requiring medical tests may violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. Moreover, “the lawsuits are based on the view that it is no longer voluntary if employees face up to $4,000 in penalties for non-participation, loss of insurance or even their jobs,” reports Reuters.

    “The fact that the EEOC sued is shocking to our members,” said Business Roundtable Vice President and counsel Maria Ghazal.

    Some big businesses and interest groups are reportedly considering going on record opposing Obamacare. Contrary to conventional thinking, several big businesses and industries backed Obama and Obamacare. Indeed, in 2008, the healthcare industry donated $22,471,562 to Obama, and has posted record profits as a consequence of Obamacare.

    The new EEOC challenges to workplace wellness programs threaten to further erode Obamacare’s already anemic levels of public support. According to a recent Gallup poll, a record-low 37 percent of Americans now support Obama’s signature legislative achievement.
    Posted 1st December 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  166. NOV30Cost of Obama Lied About Care for Virginians on Bronze Plan



    Because many doctors and hospitals have been dropped from ObamaCare, their services are not eligible for ObamaCare payments. What would happen to their patients who are now suddenly forced into ObamaCare?

    The U.N Affordable Care Act specifies in Section 1401of its voluminous content that subsidies cannot be paid to people residing in states that do not have a State Exchange. The decision was upheld in the D.C. Federal Circuit Court and the Supreme Court will make a decision in June 2015.

    In the Commonwealth of Virginia, no subsidy will thus be paid on the 80 percent of subscribers’ premiums who enrolled in ObamaCare and are eligible for subsidies. And the 2015 costs of these premiums have not been made public until November 15, 2014, conveniently after the November election.
    Using the calculator on the ObamaCare website for the Bronze Plan (a plan with a 60 percent reimbursement rate after deductibles have been met) for a Preferred Provider, Thomas L. Cranmer, Vice President of Fairfax County Taxpayers’ Alliance, determined that a northern Virginia family of four would pay “at any income a deductible out of pocket of $12,600 and a premium of $7,224 per year. The total $19,824 represents 40 percent of $50,000 and 20 percent of $100,000 gross income.”
    If doctors are not “preferred,” ObamaCare labels them “out of network,” in which case the costs can be limitless. The website calculator, which is now operational (HHS had taken it down temporarily before the elections), can be used anonymously to calculate the cost for any individual or family.
    People, who have lost their plans due to the increased demands of ObamaCare on private insurance companies, and have been forced to sign for Obamacare, report two and half times higher costs.
    Many insured by Medicare have lost their supplemental insurance and those with Medicare/Medicaid have been moved into Humana. Humana is now busy rationing care to the elderly in order to meet the President’s plan to take billions from Medicare in order to fund ObamaCare. Many retirees are thus forced to find other plans with higher premiums and deductibles.
    Illegal aliens, who were not “supposed” to be covered by ObamaCare as falsely reported, are getting their premiums for free or $2.71. A lady I met recently in a doctor’s waiting room was excited that her premium was $24 a month. She had never bought insurance before, betting on her good health, but was now experiencing declining health in her mid-thirties and was glad for ObamaCare’s low premium.
    With the three plans, Bronze, Silver, and Gold, the reimbursement rates for doctors are 60 percent, 70 percent, and 80 percent respectively. If doctors accept ObamaCare, can they cover their expenses?  Do they ask for payments in advance, considering that the out-of-pocket deductible for patients is $12,600, and they may not be able to pay for the visit?
    Tom Cranmer asked his physician in a very direct letter if the “concierge fee” of $1,650 he paid him covers his expenses. Additionally, if the “doc fix reimbursement schedule for Medicare does not pass Congress (it comes up for renewal in December 2014), and doctors’ compensation is lowered,“  how would it affect their medical practice in terms of doing what is best for their patients?
    Because many doctors and hospitals have been dropped from ObamaCare, their services are not eligible for ObamaCare payments. What would happen to their patients who are now suddenly forced into ObamaCare?
    Where would they find new doctors, especially since many are retiring or pursuing other careers? Did the President not promise, “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor?” Would these patients be forced to accept nurse practitioner care instead?http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/67936?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=afb319e7ac-Call_to_Champions&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-afb319e7ac-297703129
    Posted 30th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  167. NOV19ruber: Seniors Should Be Limited to Three Lowest Cost Medicare Part D Plans They’d be better off with “less scope for choosing the wrong plan.”One of the reasons that choices should be restricted for seniors is their inability to understand the choices available to them. According to Gruber,


    In a 2009 paper, “Choice Inconsistencies Among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program,” Obamacare advisor Jonathan Gruber argued that there were too many Medicare Part D plans for seniors to choose from, which led them to make bad decisions when enrolling in a plan.

    In the paper, written for the National Bureau of Economic Research, Gruber wrote with Jason T. Abaluck that the privatization of the public Medicare program had resulted in dozens of private insurers offering a wide variety of insurance products for seniors to choose from. The result of so many choices, Gruber wrote, is that seniors are not making decisions that are in their best interest. ”First, elders place much more weight on plan premiums than they do on the expected out of pocket costs that they will incur under the plan. Second, they substantially under-value variance reducing aspects of alternative plans. Finally, consumers appear to value plan financial characteristics far beyond any impacts on their own financial expenses or risk.”The paper noted that while standard economic theory would suggest that expanded choice is a beneficial plan feature, “There are reasons to believe that the standard model is insufficient, particularly for a population of elders. There is growing interest in behavioral economics in models where agents are better off with a more restricted choice set.”
    One of the reasons that choices should be restricted for seniors is their inability to understand the choices available to them. According to Gruber, “These issues may be paramount within the context of the elderly, given that the potential for cognitive failures rises at older ages.” He continued, “There is substantial scope for increases in utility if consumers made better choices, and some of these gains could be realized by restricting to the three lowest cost plans.”Gruber admits that his models did not distinguish between the case of rational consumers choosing plans they trust and consumers making poor choices due to a lack of cognitive ability. “In either case,” he concluded, “our estimates imply that consumers would be better off if there were less scope for choosing the wrong plan.”
    Gruber reiterated his assertion that seniors would be better off with fewer choices in a follow-up paper in 2013, “Evolving Choice Inconsistencies in Choice of Prescription Drug Insurance.”“The bold experiment with consumer choice across health insurance plans embodied in the Medicare Part D program provides an excellent opportunity to assess how consumers perform in choosing insurance plans,” Gruber wrote. “We find that, using the best available data, consumers are very inconsistent in their choices, overweighting premiums relative to out of pocket costs, weighting plan characteristics above and beyond the effect on that consumer, and ignoring variance in coverage across plans.”Gruber again acknowledged that standard economic theory would suggest that Medicare beneficiaries are better off choosing from a wide variety of plans that meet their needs, rather than constraining them to a limited set of choices being made by the government. But perhaps giving insight into what Obamacare masterminds envision, not only for the Medicare Part D program but also for the future of the Obamacare exchanges, Gruber concluded, “There are a large number of behavioral economics models which suggest that in fact agents may be better off with more restrictive choice sets.”Posted 19th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  168. NOV19Years Of Obama Lied About Care Problems Are Still On The Way


    Given Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber’s candid comments, a whole load of information about Obamacare is now coming out — years too late for the public to weigh in on it.Americans clearly aren’t happy about it: approval of the health-care law has dropped to an all-time low of just 37 percent.It’s not surprising — a lot of things haven’t gone as promised. You were supposed to be able to keep your plan; that was a lie. Health insurance costs were supposed to fall — but premiums are rising. Obamacare was written to redistribute income for a select few — as this chart from the Brookings Institution makes clear:Potential Effects of the Affordable Care Act on Income Inequality, The Brookings InstitutionBut those problems are just the beginning. Obamacare’s been active for less than a year — there are a number of provisions in the health law that haven’t been activated yet. See a full timeline of the law here, courtesy of the right-leaning think tank American Action Forum.Individual MandateThe individual mandate’s been in action since Jan. 2014, but fewer people than expected have actually felt its sting. The mandate requires everyone the administration thinks can afford insurance to buy it or pay a penalty — which is growing.
    his year, that “tax” was $95 for a single adult, or 1 percent of income — whichever is greater. But next year, it spikes to $325 per adult (two percent of income); in 2016, it’ll reach its peak at a massive $695, or 2.5 percent of income.Plus, the administration issued an extra hardship exemption in 2014 thatlowered the number of people who actually had to pay the penalty: the latest hardship is if a person’s policy was canceled by Obamacare itself. But there’s no guarantee that will stick around — more people could fall prey to the penalty in the future.Employer MandateThis one was supposed to hit in 2014, but the Obama administration decided to delay it.On Jan. 1, 2015, employers with over 100 employees will be partially subjected to the mandate: they’ll have to provide coverage for 70 percent of employees by 2015 (95 percent of employees by 2016). Businesses with between 50 and 99 employees will have until January 2016 to provide health insurance to their employees; if they don’t, they’ll face fines of $2,000-$3,000 per worker.The mandate incentivizes businesses with close to 50 employees to stop hiring or start firing to avoid the mandate’s penalties. AAF reports that adding a 50th employee now costs a firm $40,000 in extra costs due to Obamacare alone.And Obamacare also introduces new costs on health insurance itself — especially for large employers. Obamacare requires employer health plans to cover a new batch of services, whether workers want them or not; mandates that fully-grown adults up to age 26 can remain on their parents’ plans; includes preventive services and at least 20 types of contraceptives — all major cost hikes for employers that are passed onto workers.
    Risk Corridors and Reinsurance Obamacare has three risk-mitigation provisions: risk corridors, reinsurance and risk adjustment. The first two are temporary, slated to run out in 2016.The programs are supposed to serve as a financial buffer, encouraging insurers to participate in the new Obamacare exchanges. The risk corridor program redistributes funds collected by the federal government amongst exchange insurers — although the administration has opened the door to doling out taxpayers funding to companies suffering losses on exchanges.University of Minnesota economist Stephen Parente has predicted that when the programs’ stint is through, health insurance premiums will rise drastically— hitting lowest-cost plans hardest. He published a study earlier this year predicting that some bronze plan premiums will double by 2024.As a result of the growing costs, Parente’s model predicts that the number of uninsured Americans will actually go back up, reaching 40.5 million by 2024.
    http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/18/years-of-obamacare-problems-are-still-on-the-way/2/Posted 19th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  169. NOV18Crack Up: Democrats Fracturing Over Obama’s Executive Amnesty?Having endured an electoral beating two weeks ago, and staring at poor-to-horrific polling, some Congressional Democrats may be getting cold feet on President Obama’s impending immigration policy upheaval by executive fiat.  A liberal blogger at theWashington Post worries that in spite of the fact that most Senate Democrats are locking arms in support of Obama diminishing their Constitutional power, some back-benchers from red and purple states may be nervously eyeing an escape hatch.  And liberals are preparing a blitz of pressure to bring any wayward partisans back in line:
    What happens if a half dozen Senate Dems defect and side with the GOP against Obama’s executive deportation relief? Immigration advocates are warning that this is a real possibility — one that could have a serious impact on the politics of this fight if and when a government shutdown battle looms — and they are preparing to exert maximum pressure on those Democrats they deem at risk. “We are preparing to pressure them at home and in Washington, to let them know that there will be hell to pay if this happens,” Frank Sharry, the executive director of America’s Voice, tells me. Among the Democrats believed to be at risk are Joe Manchin, Heidi Heitkamp, Jon Tester, Claire McCaskill, and Joe Donnelly. Angus King (who is an independent but caucuses with Dems) is also a question mark. The problem, advocates worry, is that if these Democrats come out against any Obama executive action, it could complicate the political battle to come. Republicans are expected to try to pass legislation rolling back whatever Obama does. Democrats will try to block it. But if Republicans can get 60 votes — which they could do if enough Dems defect — the president would then have to veto it. That could make the politics of this battle worse for Obama: Not only is he acting unilaterally; he’s also facing bipartisan opposition within Congress that is requiring him to protect those unilateral actions with a veto.
    Undermining The One’s political position, even in defense of our Constitutional order, was once a high crime among Democrats — but maps that look like this have a way of focusing the mind.  The angry Left is starting to eat its own in general, with dozens of sullen activists picketing outside Sen. Mary Landrieu’s home (on Capitol Hill, natch), expressing their hope that she loses her December 6 runoff election.  It looks like they’ll get their wish.  Meanwhile, in an extraordinary scene, a liberal House Democrat was unable to answer basic questions about the legality of Obama’s planned immigration decree…on MSNBC:
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/11/18/crack-up-democrats-fracturing-over-obamas-executive-amnesty-n1920484Posted 18th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  170. NOV18Johns Hopkins Study Reveals Shocking Effects Of Michelle Obama’s Lunchroom Regulations. the months since Michelle Obama-backed federal mandates regarding public school nutrition went into full effect, it has become clear that few are pleased with the results. Students complain about the unappetizing fare, administrators lament the steep costs associated with compliance, and parents worry kids are not getting enough to eat.Even as many districts forego vital federal funding to shed the restrictions associated with the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, some continue to promote the utopian idea that forcing health food upon the nation’s students will result in its ultimate consumption. Researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health began a recent study with such a hypothesis; however, the results depicted a very different reality.
    We have been thinking that if young children choose healthy food, they will eat it,” explained researcher Dr. Susan Gross. “But our research shows that is not necessarily so.”The experts kept an eye on the eating habits of 274 New York students between kindergarten and second grade in an attempt to determine how much of their healthy lunches they actually eat. By taking photos of specific lunches – chicken and vegetables – as they were being served and as they were being discarded, it became clear that much of the food ended up in the trash can rather than in the mouths of growing children.According to the study, less than one in four students took even one bite of a vegetable on their tray. As a result of their findings, researchers noted that it will take more than a revamped menu to turn students into healthy eaters.“As much as we are focused on menus in the school lunch program,” Gross noted, “we need to look more at our cafeteria environments, especially with our youngest children.”
    Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/johns-hopkins-study-reveals-shocking-effects-michelle-obamas-lunchroom-regulations/#JmJIQRde1ARPBfBM.99Posted 18th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  171. NOV18Gallup: Obama Lied About Care Approval Rating At All Time Low, only 37 percent of Americans approve of Obama Lied About Care while 56 disapprove As the Affordable Care Act’s second open enrollment period begins, 37% of Americans say they approve of the law, one percentage point below the previous low in January. Fifty-six percent disapprove, the high in disapproval by one point.Americans were slightly more positive than negative about the law around the time of the 2012 election, but they have consistently been more likely to disapprove than approve of the law in all surveys that have been conducted since then. Approval has been in the low 40% or high 30% range after a noticeable dip that occurred in early November 2013. This was shortly after millions of Americans received notices that their current policies were being canceled, which was at odds with President Barack Obama’s pledge that those who liked their plans could keep them. The president later said, by way of clarification, that Americans could keep their plans if those plans didn’t change after the ACA was passed.The current 37% reading comes on the heels of last week’s midterm elections, in which Republicans won full control of both houses of Congress. Already, party leaders are discussing efforts to repeal the unpopular law.Repeal is highly unlikely, given Obama’s veto power, but the law’s new low in approval — and new high in disapproval (56%) — could potentially have an impact on its future. The president himself has acknowledged he will consider modifications to the law, which could include repealing the tax on medical devices.Approval Among Independents at 33%Approval of the law continues to diverge sharply by party, with 74% of Democrats and 8% of Republicans approving of it. Independents have never been particularly positive toward the law, with approval ranging between 31% and 41%. Currently, 33% of independents approve.Nonwhites, who disproportionately identify as Democrats, have maintained majority approval since the ACA’s inception, now at 56%. Though this is still about double the level of approval among whites (29%), it is the first time nonwhites have fallen below the 60% mark.Bottom LineAmericans have never been overly positive toward the ACA, at best showing a roughly equal division between approval and disapproval early on in the law’s implementation. The percentage of Americans who approve of the law represents a new numerical low, which could indicate a loss of faith in the law amid the aftermath of the 2014 midterms. Although the ACA, also called Obamacare, was not as dominant an issue in this year’s congressional elections as it was in 2010, the issue was part of Republicans’ campaign efforts to oppose the president’s agenda overall. In doing that, many of the party’s candidates were successful.Though the law’s implementation suffered setbacks last fall, government officials have greater optimism for the health insurance website’s usability this time around. Importantly, though, approval of the law has remained low throughout the yeareven as it has had obvious success in reducing the uninsured rate. And with approval holding in a fairly narrow range since last fall, it may be that Americans have fairly well made up their minds about the law, and even a highly successful second open enrollment period may not do much to boost their approval.Survey MethodsResults for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Nov. 6-9, 2014, on the Gallup U.S. Daily survey, with a random sample of 828 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. For results based on the total sample of national adults, the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by time zone within region. Landline and cellular telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods.http://www.gallup.com/poll/179426/new-enrollment-period-starts-aca-approval.aspxPosted 18th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  172. NOV15Two more businesses win against HHS mandateTwo Missouri businesses are claiming victory over the Obama administration’s contraception and abortion drug mandate.In a decision that has been expected since the Supreme Court ruled against the administration in Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby, U.S. District Judge Ortrie Smith said that Reed Automotive Inc. and Sioux Chief Manufacturing Co. did not have to follow the mandate’s requirements.In the Hobby Lobby case, the Supreme Court ruled that closely-held for-profit corporations may refuse to follow the mandate under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The Court noted that the mandate was a more restrictive method of accomplishing the government’s goal of providing contraceptive and abortifacient access — as well as sterilization insurance coverage — than was necessary.“It’s always great when you can score a win for religious liberty, especially when you have an attempt to force these owners of companies that have sincere religious convictions to violate those convictions under threat of severe penalties,” said Alliance Defending Freedom attorney Kevin H. Theriot, who represented the businesses.Smith’s ruling came days after he overturned Missouri’s marriage amendment, saying it was unconstitutional. His latest decision joins the vast majority of rulings related to the mandate — according to a count by the law firm The Becket Fund, 103 lawsuits have seen 11 rulings in favor of the mandate and 75 against.https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/two-more-businesses-win-against-hhs-mandate?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=6615b667f7-LifeSiteNews_com_US_Headlines_06_19_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0caba610ac-6615b667f7-397605257Posted 15th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  173. NOV13Obama Lied About Care 2015: Higher costs.penalty


    The financial penalty for skipping out on health coverage will more than triple to $325 or or 2 percent of income,Children will be fined at half the adult rate, $162.50 for those under 18 years old.


    With the Affordable Care Act to start enrollment for its second year on Nov. 15, some unpleasant surprises may be in store for some.That’s because a number of low-priced Obamacare plans will raise their rates in 2015, making those options less affordable. On top of that, penalties for failing to secure a health-insurance plan will rise steeply next year, which could take a big bite out of some families’ pocketbooks.”The penalty is meant to incentivize people to get coverage,” said senior analyst Laura Adams of InsuranceQuotes.com. “This year, I think a lot of people are going to be in for a shock.”In 2014, Obamacare’s first year, individuals are facing a penalty of $95 per person, or 1 percent of their income, depending on which is higher. If an American failed to get coverage this year, that penalty will be taken out of their tax refund in early 2015, Adams noted.While that might be painful to some uninsured Americans who are counting on their tax refunds in early 2015, the penalty for going uninsured next year is even harsher. The financial penalty for skipping out on health coverage will more than triple to $325 per person in 2015, or 2 percent of income, depending on whichever is higher. Children will be fined at half the adult rate, or $162.50 for those under 18 years old.Based on the flat-rate method, the maximum dollar amount an uninsured family could be fined is $975.That flat-rate penalty “will affect lower-income or middle-income households,” Adams said. Some middle-class families “may be making enough that they don’t qualify for a subsidy, so they won’t get a break if they are getting health coverage. It’s a big penalty for the middle class for not having insurance.”Considering that Americans’ average tax refund is about $3,000, that 2015 penalty could take a big chunk out of some payouts.In Obamacare’s first year, some Americans may have opted to pay the penalty rather than get insurance because it may have cost more to take out health coverage, Adams added. But with the penalty rising next year, it may spur more consumers to consider getting a plan, as well as create more grumbling.There are some loopholes for getting out of the penalty, however. People can claim financial hardship or forgo health insurance for fewer than three months, according to HealthCare.gov. Native Americans also are exempt from paying a penalty as long as they are members of a federal recognized tribe.Despite the government’s push to get Americans enrolled in health-care plans, a significant number remain uninsured. About 13.4 percent of U.S. adults lacked health insurance in April, according to a Gallup poll. For lower-income households earning less than $36,000, the rate was much higher, with one out of four lacking insurance.Still, that represents a decline from 2013, when 17.1 percent of adults across the nation lacked insurance, and almost 31 percent of households going uninsured.It’s not only the uninsured who will be facing higher costs. Many health-care plans are also charging more, with Investor’s Business Daily finding that a 27-year-old earning 250 percent of the poverty rate will pay an average of 7 percent more for the lowest-cost bronze plan, based on an analysis of rates in the largest city in 34 states. The lowest-cost silver plan will rise an average of 9 percent, while the lowest-priced catastrophic policy will climb 18 percent, the analysis found.Between 9 to 9.9 million Americans will enroll in heath coverage through the Obamacare marketplaces for 2015 coverage, the Health and Human Services Department said on Monday. That’s lower than the 13 million people that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office had earlier this year estimated would enroll for 2015.Aside from higher penalties and potentially higher health-care costs, Obamacare may be facing another challenge in luring consumers: awareness.Nine out of 10 uninsured Americans are unaware that open enrollment starts on Saturday, according to a recent poll from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. On top of that, two-thirds of uninsured Americans say they know either nothing or just a little bit about the marketplaces.Americans still aren’t crazy about the law, the poll found. Only 20 percent of Americans have favorable views of Obamacare, while 43 percent held unfavorable opinions, the study found.Many U.S. consumers are also in the dark about the penalties, Adams noted. “There is very little awareness of this,” she added. “Until people understand the financial consequences, they don’t have an incentive.”
    Read More: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obamacare-2015-higher-.Posted 13th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  174. NOV10Obamacare Architect: We Passed the Law Thanks to the ‘Stupidity of the American Voter’One of the architects of Obamacare said the law was written in a deliberately “tortured” way and relied on the “stupidity of the American voter” to ensure its passage.

    In a newly unearthed 2013 clip, Jonathan Gruber, the MIT health economist who helped craft parts of the Affordable Care Act, got fairly candid about the tactics used to get the Affordable Care Act passed during a panel at the Annual Health Economists’ Conference last year.

    “This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure [the Congressional Budget Office] did not score the mandate as taxes,” Gruber said in one 52-second clip. “If CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies. OK, so it’s written to do that. In terms of risk-rated subsidies, if you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in – you made explicit healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed.”

    Gruber then trumpeted the value of a “lack of transparency” — and called American voters stupid.
    “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage,” Gruber said. “And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really really critical for the thing to pass.”
    Better for the American people to be saddled with a law they don’t understand, Gruber claimed, than for them to understand the law and rally against it.

    “Look, I wish … we could make it all transparent,” Gruber said, “but I’d rather have this law than not.”Posted 10th November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  175. NOV3Survey: Majority Of Last Year’s Obama Lied About Care Customers Won’t Return


    A majority of last year’s Obamacare customers aren’t planning to purchase their coverage again in 2015, according to a Bankrate survey.Fifty-one percent of respondents in a survey of last year’s Obamacare exchange customers don’t plan to purchase an exchange plan this year, according to aBankrate Health Insurance Pulse survey out Monday. Those who earn less and receive higher premium subsidies were more likely to renew their plans. Fifty-three percent of those who earn less than $30,000 a year said they’d return to the exchanges, while just 35 percent of those making $75,000 or more expect to return.Higher premiums are keeping most customers away. Forty-three percent said higher insurance rates are their biggest concern about buying Obamacare coverage again; just one in five said they’re most afraid of a repeat of last year’s website glitches and error messages.In many states, the insurance companies that earned the most customers in year one of Obamacare betted on lower rates in 2014 to attract their customer base and are now hiking premiums. There are, however, more insurers on the exchanges this year, as new insurers are looking to pull off customers with new prices.Keeping the same plan from last year is more likely than not going to result in large premium increases, according to a July study from health consulting firm Avalere Health. The key difference between Obamacare exchanges from traditional private markets may be that exchange customers are better served by changing their insurance plan every year. (RELATED: Many Obamacare Customers Will Have To Switch Plans Or Face Skyrocketing Costs)According to Doug Hough, an associate director at Johns Hopkins’ Bloomberg School of Public Health, last year’s endless tech problems could lead many people to keep their plans just to avoid the exchanges anyway.
    hey’re going to be auto-renewed,” Hough told Bankrate. “With 43 percent saying their experience last time was somewhat or very bad, they’re not looking forward to doing it again. That in itself will encourage people to just go with auto-renew.”But while premium costs may keep customers away, most of last year’s Obamacare customers expect that the administration will have fixed the website in time for the second open enrollment period, which begins Nov. 15.Fifty-two percent of last year’s customers said they were somewhat or very confident that Obamacare exchanges will work smoothly this time around, compared to 45 percent who expect there will be more glitches. (RELATED: Flaws Found In Testing Of Delayed Obamacare Small-Business Exchanges)Unsurprisingly, Republicans are over twice as likely to be more pessimistic about the exchanges’ performance. But part-time workers, who likely have fewer choices outside of the exchange, are more optimistic than full-time workers. Sixty-two percent of part-time respondents are somewhat or very confident, compared to just 47 percent of full-time workers who used the exchanges last year.Just 39 percent of full-time workers said they’d come back to the exchange again next year, while a slight majority of part-time workers plan on purchasing coverage again.The Obama administration has hedged its bets on Obamacare enrollment numbers this time around. Health and Human Services secretary Sylvia Burwell and new Obamacare CEO Kevin Counihan have both refused to predict how many exchange customers they’ll end up with for 2015. Burwell has emphasized the difficult few months her agency will have in trying to bring old customers back to the exchange while attracting new customers as well.http://dailycaller.com/2014/11/03/survey-majority-of-last-years-obamacare-customers-wont-return/
    Posted 3rd November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  176. NOV3Blue Cross Blue Shield N.C. announces double-digit rate increases for 2015 insurance plans?


    Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina customers renewing their individual health insurance plans this year will see an average rate increase of 13.4 percent or more, the company announced Wednesday.
    Those renewing plans compliant with Affordable Care Act standards, largely on the HealthCare.gov marketplace, and those renewing their coverage under grandfathered plans will see an average hike of 13.5 percent and 13.4 percent, respectively.


    Customers with so-called “transitional plans” — those plans purchased after the passage of the ACA and allowed to be continued by the Obama administration in 2013 — will see the highest jump, with an average increase of 19.2 percent.


    More specific details about premium increases will come next week as Blue Cross and Blue Shield, the state’s largest insurer, mails out new rate information to the roughly 540,000 customers covered by individual policies in the state. Statewide, the insurer’s plans cover about 3.8 million people.


    “It’s very early to see what the final impact of the ACA on rates will be,” said Patrick Getzen, vice president and chief actuary for Blue Cross and Blue Shield. “Analysts are saying we won’t know the impact on the market for several years.”


    While the increases announced Wednesday provide some insight into the trend in premiums — they’re going up, by and large — the company offered few specific details about how different segments of customers within the market, as well as different regions within the state, will be affected.
    For instance, those buying ACA-compliant plans, either on HealthCare.gov with the help of subsidies or directly from Blue Cross and Blue Shield, have three levels of plans to choose from. Each has varying levels of coverage, and each could see a different level of increase.


    http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/news/2014/10/22/blue-cross-blue-shield-n-announces-double-digit.htmlPosted 3rd November 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  177. SEP23Obama LiedCcare Enrollees on the Decline










    The stated goal of Obamacare, the takeover of 1/6 of the American economy by unelected bureaucrats, was to force uninsured Americans to buy federal government approved healthcare insurance.


    Last spring, the Obama Regime bragged that 8 million Americans had enrolled in Obamacare, a number highly in dispute considering the near zero amount of credibility the regime has remaining, after multiple lies were told to the American public, such as “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan,” or “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor,” or “the average American family will save $2,500 per year in premiums.”

    All damnable lies told knowingly and repeatedly by smiling Democrats.

    But even if one were to be so gullible as to accept the previously stated eight million newly enrolled, it’s a small number considering, to sell the scheme,  The Obama White House itself claimed on August 11, 2009, that 46 million Americans were uninsured.

    Eight million out of 46 million is an abysmal failure by any honest measurement, but now even that inflated number is on the decline, as Jim Angle of FOX News reported on Monday.

     The Obama regime’s stated number has declined to 7.3 million as of August 15 of this year. And in Florida, for example, Obamacare enrollments are 220,000 lower than the regime’s count in April:
    Marilyn Tavenner, administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, told a congressional committee that “as of August 15, this year, we have 7.3 million Americans enrolled in Health Insurance Marketplace coverage and these are individuals who paid their premiums.”A key part of her statement was Tavenner’s reference to those who paid, because just signing up isn’t enough to be counted as enrolled.
    As Doug Holtz-Eakin, former Director of the Congressional Budget Office, explained,”it’s not enough to sign up. You have to sign up and pay on a regular basis to really be enrolled.”That is one reason both state and private insurance officials have been saying their enrollments were shrinking.http://www.tpnn.com/2014/09/22/obamacare-enrollees-on-the-decline/Posted 23rd September 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  178. SEP17Trainwreck, Continued: Eight New Pieces of Bad ObamaLied About Care NewsWho’s up for the latest batch of bad Obamacare-related news? 

    (1) Consumers brace for the second full year of Obamacare implementation, as the average individual market premium hike clocks in at eight percent — with some rates spiking by as much as 30 percent.
    (2)
     “Wide swings in prices,” with some experiencing “double digit increases.”(Remember what we were promised):
    Insurance executives and managers of the online marketplaces are already girding for the coming open enrollment period, saying they fear it could be even more difficult than the last. One challenge facing consumers will be wide swings in prices. Some insurers are seeking double-digit price increases…
    (3) A nightmarish tax season, via Philip Klein

    The top executive for H&R Block, the nation’s largest tax preparer, on Wednesday said he expected President Obama’s health care law to add “significant complexity” to next year’s tax season…“As expected, the forms are very detailed and can present significant complexity, depending on a filer’s coverage status during the year, income level, and household composition,” Cobb said. “Depending on their situation, there are instances where filers may need to file multiple new tax forms and complete additional worksheets.” Starting with next year’s tax season, individuals who do not have health insurance that meets federal requirements will be subject to penalties. But there are various categories of individuals who could be exempted. “Depending on the type of exemption, the process to claim it could be quite cumbersome and time consuming,” Cobb said.
    (4) Rural hospitals closing down:

    Small, rural hospitals like Linden have always struggled to remain viable, but things are getting worse, fast. Rural communities are shrinking at a time when healthcare providers are being pressured to cut costs and release patients sooner. Twenty-four rural hospitals have closed across the country since the start of 2013, double the pace of the previous 20 months, according to the North Carolina Rural Health Research Program….Now the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, is bringing additional pressure. Obamacare is designed to fold the poor and uninsured into the healthcare system, but changes in how the federal government pays for the disadvantaged are already pressuring the hospitals that cater to them, such as rural ones.
    (5) Thanks, taxpayers.  Please enjoy the unironic use of “unlikely:”
    With an $8 billion tax on insurers due Sept. 30 — the first time the new tax is being collected — the industry is getting help from an unlikely source: taxpayers. States and the federal government will spend at least $700 million this year to pay the tax for their Medicaid health plans. The three dozen states that use Medicaid managed care plans will give those insurers more money to cover the new expense. Many of those states – such as Florida, Louisiana and Tennessee – did not expand Medicaid as the law allows, and in the process turned down billions in new federal dollars. Other insurers are getting some help paying the tax as well. Private insurers are passing the tax onto policyholders in the form of higher premiums. Medicare health plans are getting the tax covered by the federal government via higher reimbursement.
    (6) One of Obamacare’s chief architects is proudly predicting that 80 percent ofemployer-based healthcare plans will disappear within the next decade.  Administration officials offered similar projections in private, even as Democrats repeatedly promised that Americans could keep their existing coverage, with which the vast majority were satisfied:


    (7) The federal health spending “cost curve” continues to point up, not down (as promised), as health spending increases, via the government’s own actuaries:
    The combined effects of the Affordable Care Act’s coverage expansions, faster economic growth, and population aging are expected to fuel health spending growth this year and thereafter (5.6 percent in 2014 and 6.0 percent per year for 2015–23)…Because health spending is projected to grow 1.1 percentage points faster than the average economic growth during 2013–23, the health share of the gross domestic product is expected to rise from 17.2 percent in 2012 to 19.3 percent in 2023.
    (8) Hampering the economy:

    Last month, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York published two surveys of regional employers—one focused on manufacturing businesses, one on service companies—and asked them how Obamacare was affecting their businesses. For 2015, 33.3 percent of service firms said Obamacare was increasing their costs “a lot,” whereas 51.2 percent of manufacturing firms said the same. While almost no firms said they would be dropping health coverage for their workers, 16.9 percent of service firms and 21.6 percent of manufacturers said they would be reducing their workforce due to Obamacare. 21.8 and 20.5 percent, respectively, said they would be reducing wage and salary compensation. 25 and 36.4 percent, respectively, said they would be raising prices for their customers.
    Avik Roy spells out the three primary ways in which the “Affordable” Care Act acts as a wet blanket on the US job market: (a) Obamacare is one of the largest tax increases in U.S. history; (b) Obamacare increases the cost of employing workers; (c) Obamacare’s exchange subsidies encourage many workers to drop out.  Click through for details.  In fact, the nonpartisan CBO released new numbers this week that underscore our halting economic progress:http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/09/04/obamacare-consumers-bracing-for-year-two-tax-season-headaches-predicted-n1887029?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pmPosted 17th September 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  179. SEP4Obamacare promises on health care costs an illusion







    Senate Republicans sent out an interesting email that pulls together information from government agencies and media sources that shows most of the president’s promises on controlling health care costs for families and employers to be an illusion.
    From the CMS:
    PROMISE: “…it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.” (President Obama, 9/9/09)

    From the CMS:
    PROMISE: “…it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government.” (President Obama, 9/9/09)
    REALITY: “The combined effects of the Affordable Care Act’s coverage expansions, faster economic growth, and population aging are expected to fuel health spending growth this year and thereafter (5.6 percent in 2014 and 6.0 percent per year for 2015–23).” (Office of the Chief Actuary for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, “National Health Expenditure Projections, 2013-23”, Health Affairs, October 2014)

    The significance is that health care costs had been rising at only a 4% clip since 2008. Experts say this is mostly due to the recession, but growth in the earlier part of the decade was also slowed compared to the previous two decades. The administration is trying to spin the numbers to make us believe that Obamacare is slowing the rate of growth in health care spending, but numerous other factors are actually at work.
    Meanwhile, health care costs for familes are on the rise:


    One challenge facing consumers will be wide swings in prices. Some insurers are seeking double-digit price increases…” (“Experts Bracing For New Set Of Challenges In Year 2 Of Health Care Law,” The New York Times, 9/2/14)


    “Rates will be a mixed bag… the average premium increase would be 8%, according to PwC’s Health Research Institute. But the individual moves ranged from proposed 23% cuts for two plans to increases of more than 30% for a few other plans.” (“With Health-Law Marketplaces Reopening, Insurers Brace For Round Two,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/3/14)


     *  “In Arkansas, where the average increase was 11.2 percent, some consumers could see their premiums soar by 50 percent.” (“Obamacare Rates Are Rising Once Again,” Washington Examiner, 8/21/14)
    * the change in premiums varies a lot … from no increase to35 percent higher in Indiana.” (“Here’s What’s Going On With Obamacare Premium Increases,” Huffington Post, 8/21/14)
    And for employers and their employees, some rude surprises:
    “Many businesses said Obamacare is jacking up their employee health coverage costs, and they expect it to do so even more next year, two new surveys of businesses by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York have found.” (“NY Fed: Firms ‘Widely’ See Obamacare Boosting Health Costs,” CNBC, 8/18/14)
    AMERICAN HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE: “…the ACA imposes additional costs of $4,800 to $5,900 per employee over the course of a decade.” (American Health Policy Institute, “The Health Care Employment Squeeze: Labor Day 2014,” p. 3)
    INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION OF EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS: “…nearly one in six employers with 50 or fewer employees has reduced its workforce in response to ACA-related costs … one in ten has reduced hiring in order to stay under the 50-employee ACA threshold for small employers.” (American Health Policy Institute, “The Health Care Employment Squeeze: Labor Day 2014,” p. 4)
    FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF PHILADELPHIA: “…18.2 percent of manufacturing employers have reduced both jobs and employees as a result of the ACA, while just 3 percent were hiring more.” (American Health Policy Institute, “The Health Care Employment Squeeze: Labor Day 2014,” p. 4)And be prepared for massive confusion at tax time next year, when the IRS does what it does best; creates complex forms that no one understands and everyone is likely to make errors on.


    Will people eventually get mad enough to demand repeal? The cumulative effect of all these disasters may be telling. If 10% of workers are switched to part time so that employers can avoid paying insurance for them, will that do it?


    I’ve given up depending on the people at large to get mad about anything. They sit there and take it. They figure there’s nothing they can do, so they acquiesce in this madness.


    And if we have a meltdown because of Obamacare, they’ll have no one to blame but themselves.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/09/the_presidents_obamacare_promises_on_health_care_costs_an_illusion.htmlPosted 4th September 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  180. AUG25American Life League’s Defend The Family Campaign IS A Brand New Effort To Have Planned Parenthood Declared An Enemy of the Catholic Church.By encouraging regular prayers after Mass for the conversion of individual countries from the ideologies of Planned Parenthood to the word of God, offering prayers for the pope, and opening communication with local bishops about the dangers Planned Parenthood poses to the faithful, it is our hope that this prayer-led effort will inspire the Holy Father to officially declare Planned Parenthood an enemy of the Church.


    In order to accomplish this goal, we have generated a brief report for the Vatican and bishops around the world—available in English, Spanish, Italian, and French—that outlines the threat that Planned Parenthood poses to the family. As Catholic bishops prepare for the October 2014 Synod on the Family, we have made sure that each participant has received a copy of this report.
    Argument and rhetoric alone will not accomplish the goal of seeing Planned Parenthood declared an enemy of the Church. This is why we are asking Catholics around the world to join together in reciting certain prayers at the end of every Mass for the conversion of their own respective countries from the ideologies of Planned Parenthood to the word of God. This is also why we are asking for everyone who hears about this effort to sign on to the spiritual bouquet we are preparing for the Holy Father. Great things are accomplished through faith and grace, and it will be through this prayerful effort that we believe we will see this enemy of families identified for what it is.
    1. Printing, signing, and mailing back to American Life League our Declaration of Encouragement to the Holy Father.
    2. Enrolling in the Spiritual Bouquet for the Holy Father
    3. Distributing our brochures; Defend the Family Campaign (coming soon to the online store), Why Do We Oppose Planned Parenthood?Planned Parenthood Steals Souls.
    4. Using our fact sheets on Planned Parenthood (not available yet)
    5. Downloading and printing the Defend the Family prayer card
    6. Having your parish publish this bulletin insert (Word Document).
    7. Telling your friends and family about this campaign.
    http://www.all.org/article/index/id/MTQwNjIPosted 25th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  181. AUG25Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey, co-chair of the Bipartisan Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, New HHS rule is an ‘obnoxious, unprecedented government attack on conscience rights’

    The nation’s political leaders – including one of the most outspoken pro-life leaders in Congress – have dismissed the new HHS mandate revision as the latest attempt to coerce religious non-profits and closely held corporations into paying for abortifacient drugs, contraception, and sterilization that violate their deeply held religious beliefs.


    The latest change allows religious non-profits to contact the government with their religious objection to the HHS mandate, and the government in turn will notify the non-profit’s insurance provider of the need to furnish women with the offending drugs “free of charge.”


    The penalty for entities that fail to comply is still $100 a day, or $36,500 a year, for each employee.
    Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey, co-chair of the Bipartisan Congressional Pro-Life Caucus called the new rule “just another highly coercive regulation — a direct, obnoxious, unprecedented government attack on the conscience rights of religious entities and anyone else who for moral reasons cannot and will not include potentially abortion-causing drugs — such as ella — or contraception and sterilization procedures in their private insurance plans.”


    Arina Grossu, director for the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, said the revised procedure “remains an insulting accounting gimmick does not protect the rights of Americans with sincere conscientious objections.”


    The new proposal also seeks to find a way to force closely held corporations into a similar procedure, in response to the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision.


    Grossu sees this as an attempt to violate the religious liberty of closely held corporations and a power-grab around the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision.


    Grossu says the Obama administration is still “soliciting comment on new ways to force family businesses to violate their deeply held moral and religious convictions due to the HHS mandate in an attempt to address and skirt the recent Supreme Court ruling. However, the government’s actions here still force family businesses to be complicit in what they view as morally wrong.”


    “This overreach by the Obama administration is intended only to ensnare family businesses back into the web of the mandate,” Rep. Smith said.


    Grossu added, “The Family Research Council urges the administration to offer a full exemption from the mandate to charities and non-profits that have sincere conscientious objections and to respect the Supreme Court’s ruling regarding family businesses like Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties.”


    Click “like” to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!
    Meanwhile, Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood objected that critics’ objections are based in fanaticism.


    “Once again, we’re reminded of the great lengths opponents are willing to go to put barriers between women and their birth control,” she said. “While the Obama administration is working hard to protect women’s access to birth control in the face of harmful Supreme Court decisions, today’s notice also serves as a stark reminder of what is at stake for women in this country when it comes to affordable basic health care.”


    But religious leaders say both religion and the Constitution rebuff the revision.


    Dr. Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, said, “When it comes to these contentious issues I don’t necessarily expect those who disagree with us to ask ‘What Would Jesus Do?’ But, in this case, asking ‘What Would Jefferson Do?’ would be a good start.”



    Posted 25th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  182. AUG19White House won’t reveal documents related to Obama Lied About Care website securit, Obama Flashback (2008): “No more secrecy. That’s a commitment I make to you as President. No more secrecyObama has failed to deliver on few promises as miserably as his vow to create a more transparent and open government. Shortly after being sworn into office, he sent a memo to federal agencies promising, “We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration.”




    The White House has rejected a request to publicly disclose documents relating to the kinds of security software and computer systems behind the federal health care exchange website on the grounds that the information could “potentially” be used by hackers.The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services denied a Freedom of Information Act request made late last year by the Associated Press amid concerns that Republicans raised about the security of the website, which had technical glitches that prevented millions of people from signing up for insurance under ObamaCare.In denying access to the documents, including what’s known as a site security plan, Medicare told the AP that disclosing them could violate health-privacy laws because it might give hackers enough information to break into the service.”We concluded that releasing this information would potentially cause an unwarranted risk to consumers’ private information,” CMS spokesman Aaron Albright said in a statement.The AP is asking the government to reconsider. Obama instructed federal agencies in 2009 to not keep information confidential “merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears.” Yet the government, in its denial of the AP request, speculates that disclosing the records could possibly, but not assuredly or even probably, give hackers the keys they need to intrude.Even when the government concludes that records can’t be fully released, Attorney General Eric Holder has directed agencies to consider whether parts of the files can be revealed with sensitive passages censored. CMS told the AP it will not release any parts of any of the records.The government’s decision highlights problems as it grapples with a 2011 Supreme Court decision that significantly narrowed a provision under open records law that protected an agency’s internal practices. Federal agencies have tried to use other, more creative routes to keep information censored.In addition to citing potential health-privacy violations, the government cited exemptions intended to protect personal privacy and law-enforcement records, although the agency did not explain what files about the health care website had been compiled for law-enforcement purposes. Some open-government advocates were skeptical.”Here you have an example of an agency resorting to a far-fetched privacy claim in an unprecedented attempt to bridge this legal gap and, in the process, making it even worse by going overboard in withholding such records in their entireties,” said Dan Metcalfe, a former director of the Justice Department’s office of information and privacy who’s now at American University’s law school.Keeping details about lockdown practices confidential is generally derided by information technology experts as “security through obscurity.” Disclosing some types of information could help hackers formulate break-in strategies, but other facts, such as numbers of break-ins or descriptions of how systems store personal data, are commonly shared in the private sector. “Security practices aren’t private information,” said David Kennedy, an industry consultant who testified before Congress last year about HealthCare.gov’s security.Last year, the AP found that CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner took the unusual step of signing the operational security certificate for HealthCare.gov herself, even as her agency’s security professionals balked. That memo said incomplete testing created uncertainties that posed a potentially high security risk for the website. It called for a six-month “mitigation” program, including ongoing monitoring and testing. The site has since passed a full security test.Government cyber-security experts were also worried that state computers linking to a federal system that verifies the personal information of insurance applicants were vulnerable to attack. About a week before the launch of HealthCare.gov, a federal review found significant differences in states’ readiness. The administration says the concerns about state systems have been addressed.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/08/19/white-house-wont-reveal-documents-relating-to-obamacare-website-security/?cmpid=NL_morninghlPosted 19th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  183. AUG18Federal court strikes down Obamacare mandate for Christian college

    Louisiana College is a Christian school that objected to the mandated abortion-inducing medications and contraceptives.According to ADF, the mandate has lost in court 77 times.Alliance Defending Freedom filed a challenge to the ACA abortion mandate on behalf of Louisiana College in 2012.federal court has ruled that the privately run Louisiana College can opt out of an Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandate that violates the school’s religious freedom.Wednesday’s decision from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana halted the enforcement of a controversial federal mandate that requires the Christian run Louisiana College, as an employer, to provide insurance coverage for abortion pills to its employees.”Louisiana College is a Christian college that simply wants to continue to operate as a Christian college as it has since its founding in 1906.”    Tweet This“All Americans should oppose unjust laws that force people—under threat of punishment—to give up their freedom to live and work according to their beliefs,” Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) Senior Counsel Kevin Theriot said in a press release.Obamacare, as the federal healthcare law is commonly called, says that employers must provide insurance coverage for abortion-inducing medications and contraceptives. That provision has been highly contested as it conflicts with the moral and religious convictions of some employers.ADF, a conservative Christian nonprofit legal organization, filed the federal lawsuit against the Obama administration on behalf of the college in February 2012. The Louisiana College v. Sebeliusdecision marks another win for those who oppose the federal mandate which has lost 77-6 in court to date, according to the organization.“Louisiana College is a Christian college that simply wants to continue to operate as a Christian college as it has since its founding in 1906,” Theriot said. “The court did the right thing in striking down the Obamacare abortion-pill mandate as it applies to Louisiana College’s health insurance coverage.”In May, a federal judge ruled that Cornerstone College in Michigan and Dordt College in Iowa could opt out of the Obamacare abortion pill mandate.http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=5838&advD=1248,355761Posted 18th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  184. AUG14A NEW PLAN TO REPLACE OBAMA Lied About CARE





    Avik Roy of the Manhattan Institute has been one of Obamacare’s most prominent critics over the past several years. On Wednesday he released his new plan – The Universal Exchange Plan – to replace Obamacare. He has been advocating for this plan in general terms for some time, and it could prove to represent the most realistic path for future reform if the politics of the issue does not play in favor of Republicans. The plan does not actually require the full repeal of Obamacare in order to work.What Roy is presenting here is a recipe for reform even in a situation where Obamacare’s structure endures. But it does not accept Obamacare’s permanence; instead, Roy is outlining a plan that dramatically shifts Obamacare’s effects; eliminates the individual and employer mandates; essentially transforms the Medicaid expansion in favor of private coverage; repeals all but the Cadillac Tax of Obamacare; and shifts power and authority to the stateshttp://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/mpr_17.pdf
    Exchange reform. The Plan repeals the ACA’s individual mandate requiring most Americans to purchase government-certified health coverage. The Plan restores the primacy of state-based exchanges and state-based insurance regulation. It expands the flexibility of insurers to design exchange-based policies that are more attractive to consumers, because they are of higher quality at a lower cost. The Plan expands access to health savings accounts. Because these reforms lower the cost of insurance for younger and healthier individuals, they have the potential to expand coverage, despite the lack of an individual mandate.Employer-sponsored insurance reform. The Plan repeals the ACA’s employer mandate, thereby offering employers a wider range of options for subsidizing workers’ coverage. The Plan preserves the ACA’s “Cadillac tax” on high-cost health plans, but it repeals other taxes, and reforms other regulations that artificially drive up the cost of employer- based insurance.Medicaid reform. The Plan migrates the Medicaid acute-care population onto the reformed state-based exchanges, with 100 percent federal funding and state oversight. (Medicaid acute care is a form of conventional insurance for hospital and doctor services.) In exchange, the Plan returns to the states, over time, full financial responsibility for the Medicaid long-term care population. (Long-term care funds nursing home stays and home health visits for the elderly and disabled.) This clean division of responsibilities will improve coverage for the poor; reduce waste, fraud and abuse; and provide fiscal certainty to state governments.Medicare reform. The Plan gradually raises the Medicare eligibility age by four months each year. The end result is to preserve Medicare for current retirees, and to maintain future retirees – in the early years of their retirement – on their exchange-based or employer-sponsored health plans. (Today, the government does not allow the newly retired to remain on their old plans; instead, it forces them to enroll in Medicare or forfeit their Social Security benefits.) In total, these changes would make the Medicare Trust Fund permanently solvent.Other reforms. The Plan tackles the growing problem of hospital monopolies that take advantage of their market power to charge unsustainably high prices. The Plan reforms malpractice litigation in federal programs. And it accelerates the pace of medical innovation through reform of the Food and Drug Administration.Callie Gable has more. The fiscal and coverage outcomes of the approach were modeled by Stephen Parente of the University of Minnesota, and the outcomes are interesting indeed. Here’s Avik Roy on the goals of the plan:
    • Reduce the deficit without raising taxes
    • Expand coverage meaningfully above ACA levels
    • Repeal the individual mandate
    • Reduce the cost of private health insurance
    • Improve health outcomes for the poor
    According to Parente’s models, the plan does this:Based on our modeling, the plan, over a thirty-year period, reduces federal spending by $10.5 trillion and federal revenue by $2.5 trillion, for a net deficit reduction of $8 trillion. We project that it will expand coverage by more than 12 million individuals over its first decade, despite the fact that it repeals the individual mandate. It reduces the cost of private-sector insurance policies by 17 percent for single policies and 4 percent for family policies.But the most dramatic improvement, we estimate, is in the Medicaid population. A group that today receives substandard care and substandard access to care will see a dramatic increase in provider access and health outcomes, based on Parente-developed indices that measure these things.Should Republicans face divided government in 2016 or should Obamacare’s polling numbers rebound, this approach could be the one they deploy to achieve long-lasting reform. Indeed, I’m curious if Roy has broken down how much of his proposal would need to be done legislatively.One of the key points here is that Roy is essentially betting that no realistic reform can be achieved if it shrinks coverage for Americans who gained it under Obamacare. He is also assuming passage of this reform would therefore be easier than a reform that fully repealed Obamacare and did not instead try to turn Obamacare’s mechanisms against the entitlement state. This may not be the case: It may turn out to be just as hard as replacing Obamacare fully.One final note: One of the most interesting parts of Roy’s reform, and the one people should pay attention to given its unique nature, is Section 5, focused on the cost of health care and health insurance and particularly the role of hospital consolidation. Cost was always the priority for most Americans prior to reform and polling evidence suggests it remains their top priority going forward. Rather than talking about the fiscal impact of Obamacare or its problems in aggregate, conservatives and libertarians would be wise to focus on reforms targeted at bringing down the cost of care and of coverage, and breaking the hospital oligopoly that drives up prices for everyone.http://humanevents.com/2014/08/14/a-new-plan-to-replace-obamacare/Posted 14th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  185. AUG8OBAMACARE-Money for Nothing (spoof)
    Posted 8th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  186. AUG7Barney Frank ‘Appalled’ By Obama Administration: ‘They Just Lied To People’Lie of the Year: ‘If you like your health care plan, you can keep it’http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/




    WASHINGTON — Barack Obama made a major political mistake by lying about the details of his health care plan, according to former House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.).”The rollout was so bad, and I was appalled — I don’t understand how the president could have sat there and not been checking on that on a weekly basis,” Frank told HuffPost during a July interview. “But frankly, he should never have said as much as he did, that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it. That wasn’t true. And you shouldn’t lie to people. And they just lied to people.”Obama has taken significant flak in conservative circles for claiming that his health care overhaul would allow all existing health care plans to continue, when, in fact, new consumer protection standards would require some people to sign up for more comprehensive insurance. The law provides government subsidies to help people of modest means pay for the more robust plans. Frank is a strong supporter of the law, and he has repeatedly defended Obama and his legislative agenda.”He should have said, ‘Look, in some cases the health care plans that you’ve got are really inadequate, and in your own interests, we’re going to change them,'” Frank said. “But that’s not what he said.”A recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that Obamacare continues to be widely misunderstood, with a majority of Americans unaware that the law allows consumers to choose between different private sector health plans. Lying about how the consumer protection standards would function, Frank said, created an unnecessary circus around a program that would help people get better coverage.”Any smart political adviser would have said, ‘Don’t lie to people, because you’re gonna get caught up in it and it’s gonna have this tsunami that you now have,'” Frank told HuffPost. “My political motto, very simple. I have always told the truth, and nothing but the truth. But I don’t volunteer the whole truth in every situation.”http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/01/barney-frank-obama-lie_n_5642132.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592Posted 7th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  187. AUG6Ohio House Republicans introduce bill to replace Common CoreO

    Ohio school districts that have spent four years implementing new Common Core standards might soon be told to change course.“The standards are always going to evolve,” said Rep. Matt Huffman, R-Lima, the No. 2 leader of the House.Huffman said hearings will begin in August on a new bill designed to eliminate the Common Core math and English/language arts standards and begin developing new standards for Ohio. The bill also might rework new science and social studies standards developed by the state.The goal is to pass the bill one week after the November election, when the House reconvenes after breaking in early June, Huffman said.“Speaker (William G.) Batchelder wanted to make clear … and I want to make clear the leadership in the House supports the repeal of these Common Core standards with the substitution of high standards and getting the federal government out of the business of education,” Huffman said.Rep. Andrew Thompson, R-Marietta, who has led the push to repeal Common Core in Ohio, said they are looking at other states with “proven standards” such as Massachusetts.“We want to look at standards that are tested, proven and effective,” he said, calling it “ creepy” the way Common Core came to Ohio.Common Core, the math and English standards developed by the National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, are in place in more than 40 states. The goal of Common Core is to improve college and career readiness and critical thinking, while aligning standards among states to allow for comparisons of results.Gov. John Kasich has said he supports Common Core, because specific curriculum is developed at the local level.Huffman and Thompson argued that Common Core stifles local control and represents too much federal intrusion — a point that supporters counter, arguing that local districts decide how to teach and the federal government played no role in its creation except to provide some funding.Tom Ash of the Buckeye Association of School Administrators said his group supports Common Core but he agrees with Huffman and Thompson on one thing.“The education community at large has done a terrible job of keeping the public informed of this whole process from the beginning,” he said.Asked why state associations representing superintendents and school boards support the standards, Huffman said state associations, particularly the superintendents, sometimes take an official stance counter to that of school leaders across the state.He said the superintendents association will support policies publicly, “but then take the representative into their office after the meeting and say, ‘This is what I really think.’”Superintendents are getting some public pressure to repeal, Ash said, “But they have others, particularly their own staff members, who say we can’t turn our backs on what we’ve been building for the last four years. And staff members think it’s going to be good for kids.”Melissa Cropper, president of the Ohio Federation of Teachers, said “teachers overwhelmingly believe the Common Core is a better way of instruction,” adding that “students more easily learn the material, retain it and apply it in other aspects of their learning.”Common Core also has support from the Ohio business community. In a recent column, Dan Navin, vice president for tax and economic policy at the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, highlighted businesses’ need for highly skilled workers.“Building a college- and career-ready Ohio starts with higher, yet achievable, standards,” he wrote. “The Common Core state standards do this.”In May, Batchelder and other GOP leaders took notice when three-term Rep. Peter Stautberg, R-Cincinnati, suffered a surprising primary defeat to an opponent who made Common Core a key issue.The new bill will not go to the House Education Committee, whose chairman, Rep. Gerald Stebelton, R-Lancaster, backs Common Core. Instead, Huffman said, it will be assigned to the Rules Committee, a leadership-controlled panel that rarely hears bills.The hearings are scheduled to start on Aug. 12.Lawmakers this year already took action to address some Common Core issues, such as ensuring that parents have the opportunity to review instructional materials and curriculum, new state-level content review committees, and safeguards to protect student data.http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/07/28/common-core-elimination-bill.htmlPosted 6th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  188. AUG6Hobby Lobby’s Liberty, and Ours, Obama issued an executive order that prohibits federal government contractors from “sexual orientation” and “gender identity, This means that Washington will now police the hiring and staffing policies of any church or charitable organization that holds federal contracts.





    Religious liberty has long been considered our “first freedom” in America. So why are we spending so much time defending this freedom in court now?Many celebrated the Supreme Court’s June 30 ruling on Hobby Lobby. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves: Plenty of other challenges are coming for churches, synagogues, mosques and, yes, businesses.

    On July 21, President Obama issued an executive order that prohibits federal government contractors from “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” discrimination and forbids “gender identity” discrimination in the employment of federal employees. In a scathing response, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops decried the executive order as “unprecedented and extreme and should be opposed.”The bishops’ response, authored by Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore and Bishop Richard Malone of Buffalo, asserted that “in the name of forbidding discrimination, this order implements discrimination.” The bishops predicted that “faithful Catholics and many other people of faith will not assent” to the deeply flawed understanding of human sexuality undergirding the order. “As a result, the order will exclude federal contractors precisely on the basis of their religious beliefs,” the bishops said.This means that Washington will now police the hiring and staffing policies of any church or charitable organization that holds federal contracts. The irony here is that the Catholic Church unequivocally opposes discrimination based on gender or sexual orientation, without compromising its teachings on marriage or family. Who holds the moral high ground on this question, the federal government or the Church?This was, in a way, inevitable. I’ve been sounding the alarm for more than two decades about the risks of church-based groups — Catholic Charities comes immediately to mind — becoming overly dependent on government contracts. What we should do is to “reprivatize” private charities. That’s the only way these religious groups will be truly accountable and truly private.One of the little noticed dimensions of the Hobby Lobby decision is the critical connection between the right of religious liberty and the freedom to live out one’s moral and religious convictions as business owners and workers. The link is essential if our society is ever going to deal with the necessity of developing a culture that brings virtue and moral truth more deeply into our economic life.Hobby Lobby and the threats to religious liberty posed by Obamacare are about much more than merely birth control (which the company provides for its employees in any case), or even forcing employers to pay for abortion-inducing drugs and devices (which was Hobby Lobby’s principal objection). No, what’s at stake in this ruling is the religious liberty of the people who own Hobby Lobby and Mardel and Conestoga Wood Specialties, and the fact that they did not surrender those rights when turn on the lights of their businesses every morning.It is worth noting here that there is an important link between religious liberty and the right to private property. One of the traditional justifications for private property that one finds in, for instance, Roman Catholic teaching is that it provides the holder of that property and his dependents with a sphere of liberty that in turn limits the state’s control over a society’s resources. Hence, without ownership of these resources, it would have been hard if not impossible for Hobby Lobby to make its case against the full might of the most aggressively secularist administration in America’s history.We simply must not use employment law and anti-discrimination executive orders to force not just businesses but also churches, synagogues, and other religious associations to betray their beliefs. Such an effort ought to signal to anyone seriously concerned about preserving the fundamental freedoms upon which the republic was founded.The Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision was a victory for those who desire to maintain this American inheritance. I just hope that we all realize that the extent to which the security of our freedoms depends on maintaining the liberty of all.Posted 6th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  189. AUG5Florida premiums to jump 13% for 2015

    Remember when Barack Obama promised to bend cost curves downward with ObamaCare? Later, that pledge morphed into a claim that premiums wouldn’t go up as much as they did in the past; last month, it changed to a disclaimer that premiums wouldn’t go up any more sharply than without ObamaCare. Tell that to Floridians, who face double-digit premium increases when open enrollment starts this fall:Floridians who buy health insurance on the individual market for next year will face an average increase of 13.2 percent in their monthly premiums, according to rate proposals unveiled Monday by the state’s Office of Insurance Regulation. …Fourteen companies filed ACA-compliant plans for Florida’s 2015 individual market, including three new companies that did not participate on the federally-run exchange last year.Of the 11 returning plans, eight filed average rate increases ranging from 11 to 23 percent, and three filed rate decreases ranging from 5 to 12 percent, the state’s insurance regulator reported.Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican who is campaigning for reelection, seized on the report to criticize his Democratic challenger, Charlie Crist, and the ACA, commonly referred to as Obamacare.“Obamacare is a bad law that just seems to be getting worse,’’ Scott said in a written statement. “Florida families are going to be slammed with higher costs.’’HHS objected to the OIR’s report, claiming that it didn’t take into account the subsidies that taxpayers would use to pay insurers. That would reduce the bill for the average taxpayer to $50 a month, HHS said, but that’s a non-sequitur. The premiums are still skyrocketing in Year 2 for ObamaCare regardless of who pays the bill. And by the way, federal subsidies get paid by taxpayers in the end anyway; it’s just a sleight of hand to take the money from taxpayers on one hand and give them back in the other hand.Don’t forget that one of the supposed reasons that Congress had to overhaul and take control of the health-insurance industry wasn’t the uninsured, but cost control. We could have expanded Medicaid to cover those uninsured not by choice at much less cost and intrusiveness. Democrats insisted that escalating health-care costs also had to be addressed, including the cost of health insurance. So far, ObamaCare has made that worse rather than better, while still leaving tens of millions uninsured.By the way, do readers also recall how ObamaCare advocates gave credit for a slowdown in escalating health-care costs to the new law? Never mind:Some of the best news for health care in a while is also driving one of its biggest debates — what exactly is behind the historic slowdown in health-care spending these past few years. Just how much credit should be given to structural changes in the health-care system versus the effects of the Great Recession? The answer has major fiscal implications for the country’s future as the economy improves and millions more gain health insurance under the 2010 health-care law.Previous research has tried to answer this question, but a new study finds that the recession gets most of the credit for the recent slowdown in the growth of health-care spending, suggesting that an improving economy could accelerate health spending once again.After the annual growth rate for health care spending averaged 6.6 percent between 2000 and 2007, it shrank to just 3.3 percent each year between 2008 and 2011, according to the authors’ analysis of federal data. During those three years, the slumping economy accounted for 70 percent of the spending slowdown, according to a new peer-reviewed study from Northwestern University economists published in today’s Health Affairs journal. A separate working paper released Monday from the Brookings Institution also argues the slowdown is largely the result of the two previous recessions.If it’s any consolation to ObamaCare advocates, the law will almost certainly suppress economic activity, business expansion, and job creation over the long haul, so the recessionary effects aren’t likely to dissipate quickly.http://hotair.com/archives/2014/08/05/florida-premiums-to-jump-13-for-2015/Posted 5th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  190. AUG5Doctors Begin To Refuse Obama Lied About Care Patients
    Obamacare is a travesty Forced down our throats by his majesty.
    Lied to us from the very first day Just take a pain pill and go away.
    Liberals continue to lie to us And says Obamacare is a definite must. A ‘death panel’ does not truly exist Another LIE from this socialist.















    Obamacare plans have shrunk payments to physicians so much that some doctors say they won’t be able to afford to accept Obamacare coverage, NPR reports.
    Many of the eight million sign-ups in Obamacare exchanges nationwide already face more limited choices for physicians and hospitals than those in the private insurance market. But with low physician reimbursement rates, the problem could get even worse.For a typical quick patient visit, Dr. Doug Gerard, a Connecticut internist, told NPR a private insurer would pay $100 while Medicare would pay around $80. But Obamacare plans are more likely to pay closer to $80, which Gerard says is unsustainable for his practice.“I cannot accept a plan [in which] potentially commercial-type reimbursement rates were now going to be reimbursed at Medicare rates,” Dr. Gerard told NPR.  ”You have to maintain a certain mix in private practice between the low reimbursers and the high reimbursers to be able to keep the lights on.”Narrow networks have become a hallmark of many Obamacare exchange plans, as one of few options left to insurance companies that allows them to save money by lowering reimbursement rates and covering fewer providers. In the health-care law’s first year, 70 percent of all Obamacare plan networks were either narrow or ultra-narrow, according to an analysis from consulting firm McKinsey.But doctors are feeling even more financial pressure due to the changes and many believe there’s a risk that Obamacare insurance will go the way of Medicaid, where patients still struggle to find a doctor after low reimbursement rates led many physicians to stop accepting it.“I don’t think most physicians know what they’re being reimbursed,” Gerard said. “Only when they start seeing some of those rates come through will they realize how low the rates are they agreed to.”If Obamacare coverage continues on its current track, exchange customers could face a lower level of care than those who buy coverage in the private market.“I think it could lead potentially to this kind of distinction that there are these different tiers of quality of care,” Connecticut Obamacare chief Kevin Counihan told NPR. ”That’s been something, at least in our state, that we’re trying to work against. And the carriers are, as well.”The problem is especially bad for private practices like Gerard’s, where physicians’ income is directly tied to reimbursements. But hospitals — especially top-tier ones that treat the most difficult diseases — are also increasingly rejecting the low reimbursement rates. The nation’s best cancer treatment centers are often covered by very few exchange plans in their states; if Obamacare customers end up with a difficult-to-treat cancer, they’re likely to face a lower quality of care right off the bat.
    You get what you pay for,” said Connecticut State Medical Society president-elect Bob Russo. “If you can’t convince [doctors] that they’re not losing money doing their job, then it’s a problem. And they haven’t been able to convince people of that.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/08/04/doctors-begin-to-refuse-obamacare-patients/#ixzz39YTCThPHPosted 5th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  191. AUG4Obama Lied About Care’s Bad News Didn’t Stop; The Media Just Lost Interest





    Several news cycles pass without much discussion of Obamacare/the Affordable Care Act. Some may interpret this as a sign that disapproval of the law is wavering — it isn’t — or that the reports of frustration, waste, mismanagement and premium hikes have stopped. They haven’t stopped, they’re just not surprising news anymore, and they’ve been pushed to the back pages by the summer’s cavalcade of crises: the humanitarian crisis on the border, ISIS taking over Iraq, Russian separatists shooting down airliners, Israel fighting Hamas, and so on. As mentioned in today’s JoltJust Because You’re Not Hearing About Obamacare Messes Doesn’t Mean Obamacare Isn’t Making New Messes (or Exacerbating Old Ones)Hey, remember Obamacare?The New York Times checks in with those who have insurance for the first time:Last week, Salwa Shabazz arrived at the office of a public health network here with a bag full of paperwork about her new health insurance — and an unhappy look on her face. She had chosen her plan by phone in March, speaking to a customer service representative at the federal insurance marketplace. Now she had problems and questions, so many questions.“I’ve had one doctor appointment since I got this insurance, and I had to pay $60,” Ms. Shabazz told Daniel Flynn, a counselor with the health network, the Health Federation of Philadelphia. “I don’t have $60.”Mr. Flynn spent almost two hours going over her Independence Blue Cross plan, which he explained had a “very complicated” network that grouped doctors and hospitals into three tiers. Ms. Shabazz, who has epilepsy, had not understood when she chose the plan that her doctors were in the most expensive tier.Another survey indicating that a significant chunk of the uninsured aren’t paying any attention to anything:Among those who were uninsured last year and remain uninsured, only 59% were familiar with the new Obamacare marketplaces and 38% were aware of federal subsidies to lower their insurance costs, according to the survey conducted in June by the nonpartisan Urban Institute.About 60% of respondents list cost as the main reason for not having insurance. But 20% say they don’t want health insurance or would rather pay the fine for not having coverage.The price tag just keeps growing, well beyond previous estimates: “Between September 2011 and February 2014, the “federally facilitated marketplace” (FFM) saw costs grow from $56 million to $209 million. Meanwhile, the costs for the related data hubs, the so-called ‘back office operations,’ rose from $30 million to $85 million.”Up in Massachusetts, the folks who failed to gets the state’s health-insurance exchange running smoothly on time . . . are getting a bunch of raises.Recently, Massachusetts Health Connector executive director Jean Yang doled out raises of $10,000 or more to 11 of the agency’s 53 workers. The increases ranged from 15 percent to 24 percent, with another 3 percent on the way in the fiscal 2015 budget if the agency meets goals to successfully re-launch its balky website by November.Yang said the salary increases are needed to retain valued employees and improve performance going forward. This action comes after the embarrassing debacle associated with the state’s rollout of its Obamacare website, which has cost taxpayers nearly $1 million in computer fixes and lawsuits and still isn’t resolved.Yang is also planning to hire eight more workers, increasing the staff to 61.

    The last time we saw Yang she was tearfully testifying on Beacon Hill about the website’s failures. The strain on her staff, and the demoralizing effects it had on them, were articulated quite extensively.Indeed, failure is demoralizing. Speaking of Massachusetts, you may have missed this Friday:Former Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) slammed the administration’s ObamaCare rollout, calling President Obama’s claim that people could keep their insurance plans under the law a “lie.”“The rollout was so bad, and I was appalled — I don’t understand how the president could have sat there and not been checking on that on a weekly basis,” Frank said in an interview with the Huffington Post published Friday.“But frankly, he should never have said as much as he did, that if you like your current health care plan, you can keep it,” he continued. “That wasn’t true. And you shouldn’t lie to people. And they just lied to people.”Here’s a story of Hartford, Connecticut doctors facing reality on the reimbursement rates:On a recent afternoon at his office in Hartford, Conn., Dr. Doug Gerard examines a patient complaining of joint pain. He checks her out, asks her a few questions about her symptoms and then orders a few tests before sending her on her way.For a typical quick visit like this, Gerard could get reimbursed $100 or more from a private insurer. For the same visit, Medicare pays less — about $80. And now, with the new private plans under the Affordable Care Act, Gerard says he would get something in between, but closer to the lower Medicare rates.That’s not something he’s willing to put up with.“I cannot accept a plan [in which] potentially commercial-type reimbursement rates were now going to be reimbursed at Medicare rates. You have to maintain a certain mix in private practice between the low reimbursers and the high reimbursers to be able to keep the lights on,” he says.Three insurers offered plans on Connecticut’s ACA marketplace in 2014 and Gerard is only accepting one. He won’t say which, but he will say it pays the highest rate.“I don’t think most physicians know what they’re being reimbursed,” he says. “Only when they start seeing some of those rates come through will they realize how low the rates are they agreed to.”Gerard’s decision to reject two plans is something officials in Connecticut are concerned about. If reimbursement rates to doctors stays low in Obamacare plans, more doctors could reject those plans. And that could mean that people will get access to insurance, but they may not get access to a lot of doctors.Posted 4th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  192. AUG4Obama Lied About Care: Enrollees Face Unhappy Surprises, Doctors Explain ‘Access Shock’






    As government watchdogs pound the White House’s incompetence andnegligence over the implementation and administration of Obamacare, the law has slumped to a new low in the (generally Obamacare-friendly) Kaiser Family Foundation national survey released last week. Administration officials are warning consumers that November’s open enrollment period won’t to go smoothly, predicting “bumps” and higher premiums. The system is still disjointed because, in spite of nearly $850 million already spent on Healthcare.gov, the hub’s “back end” still isn’t built — and isn’t expected to be functional until some time in 2015. This glaring flaw has created data discrepancyheadaches left and right, and has opened the door for fraud. Sticker shock and confusion have simultaneously led to some “attrition” among enrollees who purchased plans, but have ceased paying for coverage. And all of this against a backdrop of steadily increasing costs for average people who were assured that Obamacare would save their family thousands per year. The New York Timescatches up with some of the law’s freshly signed-up consumers and discovers that some of the law’s “beneficiaries” aren’t exactly thrilled with their benefits:
     Last week, Salwa Shabazz arrived at the office of a public health network here with a bag full of paperwork about her new health insurance — and an unhappy look on her face. She had chosen her plan by phone in March, speaking to a customer service representative at the federal insurance marketplace. Now she had problems and questions, so many questions. “I’ve had one doctor appointment since I got this insurance, and I had to pay $60,” Ms. Shabazz told Daniel Flynn, a counselor with the health network, the Health Federation of Philadelphia. “I don’t have $60.” Mr. Flynn spent almost two hours going over her Independence Blue Cross plan, which he explained had a “very complicated” network that grouped doctors and hospitals into three tiers. Ms. Shabazz, who has epilepsy, had not understood when she chose the plan that her doctors were in the most expensive tier. “None of that was explained when I signed up,” she said. “This is the first I’m hearing it.” Many people who signed up for private coverage through the new marketplaces had never had health insurance, and even the basics — like what a premium is and why getting a primary care doctor is better than relying on the emergency room — are beyond their experience. Others have a sense of how insurance works but find the details of the marketplace plans confusing, especially if they signed up without the help of someone who understood them.
    Some Obamacare recipients are discovering that coverage isn’t as “affordable” as they’d hoped — and certainly not free. The story goes on to explain that Ms. Shabazz ended up leaving her job as her health problems deteriorated, dropping her into “coverage gap” territory; she had earned too much this year to qualify for Medicaid (liberals will blame this on her state’s decision against expanding the program at substantial cost, ignoring Medicaid’s proven failures), but too little to continue to qualify for ongoing generous taxpayer subsidies. Those subsidies made the plan she selected appear to be within reach financially, but that was before she found out about out-of-pocket costs. The story concludes with a health adviser recommending that Shabazz cancel her Obamacare plan, reducing her to tears. As President Obama said last November, “what we’re discovering is that insurance is complicated to buy.” Recent polling has shown that a large majority of the newly insured are satisfied with their coverage, but many are struggling to pay for it. People who were thrown off of existing plans (thus exposing an “appalling” presidential lie, to quote Barney Frank, who nevertheless voted for the law) are significantly less pleased with their new coverage than their previously-uninsured counterparts. Multiple polls have shown that Obamacare has directly hurt roughly twice as many Americans as it’s helped. One of the law’s consequences is “access shock,” a phenomenon we’ve written about a lot. This problem generally arises from people discovering that their doctors are not covered by their new plans’ networks, many of which are dramatically narrower than they’d expected. Read this profile of several Connecticut doctors whose experiences with Obamacare illustrate the considerations that are fueling this problem:
     For a typical quick visit like this, Gerard could get reimbursed $100 or more from a private insurer. For the same visit, Medicare pays less — about $80. And now, with the new private plans under the Affordable Care Act, Gerard says he would get something in between, but closer to the lower Medicare rates. That’s not something he’s willing to put up with. “I cannot accept a plan [in which] potentially commercial-type reimbursement rates were now going to be reimbursed at Medicare rates. You have to maintain a certain mix in private practice between the low reimbursers and the high reimbursers to be able to keep the lights on,” he says. Three insurers offered plans on Connecticut’s ACA marketplace in 2014 and Gerard is only accepting one. He won’t say which, but he will say it pays the highest rate…Gerard’s decision to reject two plans is something officials in Connecticut are concerned about. If reimbursement rates to doctors stays low in Obamacare plans, more doctors could reject those plans. And that could mean that people will get access to insurance, but they may not get access to a lot of doctors.
    “Access shock,” defined. Other doctors concur:
     Lalime says he also thinks low reimbursement rates are forcing some doctors to decide against accepting insurance under the Affordable Care Act. Dr. Bob Russo is sure of it. He’s a radiologist and he’s also the president-elect of the Connecticut State Medical Society. He says that the low rates and administrative burdens that come along with the ACA could make it a financial loser. “You get what you pay for,” he says“If you can’t convince [doctors] that they’re not losing money doing their job, it’s a problem. And they haven’t been able to convince people of that.” He, like Counihan, worries about creating a tiered health care system. Think about Medicaid, he says. Before a recent rise in rates, it paid doctors even less than Medicare, so many stopped accepting Medicaid patients.
    Now, remember Ms. Shabazz? Even if her state had expanded Medicaid, and even if you ignore the program’s bad outcomes (linked above), she would likely bump up against all-too-familiar struggle for Medicaid recipients: Major, maddening problems finding doctors willing to accept new patients within that program. Coverage does not equal care. Before you go, click through to this editorial exposing taxpayer-funded raises being doled out to Massachusetts’ Obamacare exchange administrators. The state’s marketplace failed miserably, and has beenentirely scrapped, flushing hundreds of millions of public dollars down the tubes. Those responsible for this breathtaking ineptitude are being rewarded with compensation bumps, and taxpayers are footing the bill.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/08/04/obamacare-some-newlyinsured-unhappy-with-plans-doctors-decry-low-reimbursements-n1874462?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pmPosted 4th August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  193. AUG1What’s New with ObamaCare? — Summer 2014 EditionIt’s been a while since we’ve checked in on one of President Obama’s programs “fundamentally transforming America.”


    We’ve moved past the “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it” nonsense. We’ve moved past the initial rush/panic of people who lost their insurance by government fiat trying desperately to get on the government’s website, healthcare.gov, which catalogued the litany of website problems they were having here. We’ve moved past then-secretary Sebelius and the president taking a victory lap for “enrolling” more than 7 million people (ignoring the RAND study showing only 858,000 previously uninsured people had obtained and paid for their insurance at the time of the celebration).


    In July 2014, the Heritage Foundation released a paper that shows only 520,000 people obtained private health insurance in the open enrollment period from October 1, 2013 through March 31, 2014. The increase in the number of people enrolling in individual insurance is off-set 77 percent by fewer people enrolling in employer-based coverage. The authors estimate that due to slow processing of ObamaCare enrollments the number of those attaining private insurance could rise to 3-4 million for the period but that number is off-set by more than five million able-bodied adults with no dependent children being added to the Medicaid rolls through program changes made in ObamaCare.


    (Actually, I just lied about us moving past liking and keeping your health care plan, but it’s okay because my intentions were good.)


    A new round of healthcare plan cancellations is coming sometime around October 2014, a month before you can thank the Democrats who gave us ObamaCare. [KLE1] 


    According to the Washington Post, millions of Americans who receive health insurance through small business employers have a good chance of finding their plans cancelled or changed by the end of 2014. “Some of the small-business cancellations are occurring because the policies don’t meet the law’s basic coverage requirements. But many are related only indirectly to the law; insurers are trying to move customers to new plans designed to offset the financial and administrative risks associated with the health-care overhaul. As part of that, they are consolidating their plan offerings to maximize profits and streamline how they manage them.”


    Color me a nit-picking pedantic, but that means it is a direct result of it.
    The Post article also contained this nugget, “Jonathan Gruber, a key architect of the health law and a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said the number of people covered by small-group policies that will be discontinued is ‘not trivial.’” We’ll get back to Mr. Gruber in a minute.
    Okay, some people lost coverage, but most people are saving money, right?
    President Obama promised that ObamaCare would save families money on health insurance plans they have and like up to $2,500 a year. John Nolte at Breitbart put together this video montage showing 19 times when Obama said that. How’s that promise working out so far? If you guessed “not so great,” congratulations, you win higher premiums.


    The Manhattan Institute published a 49-state study in November 2013 that showed on average ObamaCare would raise premiums by 41 percent in 2014. That just screams “Affordable Care Act,” no? In June 2014, they released an analysis of ObamaCare in the 3,137 counties in the U.S. Spoiler alert: it was worse.  The headline says, “ObamaCare Increased 2014 Individual-Market Premiums By Average Of 49%.” Women had rate hikes in 82 percent of counties; men had rate increases in 91 percent.


    Maybe it’s just a “fluke,” but it appears things like “free” birth control cost everybody more money.
    People receiving taxpayer-subsidized insurance are doing okay, though, for now. According to Betsy McCaughey, “What is clear is that without subsidies, the Affordable Care Act is just the opposite — hugely unaffordable. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, 87% of people who signed up for ObamaCare for 2014 qualified for subsidies, and on average they paid 76% less than the true cost of their plan. $82 a month instead of $376 a month. That $82 price tag didn’t mean ObamaCare had succeeded in lowering health insurance costs. It just shifted the cost from premium payers to taxpayers.”


    In two recent Circuit Court decisions, the fate of subsidies, and thus ObamaCare, hangs in the balance.
    In the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, a three-judge panel ruled 2-1 in Halbig v. Burwell that the IRS regulation extending federal subsidies to people who buy health insurance through the federal exchange (because they live in a state that does not have a state exchange) is not legal. The judges said Congressional intent, as plainly stated in the Affordable Care Act language, was to extend subsidies (in the form of tax credits) only to policies purchased through state exchanges. In a contradictory ruling on the same day, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia ruled in King v. Burwell that the IRS may legally grant the subsidies. It appears the U.S. Supreme Court will have to take another look at ObamaCare.


    As McCaughey points out, Section 1401 of the law “unambiguously states that subsidies will be made available ‘through an exchange established by the state.’” The Administration tried to argue that it was Congress’ intent to provide subsidies to everyone buying ObamaCare plans.


    And that brings us back to Mr. Gruber, the architect of ObamaCare. There are at least two audio clips, here and here, that show Mr. Gruber basically saying tough stuff to citizens who live in states without state exchanges.


    From a 2012 speech discussing ObamaCare at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gruber said, “In the law, it says if the states don’t provide them, the federal backstop will. The federal government has been sort of slow in putting out its backstop, I think partly because they want to sort of squeeze the states to do it. I think what’s important to remember politically about this, is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an Exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits. But your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So you’re essentially saying to your citizens, you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country. I hope that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these Exchanges, and that they’ll do it. But you know, once again, the politics can get ugly around this.” [Emphasis mine.]


    Given these statements of intent, will the U.S. Supreme Court give President Obama, the Democrats in Congress, and Mr. Gruber a mulligan?


    So far ObamaCare has brought policy cancellations, higher premiums, and yet another court case to determine the legality of one of the myriad regulations issued in an attempt to make an unworkable leviathan functional.


    If I had a nickel for every time a law had unintended consequences brought about by good intentions, I could probably pay the unsubsidized ObamaCare premiums.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/08/whats_new_with_obamacare__summer_2014_edition.html

    Posted 1st August 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  194. JUL25Architect Undermines Obama Lied About Care





    Voters got to know Jonathan Gruber in 2012 when the Obama campaign put the health care policy wonk forward to shut down ObamaCare attacks from Republican nominee Mitt Romney. President Obama was so eager to play up Gruber’s role as a chief architect of ObamaCare because Gruber had been a chief architect of Romney’s state-level health law. Elevating Gruber allowed the campaign to deliver his lines with greater crack:
    “The core of the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare and what we did in Massachusetts are identical,” says Gruber in one campaign ad. While Gruber may have helped neuter Romney’s ObamaCare attacks, he may end up helping to neuter the law itself thanks to a video unearthed by free-market think tank the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
    Gruber, an MIT professor who has become a Democratic health care talking head, also gets paid for talking to industry groups about ObamaCare. In one 2012 speech, Gruber talked about the provision in the law that has state governments administer enrollments, including subsidies. “I think what’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits,” said Gruber, a MIT professor, in a speech two years ago. Why is that problematic? Because it directly contradicts what the administration argued in court about a lawsuit that could be “devastating” to ObamaCare because it would end the subsidies paid to enrollees in the states that did not voluntarily comply.
    The preferred talking point for pro-administration groups has been to dismiss the subsidy gap as a clerical error, not an intentional policy. It goes like this: Congress meant to provide a way to work around non-compliant states, but didn’t get the wording right. It was, in the words of one administration insider deployed to knock down the court decision, a typo. And who was that insider? You guessed it: Jonathan Gruber. This matters not because it is an embarrassing deception for an academic to be caught in, but because it suggests the falsity of the administration’s claim that this was a glitch and not a feature. The administration was eager to highlight Gruber’s role in order to shame Romney, making it hard now to suggest that he was some peripheral figure. Whether this matters in the expected Supreme Court decision is a matter for the legal eagles to consider, but from a messaging point of view this is a Krakatoa-sized eruption.http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/07/25/architect-undermines-obamacare?cmpid=NL_foxnationPosted 25th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  195. JUL21U.S. Territories Suddenly Exempt from Major Obama Lied About Care RequirementsGood news for the residents of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, et. al: according to a memo quietly posted on the HHS website last Thursday, Obamacare’s coverage provisions no longer apply in these areas.After a careful review of this situation and the relevant statutory language, HHS has determined that the new provisions of the PHS Act enacted in title I are appropriately governed by the definition of “state” set forth in that title, and therefore that these new provisions do not apply to the territories. This means that the following Affordable Care Act requirements will not apply to individual or group health insurance issuers in the U.S. territories: 1 guaranteed availability (Act section 2702), community rating (PHS Act section 2701), single risk pool (Affordable Care Act section 1312(c)), rate review (PHS Act section 2794), medical loss ratio (PHS Act section 2718), and essential health benefits (PHS Act section 2707). Specifically, under this interpretation, the definition of “state” set forth in the PHS Act will apply only to PHS Act requirements in place prior to the enactment of the Affordable Care Act, or subsequently enacted in legislation that does not include a separate definition of “state” (as the Affordable Care Act does).
    Naturally, this is a complete 180 from the rhetoric espoused by the HHS last year. Under Obamacare, insurance companies operating in America’s territories had to accept every insurance applicant, but residents of the territories were not subject to the individual mandate and did not have to actually purchase insurance while still healthy. Additionally, subsidies were not available to residents of territories; only for people living in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. As a result of the law, insurance companies threatened to stop selling new plans altogether in American territories.When territory officials asked for government leniency last year, they were told that there was nothing possible to remedy this problem:”HHS, at the request of and with full support from territories, confirmed the Affordable Care Act’s market reform provisions that are incorporated into the PHS Act, including the guaranteed availability provision, are applicable to the territories,” Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight director Gary Cohen wrote in a July letter to territorial governors.”However meritorious your request might be,” Cohen continues, “HHS is not authorized to choose which provisions…might apply to the territories.”While it is certainly a good thing that the insurance market in these areas isn’t going to be completely destroyed, it is somewhat troubling that the administration is continuing to pick and choose its definition of a state depending on the situation. Congress is supposed to write and change laws–not the Department of Health and Human Services.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2014/07/21/us-territories-suddenly-exempt-from-obamacare-n1864234Posted 21st July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  196. JUL17Megyn Kelly Proves Liberals are LYING about Birth Control & Hobby Lobby …Democrats are famous for treating women like mere sex objects. That kind of misogynistic behavior goes back as far as FDR and includes the famous sexual escapades of JFK. It even goes from Bill “I never had sexual relations with that woman” Clinton all the way up to former Democrat Congressman Anthony “Carlos Danger” Weiner. Democrats (males that is) just seem to look at women like a reward for good job performance.





    Posted 17th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  197. JUL16Your health care: Obama’s $18,000 broken promise, Obama’s health plan has failed to achieve its promised premium reductions. Overall, that amounts to $1.2 trillion in higher premium costs due to Obama Lied About Care’s failure to deliver.



    How would you feel if someone promised to give you a car, and then reneged on that pledge?  That’s how all Americans should feel when it comes to ObamaCare — because Barack Obama’s failed and discredited campaign promise to lower health insurance premiums has cost the average American family an amount equal to the price of many new cars.During his 2008 campaign, one of then-Senator Obama’s most audacious promises was that his health plan would reduce premiums by $2,500 for the average family.  His repeatedly made his pledge on videotape; you can view those promises here.  But health insurance premiums have continued to rise — not just despite ObamaCare, but in many cases because of the law’s new regulations and mandates.As with any balky automobile, it’s time for the American people to trade in this ObamaCare lemon, and replace it with something that works. A new analysis by the think-tank America Next, where I serve as honorary chairman, quantifies the massive scope of the broken promise.  Compared to 2008 — the year President Obama was elected — Americans have faced a cumulative $6,388 per individual, and $18,610 per family, in higher costs because President Obama’s health plan has failed to achieve its promised premium reductions.  Overall, that amounts to $1.2 trillion in higher premium costs due to ObamaCare’s failure to deliver.The administration has put forth all sorts of excuses about why its law hasn’t met the expectations the president himself set. One of them is that the law’s major provisions only took effect in January, so ObamaCare needs more time to achieve savings.  But, in July 2008, Jason Furman—then the Obama campaign’s economic policy director, and now the Chairman of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors—told the New York Times that “we think we could get to $2,500 in savings by the end of the first term, or be very close to it.”  The fact that Democrats delayed full ObamaCare implementation until 2014 to hide the legislation’s true cost shouldn’t absolve President Obama for failing to deliver on his promise one whit.The administration also now claims that ObamaCare is working, because premiums are “only” rising by 6 or 8 percent per year.  But that’s not what then-candidate Obama himself promised in 2008; he spoke frequently of “cutting,” “reducing,” and “lowering” premium costs.  Whether premiums go up by 1 percent or 101 percent, any increase represents a promise broken.In August 2012, Politifact nicely summed up ObamaCare’s discredited premium pledge: “An author of the $2,500 figure has disavowed its use as it relates to premiums alone.  An independent health care analyst projects that premiums will go up for the typical family.  The federal agency implementing [ObamaCare] did not provide evidence that premiums will go down for the typical family.  We rate this a Promise Broken.”Even as ObamaCare has failed to deliver, there is a better way.  The America Next health plan can provide the relief from rising costs that Americans need and deserve.  Rather than focusing on a massive expansion and restructuring of the health care system, the America Next plan focuses like a laser beam on reducing health costs. The plan creates incentives for states to reform their insurance markets, thereby reducing plan premiums. It also includes other reforms with a proven track record of lowering costs, including tax equity between employer-based and individually-purchased insurance plans, lawsuit reforms, and new incentives for Health Savings Accounts. Analysis by independent, non-partisan experts confirm the plan’s effectiveness.  When considering proposals similar to those in the America Next plan, the Congressional Budget Office concluded in 2009 that they would lower small business health insurance premiums by 7 to 10 percent, and reduce individual health insurance premiums by 5 to 8 percent.  Compared to the premium increasesprojected under ObamaCare, the reforms in the America Next plan could provide thousands of dollars in real relief for families struggling from high insurance premiums.The America Next report confirms that the average American family has paid a price equal to the sum of many new cars because ObamaCare has failed to meet the president’s commitments. And, as with any balky automobile, it’s time for the American people to trade in this ObamaCare lemon, and replace it with something that works. Coupled with ObamaCare’s full repeal, the America Next health plan can provide what the American people need—real relief from skyrocketing health costs.Posted 16th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  198. JUL1140% of Federal Criminal Cases in 2013 Were in Districts on Mexican Border




    CNSNews.com) – Whether measured by the number of criminal cases filed by U.S. attorneys or the number of guilty verdicts they ultimately secured in cases in U.S. district courts, 40 percent of the federal crimes documented by the Justice Department in fiscal 2013 took place in the five U.S. court districts (out of the total of 94 U.S. court districts) that sit on the U.S.-Mexico border.These five U.S. court districts contiguous with the Mexican border were also the five where the largest numbers of individuals were convicted of federal crimes in fiscal 2013.In the Western Texas district alone–which saw more federal crime than any other district in the country–more than twice as many federal criminals were convicted in fiscal 2013 as in all four U.S. court districts in New York state combined.The Southern Texas district also saw more than twice as many people convicted of federal crimes in fiscal 2013 as all four districts in New York combined.In fiscal 2013, U.S. attorneys across the country filed 61,529 federal criminal cases in U.S. district courts, according the United States Attorneys’ Annual Report for the year.Of these, 24,746—or 40.2 percent—were filed in the five U.S. court districts contiguous with the Mexican border. These include the districts of Southern California (4,848 cases), Arizona (3,538 cases), New Mexico (3,889 cases), Western Texas (6,341 cases) and Southern Texas (6,130 cases).During the same fiscal year, federal district courts concluded 57,156 criminal cases with guilty verdicts. Of these, 23,414—or 40.9 percent–were in the five districts along the U.S.-Mexico border.The percentage concentrated in districts contguous with the border is a little smaller when the measure used is the number of individual defendants who were found guilty of federal crimes—as opposed to the number of cases in which a guilty verdict was returned.In fiscal 2013, according to the report, 75,718 individuals were convicted of federal crimes in district court. Of these, 26,831—or 35.4 percent—were convicted in the five districts contiguous with the Mexican border.However, the five border districts did lead the country in the actual number of people convicted of federal crimes. The Western District of Texas led the nation with 7,140 people convicted of federal crimes in fiscal 2013. Southern Texas was second with 6,808. Southern California was third with 5,166. New Mexico was fourth with 3,958. Arizona was fifth with 3,759.In the Northern, Western, Southern and Eastern Districts of New York–which encompass all of New York State including New York City—a combined 3,294 individuals were convicted of federal crimes in fiscal 2013. However, the 3,294 individuals convicted of federal crimes across all of New York State was still less than half the 6,808 convicted in Southern Texas alone and 7,140 convicted in Western Texas alone.The ten districts with the fewest federal criminal cases that ended with guilty verdicts in fiscal 2013 were the Northern Mariana Islands (27), the Virgin Islands (37), Guam (44), Eastern Oklahoma (77), Delaware (85), Northern Mississippi (127), Eastern Wisconsin (136), Rhode Island (140), Alaska (149), and New Hampshire (151).According to the U.S. Attorneys’ Annual report, immigration was the single largest category of crimes in which U.S. attorneys filed criminal cases in 2013. During the year, 38.6 percent of all federal criminal cases filed were immigration cases, 21.8 percent were drug cases, 19.7 percent were violent crime cases, and 10.2 percent were white-collar crime cases. 0.8 percent were official corruption cases.Among the 61,529 criminal cases filed during the year, were 23,744 filed for alleged immigration crimes, 13,383 filed for allaged drug offenses, 12,123 filed for alleged violent crimes, and 6,300 filed for alleged white-collar crimes.

    It is not a new phenomenon for a large percentage of the federal criminal cases filed during a fiscal year to be concentrated in the five court districts on the U.S.-Mexico border. In 2000, for example, U.S. attorneys filed 52,887 criminal cases in federal district courts and 16,102 (or 30.4 percent of them) were in the five border districts. In 2005, U.S. attorneys filed 60,062 criminal cases and 19,542 (or 32.5 percent of them) were in the five border districts. In 2008, U.S. attorneys filed 63,042 criminal cases and 22,420 (or 35.6 percent of them) were in the five border districts.http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/40-federal-criminal-cases-2013-were-districts-mexican-borderPosted 11th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  199. JUL11Contraceptive pill may damage women’s fertility: study

    Taking the pill may damage a woman’s fertility by quickening her biological “clock”, a new study has found.Researchers in Denmark tested 833 women to see what effect the contraceptive pill had on their reproductive systems. They found that the contraceptive can temporarily drain a woman’s ovarian reserve, a measure of the ovary’s capacity to produce eggs capable of fertilization. The ovarian reserve is determined by the combination of two measurements which make up what is commonly referred to as the Biological Body Clock Test.  Both the anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH) levels in the blood and the antral follicles in the ovaries are measured to establish the ovarian reserve.The study found that both the AMH levels and the antral follicle measurements were diminished in the women who were on the Pill by 19 and 16 percent, respectively, thus reducing their chances of conceiving. Dr. Katherine Birch Peterson from the Copenhagen University Hospital, who presented the study to the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, said that “the pill may mask a severely diminished ovarian reserve… and this is important to recognize.”The research also showed that pill users’ ovaries were between 29-52% smaller than those who were not on the pill.http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/contraceptive-pill-may-damage-womens-fertility-studyThough the researchers said they believe the detrimental results of using the pill may only be temporary, they added that further research is necessary. “We do not believe the pill changes the ovaries in any permanent way. But we still need to know more about the recovery phase after women stop the pill,” said Dr. Birch Peterson.Dr. Birch Peterson maintains that women should wait three months after using the pill to be tested in order to have a more accurate measurement of fertility.Posted 11th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  200. JUL11March for Life files lawsuit against Obama HHS mandate…but with a twist





    The pro-life group March for Life is taking a stand against the Obama administration’s abortion drug and contraceptive coverage mandate, filing a lawsuit this week against the mandate.The suit alleges that the HHS mandate is “illegal, unconstitutional and unethical.”“It is arbitrary and capricious for the government to force a pro-life organization and its pro-life employees to pay for abortifacient coverage that fundamentally violates their beliefs and ethical objections in principle and in practice.”The pro-life group is being represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). According to ADF Senior Legal Counsel Matt Bowman, the lawsuit has a twist from the dozens that have been filed against the administration since 2012.”It’s a case that is a little bit unique among the other cases,” he told LifeSiteNews today. “March for Life is not a religious organization. Their pro-life beliefs are based on science and ethics, but not faith.”In comparing the treatment of religious non-profits by the Obama administration regarding the mandate, including the “accommodation” made in 2012, Bowman says March for Life “doesn’t even get” the accommodation.

    And yet, while March for Life may not be an explicitly religious organization, it “exists to oppose abortifacients,” emphasized Bowman. “It only hires people who oppose abortifacients.”Bowman indicated that Supreme Court Anthony Kennedy, who was with the 5-4 majority in last week’s Hobby Lobby decision that went against the mandate, would support the argument of the lawsuit. Paraphrasing the justice, Bowman said that the Religious Restoration and Freedom Act (RFRA), a 1993 law passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by then-President Bill Clinton, “does not allow an agency to offer some kind of protection to some religious believers and not offer it to others.””Under the Equal Protection Clause, you can’t say ‘Well, we’re going to exempt, entirely, some organizations,'” but not others that fall into the same category, or are “similarly situated,” Bowman explained.Bowman indicated that the science of life won’t matter to the case, because of the Obama administration’s reasoning for the accommodation. In that reasoning, only beliefs were declared to be important. Given March for Life’s beliefs opposing abortion drugs, Bowman says his clients have a strong case to make that the “minimum” of a “rational basis” for the government’s mandate “doesn’t exist.”In addition to an injunction against the mandate, the lawsuit requests nominal damages, as well as court and legal fees. http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/march-for-life-files-lawsuit-against-obama-hhs-mandatebut-with-a-twistPosted 11th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  201. JUL10The Supreme Court Gave Women More Freedom, Not LessTuning into coverage of last week’s Hobby Lobby HHS Mandate Supreme Court decision would have generated countless photos and videos of young women cheering the Court’s decision that gave Hobby Lobby and other closely held companies the right to refuse to purchase life-ending drugs that they held were morally reprehensible.Again, the people cheering the decision at the front of the Court were women – young women. I was among them. My face was plastered on newspapers across the country because I was thrilled, as a woman, wife, mother, and member of the Millennial generation, to say that I agree that religious freedom is so inherent in our nation that no bossy bureaucrats should be able to tell me that giving me free birth control makes me equal to men and brings my healthcare decisions out of the dark ages.Women, especially those in my generation who are graduating college at higher rates than their male counterparts, are smarter than that. How dare the government tell me that my fertility is a disease and should be part of “preventative” medicine? How dare they infer that I demand free birth control and access to abortion-inducing drugs and sterilization regardless of what my employer, who is generous enough to provide health insurance, may believe?The hysteria from the liberals has been laughable. “[The] Supreme Court took an outrageous step against the rights of America’s women,” said Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). Actress Lena Dunham tweeted: “Women’s access to birth control should not be denied because of their employer’s religious beliefs.” At least try to get the facts straight ladies. No one is denying women birth control. In fact, Hobby Lobby already covered multiple forms of birth control. They were protesting being forced to pay for abortion-inducing drugs.We just celebrated the anniversary of our nation’s freedom, of which the foundation rests upon religious freedom. If we don’t have the right to freely exercise our faith outside of the walls of our worship space, then we have nothing. This is so much deeper and more profound than a fight over birth control. It’s about our very foundational freedoms and the fact that it has been reduced to a supposed “war on women” is disconcerting.Liberal women need to get over themselves, read the facts, and go look up all the pictures from the Supreme Court the day of the Hobby Lobby decision. The majority of my peers next to me were all young women, all Millennials, who care deeply about the direction our nation is going. They aren’t reduced to their fertility and who can provide free drugs to suppress it. They are smart, educated, and some even have families like myself, so we are more concerned with the economy and kitchen table issues than with what political party is giving us free birth control pills.These are the women of the next generation who will stand up to lead our nation. They are fearless and willing to take on the feminists who reduce them to nothing but their ability to pro-create and apparently how harmful it is. They are the pro-life generation and it could not have been clearer as we stood and cheered the momentous Supreme Court decision that gave women more freedom, not less.http://townhall.com/columnists/kristanhawkins/2014/07/10/the-supreme-court-gave-women-more-freedom-not-less-n1860393/page/fullPosted 10th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  202. JUL9Colorado Obama Lied About Care Exchange Expects A Quarter Of Sign-ups To Drop CoverageColorado’s Obamacare exchange is doubling its estimate of how many sign-ups won’t actually have health coverage, according to exchange board members. The exchange previously estimated that 13 percent of the people who signed up for health insurance through its Obamacare marketplace would either fail to pay their premiums in the first place, or would drop their coverage sometime over the next year. But exchange officials have updated the figures and now believe that 24 percent of sign-ups will drop their policies in 2015, the Denver Post reports.State-by-state estimates are one of the only clues to the number of people who actually ended up paying for, and keeping, health coverage they purchased from Obamacare exchanges. The Obama administration has not released any nationwide data on the number of people who ended up paying their first premiums for Obamacare coverage.Industry experts estimated that around 15 percent of original sign-ups wouldn’t end up paying their first premiums; others have warned that many more will not continue to pay throughout the year and will be dropped from their plans. (RELATED: Community Centers Warn That Poor Won’t Keep Paying Obamacare Premiums) Enrollee totals are slightly buffeted by those who are eligible to sign up on the exchange outside of the open enrollment period, but the Obama administration ceased releasing monthly enrollment totals in May, much to the chagrin of liberals and conservatives alike.Colorado expects that 35,800 of its 152,000 sign-ups will drop their coverage this year; officials project that next year 37,4000 of 175,000 sign-ups will drop their coverage.Dropped coverage could make tight budgets even more difficult to navigate. Colorado’s exchange funds itself through a monthly fee on every health insurance policy sold in the marketplace. The exchange expects revenue to drop from $7.9 million to $6.9 million this fiscal year from dropped policies.Exchange board member Ellen Daehnick told the Denver Post that the upped estimates are due to “feedback we’re getting from other states.”Higher rates of dropped policies could spell problems for doctors and hospitals as well. The health care law requires insurers wait 90 days before canceling an insurance policy when a customer doesn’t pay, but only mandates that insurance companies pay for medical care the customer uses in the meantime for the first 30 days.If the customer uses any health care services in the last 30 days before their policy is canceled, doctors will be forced to either wrangle payments directly from the customer or go without reimbursement.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/08/colorado-obamacare-exchange-expects-a-quarter-of-sign-ups-to-drop-coverage/#ixzz3707jktg7Posted 9th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  203. JUL7Data problems, hackers continue to plague Obama Lied About care exchangeswo reports from the government watchdog for Health and Human Services this week revealed serious data discrepancies among the sign-ups the Obama administration hailed as Obamacare’s triumphant comeback. Those data problems may mean some people got subsidies they shouldn’t have and would have to pay back hefty amounts to the federal government. Phil Klein reports:Applications for insurance coverage through President Obama’s health care law submitted in the final three months of 2013 contained millions of inconsistencies in which information such as income and immigration status could not be independently verified by the federal government, according to a June report from the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services.The inconsistencies may have resulted in individuals receiving an improper amount of subsidies, or subsidies that they shouldn’t have been eligible for in the first place — something that could require them to repay the money in future tax bills.In other cases, inconsistencies led to bizarre outcomes. According to the report, “one marketplace cited situations in which infants and young children included on applications were erroneously identified as incarcerated.”At issue is the information that individuals are asked to submit when they apply for coverage, such as income, citizenship status, Social Security number, or incarceration status. In theory, once data are submitted, they are supposed to be checked in a massive storage database known as the “hub,” which gathers data from multiple federal agencies.Between October and December 2013, there were 2.9 million such inconsistencies in applications, according to the report, 2.6 million of which remain unresolved. As Klein makes clear, this doesn’t mean there are 2.9 million separate applications with mistakes because there are many potential data problems on each person’s application. The most common inconsistency had to do with citizenship and immigration status, with income shortly behind. In some cases, the federal government and states with exchanges were not using the verification processes required by their internal rules (well, knock me over with a feather). The AP reports:Digging out from under the data problem is one of the top challenges facing newly installed HHS Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell.The administration says it is doing just that. Spokesman Aaron Albright said more than 425,000 inconsistencies have been resolved so far, more than 90 percent of those in favor of the consumer. The administration is hoping to clear up the majority of cases this summer, but may yet have to resort to an extension allowed under the health law.The inspector general found that the federal insurance exchange reported a total of 2.9 million inconsistencies with consumer data from Oct. 1, 2013 through Feb. 23 of this year.At the time, the administration had limited technical capability that would have let officials resolve roughly 330,000 of those cases. Only about 10,000 were actually cleared up within the period. Albright said the situation is much improved.The inspector general said several states running their own insurance markets were having similar problems.
    Guy Benson reports on the inspector general’s take on state exchanges:
    Democrats celebrated that “8 million new enrollments” figure in a failed attempt to improve public perceptions of the law. That number has always been highly exaggerated — not accounting for duplicates, a substantial non-payment rate, a high percentage of enrollees who were previously insured, and applicants whose coverage may be disrupted by these ongoing data issues. The watchdog report stated that approximately 1.2 million additional “inconsistencies” marred applications processed through state exchanges. More: “During our review, 4 of the 15 State marketplaces reported that they were unable to resolve inconsistencies” at all, including some of the usual suspects such as Oregon. How many data snags have affected the millions of applications filed over the first three-plus months of 2014? The final number will almost certainly be significantly higher.Meanwhile in Vermont, considered one of the better state exchanges:A Romanian attacker hacked the Vermont health exchange’s development server last December, gaining access at least 15 times and going undetected for a month, according to records obtained by National Review Online.CGI Group, the tech firm hired to build Vermont Health Connect, described the risk as “high” in a report about the attack. It also found possible evidence of sophisticated “counter-forensics activity performed by the attacker to cover his/her tracks.”http://hotair.com/archives/2014/07/03/data-problems-hackers-continue-to-plague-obamacare-exchanges/Posted 7th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  204. JUL7Obama HHS Dumped 1,300 New Pages of Regulations in Advance of Independence Day HolidayDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 

    SUMMARY: This proposed rule would revise the Medicare hospital outpatient 
    prospective payment system (OPPS) and the Medicare ambulatory surgical center (ASC) 
    payment system for CY 2015 to implement applicable statutory requirements and 
    changes arising from our continuing experience with these systems. In this proposed rule, we describe the proposed changes to the amounts and factors used to determine the payment rates for Medicare services paid under the OPPS and those paid under the ASC payment system. In addition, this proposed rule would update and refine the requirements for the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program and the ASC Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program. 

    CMS-1613-P 2 

    In this document, we also are proposing changes to the data sources used for 
    expansion requests for physician owned hospitals under the physician self-referral 
    regulations; changes to the underlying authority for the requirement of an admission 
    order for all hospital inpatient admissions and changes to require physician certification 
    for hospital inpatient admissions only for long-stay cases and outlier cases; and changes 
    to establish a three-level appeals process for Medicare Advantage (MA) organizations 
    and Part D sponsors that would be applicable to CMS-identified overpayments associated 
    with data submitted by these organizations and sponsors. 

    DATES: Comment Period: To be assured consideration, comments on all sections of 
    this proposed rule must be received at one of the addresses provided in the ADDRESSES 
    section no later than 5 p.m. EST on [Insert 60 days from date of display at the Office 
    of the Federal Register].

    CMS-1613-P 6 

    Barry Levi, (410) 786-4529, for issues related to OPPS pass-through devices, 
    brachytherapy sources, brachytherapy composite APC, and multiple imaging composite 
    APCs. 
    John McInnes, (410) 786-0791, for issues related to comprehensive APCs, 
    provider-based issues, packaged items/services, OPPS 
    drugs/radiopharmaceuticals/biologicals payments, new technology intraocular lenses 
    (NTIOLs), and ambulatory surgical center (ASC) payments. 
    David Rice, (410) 786-6004, for issues related to blood and blood products, 
    cancer hospital payments, conversion factor, cost-to-charge ratios (CCRs), and outlier 
    payments. 
    Daniel Schroder, (410) 786-7452, for issues related to physician certification of 
    hospital inpatient services. 
    Carol Schwartz, (410) 786-0576, for issues related to the Advisory Panel on 
    Hospital Outpatient Payment (HOP Panel). 
    Teresa Walden, (410) 786-3755, or Patricia Taft, (410) 786-4561, for issues 
    related to the physician self-referral law/physician-owned hospital expansion exception 
    process. 
    Marjorie Baldo, (410) 786-4617, for all other issues related to hospital outpatient 
    and ambulatory surgical center payments not previously identified. 
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Inspection of Public Comments: All comments received before the close of the 
    comment period are available for viewing by the public, including any personally

    http://ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2014-15939_PI.pdf

    Part Two: 

    DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 
    42 CFR Parts 403, 405, 410, 414, 425, and 498 
    [CMS-1612-P] 
    RIN 0938-AS12 
    Medicare Program; Revisions to Payment Policies under the Physician Fee Schedule, 
    Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule, Access to Identifiable Data for the Center for Medicare 
    and Medicaid Innovation Models & Other Revisions to Part B for CY 2015.

    ACTION: Proposed Rule. 
    SUMMARY: This major proposed rule addresses changes to the physician fee schedule, and 
    other Medicare Part B payment policies to ensure that our payment systems are updated to reflect 
    changes in medical practice and the relative value of services, as well as changes in the statute. 
    See the Table of Contents for a listing of the specific issues addressed in this proposed rule. 
    DATES: Comment date: To be assured consideration, comments must be received at one of the 
    addresses provided below, no later than 5 p.m. on September 2, 2014

    http://ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2014-15939_PI.pdfRead More: http://www.tpnn.com/2014/07/07/obama-hhs-dumped-13…Posted 7th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  205. JUL7How Obama Lied About Care Will Kill Job-Based PlansAmericans aren’t all that optimistic about ObamaCare, according to a recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll: Fifty-seven percent say the law isn’t working as planned.That number will shoot even higher if employer health insurance vanishes, as an S&P Capital IQ report predicts. The financial-research firm forecasts that 90 percent of Americans who now have employer-sponsored coverage will lose it by 2020 — and have to turn to government exchanges for policies.The Obama administration has long denied that its health-reform law would cause companies to stop providing insurance. But thanks to an ObamaCare-fueled increase in health costs, employer-sponsored coverage may soon become a thing of the past.The S&P report comes three years after the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. suggestedthat 30 percent of employers would dump workers into exchanges to save money.Democrats weren’t convinced. The White House attacked the McKinsey report as “flawed”; Senate Finance Committee then-Chairman Max Baucus blasted its “faulty analysis and misguided conclusions.”ObamaCare’s defenders even argued that more employers would provide health insurance once the law went into full effect. Recent history hasn’t borne them out.Health-benefits consultants around the country report that businesses are considering dumping their least-healthy employees onto the exchanges. By doing so, they can lower their own premiums — and stick taxpayers with the tab for covering their most costly workers.North Carolina benefits consultant Todd Yates recently told Kaiser Health News about this trend, saying that “employers are inquiring about it and brokers and consultants are advocating for it.”Offloading workers onto the exchanges could pay huge dividends. According to the S&P Capital IQ report, if all employers with more than 50 workers adopted this strategy, they’d collectively save $3.25 trillion. Among 500 of the country’s biggest companies, the total savings could amount to $700 billion over 10 years.Firms will be hard pressed to leave these savings on the table — especially as their costs shoot up.According to a recent study from the American Health Policy Institute, ObamaCare will saddle large firms — those with more than 10,000 employees — with an added $163 million to $200 million apiece in new costs over 10 years. That’s equivalent to $4,800 to $5,900 per worker.Brokers in Nevada are already reporting premium spikes of 35 to 120 percent for businesses in the state renewing their policies this year.Rate hikes of this magnitude could put 90,000 employer policies in the state at risk of cancellation, according to William Wright, head of Las Vegas-based Chamber Insurance and Benefits.The IRS is trying to stop employers from dumping their workers in the exchanges by threatening fines of up to $36,500 per worker. But that fine only applies if an employer tries to subsidize his worker’s exchange coverage with untaxed income.So firms can still offload their employees onto the exchanges — and even cover a portion of their premiums, as long as they do so with income that’s taxed like regular wages.The IRS may not want employers to dump their workers into the exchanges. But the law’s architects seem to want them to.Former Obama health adviser Ezekiel Emanuel predicts that within the next three years, “a few big, blue-chip companies will announce their intention to stop providing health insurance. . . Then the floodgates will open.”By 2025, he estimates, fewer than one in five Americans will get insurance through work.Another Obama ally, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, recently admitted that employer-sponsored insurance isn’t long for this world, calling it “a crumbling building.”As the employer insurance marketplace starts to crumble, President Obama continues to say of ObamaCare, “this thing is working.”Tens of millions of employees will soon find out what “working” really means when they are kicked off the health plans they were promised they could keep.http://nypost.com/2014/07/03/how-obamacare-will-kill-job-based-plans/Posted 7th July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  206. JUL3The Best Way to Understand Liberal Anger at Hobby Lobby Decision.

    https://www.facebook.com/LifeNews/posts/10152315543158598Posted 3rd July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  207. JUL3Ron Paul Says if Americans Understood This, the Hobby Lobby Contraception Case Would Likely Never Have Happened
    Former Republican Congressman Ron Paul of Texas said Wednesday that if Americans understood the definition of “rights,” the battle over whether Hobby Lobby should have to pay for its employees’ birth control would likely never have happened.“It’s the whole issue of the understanding of what rights are, and mandates that we shouldn’t have,” Paul said, speaking on The Glenn Beck Program with guest host Dana Loesch. “If we had that, then we wouldn’t have to go through this agony.”On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby, saying that Obamacare cannot force companies to pay for emergency contraceptive coverage that could lead to abortions if it violates their religious beliefs.“The claim is that women have a right to free birth control,” Paul explained. “And yet they never talk about the rights of the person that has to provide these demands. But demands and desires and needs can’t become rights, and that’s why we have a society today that, anyone who needs or wants something [says], ‘We have a right to this.’ But they never say, ‘Whose rights must we violate in order to get what we want?’”“The left never talks about that,” Paul continued. “They only talk about some individual who wants something, and they have a ‘right’ to it, and don’t even bring up the subject of whose rights are going to be violated by providing these services.”Former Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) appears on The Glenn Beck Program July 2, 2014. (Photo: TheBlaze TV)Paul said it is “such a shame” that Americans are fighting over the topic, saying “these debates wouldn’t go on” if we “lived in a free society” and understood the “definition of ‘rights.’”
    Paul also weighed in on Republican Senator Thad Cochran’s narrow victory over Tea Party-backed challenger Chris McDaniel in Mississippi, saying the election proved that the Republican establishment will do “anything to make sure that any challenge from a conservative, libertarian viewpoint will be punished.”“It looks like, just maybe, they have violated some laws,” Paul added of Cochran’s campaign. “And they certainly have violated the precepts of what Republicans pretend to believe in.”Paul also spoke about foreign policy, saying that for too long, we have only had “two choices” when it comes to dealing with other countries.“If they do what we tell them, we give them a lot of money,” Paul said. “If they don’t do what we tell them, we invade them and kill them and bomb them. And I’d like another option — just be friends with them, trade with them, and stay out of their business.”The former presidential candidate concluded with an Independence Day message for America. You can watch the complete segment below.
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/02/ron-paul-says-if-americans-understood-this-the-hobby-lobby-contraception-case-would-likely-never-have-happened/

    Posted 3rd July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  208. JUL1The Left Can’t Stop Distorting the Hobby Lobby DecisionThe so-called ‘contraception mandate’ has been an issue on which the Left has lied with exceptional fervency since the administration first released its controversial regulation in 2012. For reasons we explained yesterday, the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Hobby Lobby case was a narrowly-tailored exercise in judicial restraint. Listening to some on the Left, though, one could be forgiven for thinking that the Court had outlawed womanhood itself. The outrage flowed from the cynically deceitful to the mindless, reactionary, under-informed masses, on whom said cynics rely for votes. Elected Democrats got the ball rolling with a string of deeply misleading, paint-by-numbers “war on women” and anti-corporation slogans:


    Leave it to Harry Reid to make the cheapest argument imaginable, which naturally fails to mention that a key related ruling against the overreaching mandate at the DC Circuit Court of Appeals was handed down by Judge Janice Rogers Brown, an African American woman. It’s time that our white male Senate Majority Leader stop telling black woman jurists how to do their jobs. And I, for one, “can’t believe we live in a world” in which a privileged white woman can shamelessly traffic in an entirely unsupportable “ethnicity” claim throughout her career, drop the pretense once she’s reached the pinnacle of her profession, and still get elected to the United States Senate as an anti-privilege, populist liberal. Nobody is deciding “what happens to women,” nor is “access to basic care” being “denied.” Women managed to obtain and use birth control without incident for decades leading up to the 2012 regulation issuance, and they will continue to do so. We’ve returned to the pre-2012 status quo in which (a) birth control is legal, accessible and affordable, and (b) a relatively small handful of religious employers are not coerced by government to pay for something that violates their beliefs. The Hobby Lobby decision upholds the principle of keeping the government (and your boss) out of your bedroom. “Contraception is none of my boss’ business!” and “my boss must pay for my contraception!” are incompatible. Imbecilic “slippery slope” arguments about the medical dystopia that could arise from yesterday’s precedent ignore the Court’s explicit admonition that its ruling does not apply to other mandates, and that a refusal to subsidize other forms of care would not be supported on religious objection grounds. They also ignore the majority’s strict scrutiny National Review’s editors summarize things clearly and succinctly:
     Women who work for the plaintiffs, Hobby Lobby, remain able to use their employer-provided insurance coverage to finance the most popular forms of contraception. They remain free to use their wages to finance the ones Hobby Lobby will not cover. They remain free to find other jobs, too, if they want employer-provided insurance coverage that includes the abortifacients to which Hobby Lobby objects. Congress remains free to enact a new law that requires employers to cover abortifacients and contraceptives and explicitly rules out any RFRA exemptions. It remains free, for that matter, to repeal RFRA altogether.
    Speaking of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), Hillary Clinton has pronounced herself scandalized by SCOTUS’ decision that applied and upheld that law — which, as we discussed yesterday, was signed by her husband after sailing through Congress with three total ‘no’ votes. Her comment on the issue, which Allahpundit characterizes as stopping an inch short of “comparing the Roberts Court to the Taliban:”
     “You watch women and girls being deprived of their rights, some of them never have them, some of them lose them. Among those rights is control over their body’s, control over their own health care, control over the size of their families. It is a disturbing trend that you see in a lot of societies that are very unstable, anti-democratic, and frankly prone to extremism. Where women and women’s bodies are used as the defining and unifying issue to bring together people – men – to get them to behave in ways that are disadvantageous to women but which prop up them because of their religion, their sect, their tribe, whatever. So to introduce this element into our society…it’s very troubling that a salesclerk at Hobby Lobby who needs contraception, which is pretty expensive, is not going to get that service through her employer’s health care plan because her employer doesn’t think she should be using contraception.
    Hillary either doesn’t know, or doesn’t care, that Hobby Lobby already offered its employees coverage that included 16 types of contraception; their lawsuit was over having to pay for a small number of forms they consider to be abortifacients. And this isn’t a matter of whether or not an employer thinks an employee “should be using” a product. It’s about being compelled to pay for that product, under threat of heavy fines. (Perhaps Mrs. Clinton feels like she must make over-the-top overtures to her base on flash-points like this to distract them from the fact that she’s still quasi-defending her Iraq war vote). I’ll leave you with these videos taken outside of the Supreme Court yesterday, via the Daily Signal and Pocket Full of Liberty:http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/07/01/the-left-cant-stop-lying-about-the-hobby-lobby-decision-n1857728
    Posted 1st July 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  209. JUN305 Major Takeaways From The Hobby Lobby Decision

    The Supreme Court this morning issued its ruling in the Hobby Lobby case. At issue was whether closely held companies like Hobby Lobby could be forced by the government to provide abortifacient coverage to its employees, in defiance of its owners’ deeply held religious beliefs.In a 5-4 ruling written by Justice Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court ruled that Hobby Lobby and other closely held companies do not have to provide contraceptive coverage that conflicts with the religious beliefs of the companies’ owners. Here are 5 major takeaways from the Supreme Court’s decision.1) The government must provide religious accommodations to for-profit companiesCorporations aren’t people, but they are owned by people, and the religious beliefs of those people must be protected regardless of how those people choose to incorporate their businesses. The court ruled today that the accommodations provided to non-profit religious organizations by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act also apply to for-profit companies.“[W]e hold that a federal regulation’s restriction on the activities of a for-profit closely held corporation must comply with [the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” Alito wrote in the majority decision.It’s a big win for religious liberty and against the belief that your faith no longer matters once you decide to open a business.2) The decision only applies to “closely held” companies, not all corporationsAlthough the decision represents a complete victory for Hobby Lobby and the other plaintiffs in the case, it does not recognize a carte blanche right for all for-profit corporations. Alito’s opinion only recognizes the right of “closely held” companies to operate in accordance with their owners’ religious values.A massive, publicly held corporation that trades on the stock market and is overwhelmingly owned by hedge funds, retirement plans, university endowments, and retail investors would likely not be granted the same protections by the Supreme Court:For example, the idea that unrelated shareholders—including institutional investors with their own set of stakeholders—would agree to run a corporation under the same religious beliefs seems improbable. In any event, we have no occasion in these cases to consider RFRA’s applicability to such companies. The companies in the cases before us are closely held corporations, each owned and controlled by members of a single family, and no one has disputed the sincerity of their religious beliefs.3) The decision only applies to the contraceptive mandate, not to other government mandates like vaccinationsOne of the concerns raised by several liberal justices during oral arguments was that if Hobby Lobby could get a religious exemption from the contraceptive mandate, then what would stop a company from demanding an exemption from a vaccination mandate? Or from a mandate prohibiting discrimination?Alito and the other four concurring justices made short work of that argument. According to the Supreme Court:This decision concerns only the contraceptive mandate and should not be understood to hold that all insurance-coverage mandates, e.g., for vaccinations or blood transfusions, must necessarily fall if they conflict with an employer’s religious beliefs. Nor does it provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice.4) The Obama administration could have used other, less restrictive ways to provide contraceptive coverageOne of the main reasons the Obama administration’s arguments failed to convince five justices is that the federal government did not necessarily need to mandate employer-provided contraceptive coverage in order to ensure access to contraceptive coverage. For example, rather than mandating employer coverage, the government could have easily established its own program to provide or pay for contraceptive coverage:In fact, HHS has already devised and implemented a system that seeks to respect the religious liberty of religious nonprofit corporations while ensuring that the employees of these entities have precisely the same access to all FDA-approved contraceptives as employees of companies whose owners have no religious objections to providing such coverage. The employees of these religious nonprofit corporations still have access to insurance coverage without cost sharing for all FDA-approved contraceptives; and according to HHS, this system imposes no net economic burden on the insurance companies that are required to provide or secure the coverage.

    Although HHS has made this system available to religious nonprofits that have religious objections to the contraceptive mandate, HHS has provided no reason why the same system cannot be made available when the owners of for-profit corporations have similar religious objections. We therefore conclude that this system constitutes an alternative that achieves all of the Government’s aims while providing greater respect for religious liberty. And under RFRA, that conclusion means that enforcement of the HHS contraceptive mandate against the objecting parties in these cases is unlawful.5) Dropping coverage altogether to avoid the mandate was not a viable option for Hobby LobbyOne ridiculous argument offered during oral arguments by Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor was that the religious owners of the companies could just drop coverage altogether, thereby entirely avoiding the contraceptive mandate. Sure, there would be a hefty tax, but that’s too bad. Sometimes you just have to pay taxes.That reasoning was roundly rejected by the five-person Supreme Court majority. Why? Because the Hobby Lobby owners noted that they also felt compelled by their religious beliefs to provide health insurance to their employees — including coverage for 16 different types of contraception (Hobby Lobby’s objection was to mandated abortifacient coverage). Therefore, the solution proposed by Kagan and Sotomayor was no solution at all:In sum, we refuse to sustain the challenged regulations on the ground—never maintained by the Government—that dropping insurance coverage eliminates the substantial burden that the HHS mandate imposes. We doubt that the Congress that enacted RFRA—or, for that matter,ACA—would have believed it a tolerable result to put family-run businesses to the choice of violating their sincerely held religious beliefs or making all of their employees lose their existing healthcare plans.http://thefederalist.com/2014/06/30/5-major-takeaways-from-the-hobby-lobby-decision/Posted 30th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  210. JUN24Religious Freedom is Everyone’s Business: Hobby Lobby at the Supreme Court
    Posted 24th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  211. JUN19Obama Promises To Lower Health Insurance Premiums by $2,500 Per Year/ Study: Average Individual Market Premiums Soar 49 Percent Under Obama Lied About CareObama Promises To Lower Health Insurance Premiums by $2,500 Per Year
    Had central Obamacare promise, like its closest cousins, have been downgraded and revised to death. Last year, scholars at the Manhattan Institute ran a 49-state analysis of individual market healthcare rates under Obamacare and found a 41 percent increase on average. Their follow-up study of more than 3,100 counties across the country pegs the average hike at 49 percent. Consumers in New York — home to a distorted, “death spiral”-plagued individual market prior to Obamacare — are among the few Americans who’ve enjoyed an average rate drop. Virtually everywhere else, price tags went in the wrong direction:
     Across the country, for men overall, individual-market premiums went up in 91 percent of all counties: 2,844 out of 3,137. For 27-year-old men, the average county faced 91 percent increases; for 40-year-old men, 60 percent; for 64-year-old men, 32 percent. Women fared slightly better; their premiums “only” went up in 82 percent of all counties: 2,562 out of 3,137. That’s because Obamacare bars insurers from charging different rates to men and women; prior to Obamacare, only 11 states did so. Because women tend to consume more health care than men, the end result of the Obamacare regulation is that men fare somewhat worse. Relative to men, the average rate increase for women was less extreme: 44 percent for 27-year-olds; 23 percent for 40-year-olds; 42 percent for 64-year-olds.
    Premiums have increased in the large and small group markets as well — in addition to higher out-of-pocket costs such as deductibles and copays for many consumers. Insurers across the country have been releasing a “drumbeat” of projected 2015 rate hikes throughout the spring, which will spill over into the summer and early fall. More Americans say their health costs are going up, not down, with large majorities expecting Obamacare to raise costs in the long term. Numerous surveys have demonstrated Obamacare’s ratio of “hurt” to “helped” among consumers is roughly 2-to-1. The White House, meanwhile, is very excited about a HHS report indicating that a large majority of subsidy-eligible enrollees have seen their premiums decrease. First of all, isn’t it interesting that HHS has the capacity to tabulate and release those figures when they’re apparently unable to produce other pertinent information…like how many sign-ups are unpaid, and how many “new” enrollees previously had insurance? Secondly, Obamacare’s core promise wasn’t “we will raise health costs for millions, collect lots of taxes, then use that money to offset some people’s healthcare bills.” It was “everyone’s rates will drop significantly, and the federal government’s cost curve will bend down, thus helping to reduce deficits.” The former message would have been dead on arrival, politically speaking. The latter vision, as most people expected all along, has failed to materialize. Nevertheless, the administration is excited about all the subsidies they’re handing out. But that munificence doesn’t occur in a vacuum, and the money has to come from somewhereTa-da:
     The large subsidies for health insurance that helped fuel the successful drive to sign up some 8 million Americans for coverage under the Affordable Care Act may push the cost of the law considerably above current projections, a new federal report indicates…While the generous subsidies helped consumers, they also risk inflating the new health law’s price tag in its first year. The report suggests that the federal government is on track to spend at least $11 billion on subsidies for consumers who bought health plans on marketplaces run by the federal government, even accounting for the fact that many consumers signed up for coverage in late March and will only receive subsidies for part of the year. That total does not count the additional cost of providing coverage to millions of additional consumers who bought coverage in states that ran their own marketplaces, including California, Connecticut, Maryland and New York. About a third of the 8 million people who signed up for coverage this year used a state-run marketplace…If these state consumers received roughly comparable government assistance for their insurance premiums, the total cost of subsidies could top $16.5 billion this year. That would be far higher than projections this spring from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that the 2014 subsidies would cost the federal government $10 billion.
    Says Reason’s Peter Suderman, “to the extent that insurance is relatively cheap [for subsidy-eligible exchange enrollees], it’s because taxpayers are footing a big chunk of the bill. Obamacare didn’t reduce the price of insurance; if anything it raised it—and then used tax revenues to cover the difference.” Yep. A portion of the population benefits from taxpayers’ compulsory generosity, while virtually everyone else’s rates head north. How will the sharply-increasing price tag (described in the LA Times report above), coupled with all of the shifting pay-fors, impact the law’s long-term fiscal impact? We may never know. As we’ve noted, Congressional Budget Office analysts quietly announced that they don’t think the agency can accurately track those numbers in the face of endless tweaks, revisions and delays. Oh, and by the way, just because Obamacare enrollees have insurance cards — and quite possibly a taxpayer-funded discount — doesn’t mean they’reaccessing care smoothly:
     Patients and health care providers, in a series of interviews with The Huffington Post, complained that they are having trouble confirming that patients are insured, working out what their plans cover and figuring out which plans doctors will accept.These complaints are signs that the Affordable Care Act, President Barack Obama’s signature health care reform law, is suffering growing pains more than six months since its insurance policies took effect…Maureen Mandel of North Bellmore, New York, has endured a gauntlet of troubles to get and use her new insurance since October, when she first tried to sign up through New York State of Health, her state’s insurance exchange. Mandel, 47, spent countless hours on the phone with the exchange and her insurer, until her plan was finally confirmed in April…Mandel thought she had it sorted out. Then she went to the doctor. The front-desk attendant said some other physician was listed in the insurer’s system as her primary care provider — a doctor in Waco, Texas…These experiences soured Mandel, who described herself as politically liberal, on Obamacare, despite her appreciation for the coverage it provides and the tax credits that cut her insurance costs. “I haven’t seen any improvement,” she said, “and that’s what scares me.”
    Perhaps many Americans are discovering that the federal government is ill-equipped to manage a massive health system overhaul, let alone fully run and administer an entire system. Speaking of which, for the latest on the VA scandal — including revelations that nationwide lists of pending procedures were ordered purged — click through.

    UPDATE – The Associated Press reports on a new poll of Obamacare exchange enrollees (which represents a tiny pool of consumers). Though many within this group rate their new coverage highly, roughly 40 percent are still struggling to make monthly premium payments, “despite the availability of generous subsidies.” Just wait until they learn about their deductible requirements if and when they seek treatment.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/06/19/obamacare-studies-n1853021Posted 19th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives
  1. JUN18Obama War On Pro Life Catholic, Catholic TV Network Forced to Comply With HHS Mandate EWTN: Global Catholic Television Network (EWTN), a Catholic-themed television network founded in 1980 in a garage studio by a nunEWTN: Global Catholic Television Network (EWTN), a Catholic-themed television network founded in 1980 in a garage studio by a nun, has been denied protectionfrom the HHS contraception mandate following a decision yesterday by Mobile, Ala. District Judge Callie V. Granade.A statement posted on EWTN’s website and Facebook page by CEO Michael P. Warsaw expressed his disappointment with the decision and said that EWTN will seek an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.“We are extremely disappointed with the decision reached by the court in this case. The opinion issued is clearly inconsistent with the decisions reached in nearly all of the cases decided to date. The fact that the court has dismissed the serious issues of conscience and religious freedom that EWTN has raised is very troubling.As an organization that was founded by Mother Angelica to uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church, we do not believe that contraception, abortion-inducing drugs and voluntary sterilization should be defined as health care. We simply cannot facilitate these immoral practices. We have no other option but to continue our legal challenge of the mandate. We are making an immediate appeal to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta.”
    EWTN is the largest religious media network in the world, and its television schedule includes recordings of Catholic Mass, along with other religion and theological-based shows. In addition to its television station, EWTN also has publishing, electronic and print media, and radio divisions to further spread the Catholic faith.It’s hard to deny the religious conviction and mission that is behind the work of EWTN. Contraception, abortion, and sterilization are viewed by faithful Catholics as deeply disordered, and it is absurd that a Catholic media network be forced to provide these items for their employees. The government does not have the right to force a company to go against its deeply-held beliefs.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2014/06/18/catholic-tv-network-forced-to-comply-with-hhs-mandate-n1852933Posted 18th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  2. JUN5CBO: By the Way, We Can No Longer Score Obamacare’s Fiscal Impact





    We’ve been buried in the Bergdahl story all week, but this nugget is worth coming up for air to cover. By way of background, on the eve of Democrats’ party-line Obamacare vote in 2010, they used a cynically manufacturedCongressional Budget Office (CBO) “score” to provide jittery members a fig leaf with which to justify an ‘aye’ tally. The report they hailed purported to show that Obamacare would cost less than a trillion dollars and that it would help reduce deficits. Republicans argued that it was preposterous to suggest that the creation of a brand new, massive entitlement program could possibly save the government money, but triumphant Democrats waved around the CBO document as the gospel truth. Several months ago, CBO updated some of its findings, averring that the law’s price tag over its first true decade was more than $2 trillion, and concluding that the law has slowed economic growth, impeded hiring, and will drastically reduce the US workforce. The Left spun like crazy and gnashed their teeth, but the analysis was there in black and white, and this time it actually matched most Americans’ intuitions about the law. How will Obamacare impact America’s fiscal health moving forward? CBO has quietly announced that they no longer have confidence that they can answer that question with a reasonable degree of accuracy, so they’re essentially giving up on the task. Roll Call has the story:
     Four years after enactment of what is widely viewed as President Barack Obama’s key legislative achievement, however, it’s unclear whether the health care law is still on track to reduce the deficit or whether it may actually end up adding to the federal debt. In fact, the answer to that question has become something of a mystery. In its latest report on the law, the Congressional Budget Office said it is no longer possible to assess the overall fiscal impact of the law. That conclusion came as a surprise to some fiscal experts in Washington and is drawing concern. And without a clear picture of the law’s overall financing, it could make it politically easier to continue delaying pieces of it, including revenue raisers, because any resulting cost increases might be hidden…The CBO based its estimate on the assumption that the law, which included hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of Medicare cuts and tax increases to pay for health care subsidies, would be implemented as written. Now, after a chaotic start and a series of delays or adjustments in various provisions of the act, including an employer mandate that was expected to bring in new tax revenue, it’s unclear to what extent those promised savings are being realized.
    This is a neat trick, isn’t it? Step one: Use a carefully-gamed CBO score to help pass your giant law over the will of the public. Step two: Issue so many on-the-fly changes, revisions and waivers to the resulting monstrosity that the CBO throws in the towel on trying to track the real data, thus undercutting a key nonpartisan group’s efforts to evaluate the veracity of your previous claims. Quite the scheme. Meanwhile, Dan told you yesterday about the Associated Press scoop that roughly one-fourth of Obamacare exchange “enrollees” are facing discrepancies that could force them to pay more, or result in dropped coverage. The Hill’s write-up notesthat, “the inconsistencies point to the possibility that many enrollees obtained coverage or subsidies without being eligible.” It also looks as though nearly half of the affected cases pertain to immigration and citizenship status. Staring at the prospect of two million so-called “enrollees” getting dropped from their plans or sent larger bills, Allahpundit fully expects Obama to wave his magic wand and postpone some of that unpleasantness — which would undoubtedly boost the price tag of the whole operation…if that sort of thing were still being calculated by government bookkeepers, that is. Does anyone doubt he’ll do so, based on allavailable evidence? Also, Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion is going about as well as one might expect. Though an astonishing number of Americans have now signed up for the (empirically failing) program overall, millions of applications remain stuck in logistical limbo, thanks to the ongoing trainwreck that is the back end of Healthcare.gov. For privately-insured consumers, the expected “drumbeat” of proposed premium increases — many of the double-digit variety — continues apace, with insurers in more states previewing their coming rate hikes. A new Kaiser poll once again shows that more Americans have been hurt than helped by Obamacare, by a double-digit margin. Here’s how the law is impacting small businesses in North Carolina:

    Will Sen. Kay Hagan answer questions about this, or will she again run away in terror? She and her ilk are likely just as skittish about the president’s job approval numbers, petrified that they might get swept away by his undertow. Poll after pollafter poll shows heavy public dissatisfaction over the VA scandal (which seems like a distant memory now that the Bergdahl story slammed into DC like a wrecking ball), with the Obama administration held at least partially responsible by most Americans. According to CNN’s latest numbers, he isn’t faring well on virtually any front at all, failing to hit 50 percent support on any issue polled:


    He’s in the 30’s on every topic, with the lone exception of foreign affairs, where he stands at a robust (-17). And this poll was in the field before it became publicthat Obama negotiated with the Taliban to release five hardcore jihadist commanders in exchange for a US Army hostage, who stands accused of desertion, and worse.Gulp.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/06/05/cbo-by-the-way-we-can-no-longer-score-obamacares-fiscal-impact-n1847785Posted 5th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  3. JUN4Obamacare Enrollment Was Driven by Coercion




    Before  Obama took office, the federal government left Americans free to buy only those products or services they chose to buy. Under Obamacare, however, that has changed. For the first time in our nation’s 200-plus-year history, the federal government now compels private American citizens to buy a product or service of the government’s choosing — namely, Obamacare-compliant health insurance — merely as a condition of living in the United States. The question is, did this unprecedented level of coercion fuel enrollment in the Obamacare exchanges?  Recent polling suggests that it did.

    The polling in question was conducted for Enroll America by PerryUndem.  Politico writes that Enroll America was “was dreamed up by liberal advocates of the health care law” and is “employing political campaign tactics” to spark Obamacare enrollment.  It’s headed by Anne Filipic, a former White House official and Obama campaign staffer.  In other words, this isn’t a right-wing poll. The poll asked those who bought Obamacare-compliant insurance to list the reasons why they bought it, offering 15 potential responses.  The first and third most-common responses were (first) “It’s the law” (36 percent) and (third) “I didn’t want to pay the fine” (34 percent).  Comparatively, only 23 percent picked “I wanted insurance for my family,” and only 19 percent picked “I could afford a plan.”
    The fine was even more important in ensnaring the young, who are forced to pay artificially inflated premiums under Obamacare.  The poll writes, “Avoiding the fine was more important to young adults (18-29),” as 42 percent of them gave that as a reason for enrolling.  The mandate also “mattered more to Latinos,” as 41 percent of Latinos “say a reason they enrolled was because ‘it’s the law.’”In all, the poll writes, “Individuals enrolled for many reasons, particularly the law/fine.”  It adds, “As many as 40% indicate they might not have enrolled without the mandate.”These results invite the following question:  Is it really appropriate for the president of the United States to brag about having gotten millions of Americans to buy a product when the most common reason they gave for buying it was that they were compelled by his signature legislation to do so?In light of its demonstrated importance, moreover, it seems strange that Republicans have largely gone silent on the detested mandate.  Obama doesn’t talk about it for obvious reasons — that affront to liberty has long been the part of Obamacare that Americans have hated the most.  But why the silence from the GOP?  Shouldn’t the Republican-controlled House be passing legislation to make the fine $0 for violating the individual mandate in 2015?  (The House passed similar legislation for 2014, but only after 2014 was well underway.)  Shouldn’t Senate Republicans then insist upon a vote on that legislation and do what’s necessary to make it happen?  GOP candidates for offices in both chambers could then campaign in support of such legislation as a welcome step on the road to full repeal. What’s more, shouldn’t Republicans be advancing legislation to drain the Obamacare slush fund that Obama is currently using to buy off his insurance-company allies and mask his unconstitutional refusal to faithfully execute the law?  It’s bad enough that Obamacare’s enrollment is being driven by coercion from the federal government of a sort that our nation has never before experienced or tolerated.  It’s even worse that Obama is also implementing Obamacare in a lawless fashion and is using taxpayer money to cover his tracks.  So, where are the Republicans?http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-enrollment-was-fueled-coercion_793981.html#.U48rsD_xL_Y.twitterPosted 4th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  4. JUN43 Million Stuck In Medicaid Backlog Sparked By Obama Lied About Care ExpansionClose to 3 million Americans that signed up for Medicaid coverage since Obamacare exchanges launched, as states struggle to sift through applications amid high demand and ongoing HealthCare.gov problems.Medicaid backlogs have exploded over the past months, according to a Roll Call analysis covering 41 states. Millions of new Americans became eligible in the 26 states that agreed to Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion and “woodworkers,” or those who were previously eligible for the program, began signing up due to increased media coverage.Between California, Illinois and North Carolina, 1.5 million people are waiting for their applications to be processed — new applicants have to wait for months. California, unsurprisingly, has the largest pool of applicants waiting for a response: 900,000 are waiting to see whether they’ll be given low-income coverage. Illinois is faced with an outsized problem — state officials have been taken aback by the volume of applicants and 330,000 are waiting for an answer.HealthCare.gov glitches are to blame for some portion of the wait times. The Obamacare website accepts Medicaid applications, but has faced back-end problems that failed to send complete enrollment files to state offices that provide Medicaid coverage.Some states are still waiting to get their applicants from HealthCare.gov. Alaska, Kansas, Maine and Michigan still cannot receive Medicaid applications from HealthCare.gov, according to Roll Call. Georgia has just received applications that were submitted as far back as last fall.In the face of the HealthCare.gov problems, some states asked their applicants to re-enroll through a state website; and others sorted their applications by hand. Because of the glitches, half of Idaho’s and Louisiana’s backlogs turned out to be duplicate applications.Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services spokesman Aaron Albright told Roll Call that the federal government is working on getting states their ongoing Medicaid applications.“CMS is actively transferring accounts to all states that are ready to receive them,” Albright said. “In the meantime, every state not receiving transfers can be enrolling people through alternative options CMS has made available.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/04/3-million-stuck-in-medicaid-backlog-sparked-by-obamacare-expansion/#ixzz33hDJIrDkPosted 4th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  5. JUN4Obama Lied About Care Update: Now EVEN MORE States Report Double-Digit Premium Hikes




    Vermont, Connecticut and Arizona Obamacare customers will almost universally be paying higher premiums in 2015, contrary to one of the central promises of the health-care law — lower health care costs.  Insurers are upping premiums for all Obamacare exchange customers in Vermont, which is working its way to a single-payer health-care system to encompass the whole state by 2017. MVP Health Care has requested an average rate increase of 15.4 percent, while the only other insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield, requested average hikes of 9.8 percent.The lowest increase came from BCBS at 5.6 percent for the lowest-quality coverage, a high-deductible bronze plan, while the largest hike was an 18 percent increase for MVP’s silver plan — the most popular health plan type nationally. (RELATED: Ohio Obamacare Premiums Up By Double Digits For 2015) In Arizona, some health plans are raising rates even faster. While not all Arizona’s Obamacare insurers have submitted proposals, two top insurers are planning to up rates drastically: Cigna proposed average premium hikes of 14.4 percent and Humana requested a 25.5 percent boost. Blue Cross Blue Shield, the largest individual market insurer, expects to file their requests with state officials by the end of June.Connecticut, which currently has just three insurers participating in its exchange, will face two insurers proposing double-digit hikes and one proposing a decrease.Anthem Health Plans requested a 12.5 percent average increase, affecting 66,000 individual health care policies; ConnectiCare Benefits has proposed an 11.8 percent average rate increase for 27,500 policyholders.The one company to propose a decrease, HealthyCT, has just 7,200 members to benefit from its 8.9 percent requested decrease. Unlike its Connecticut competitors, 2014 is the company’s first year of operation and the company still has no claims experience to base its rates on. (RELATED: All But One Washington State Insurer To Hike Premiums) HealthyCT also told state officials it would be spreading out administrative expenses and fees over three years instead of one year, as is typical, making it possible for them to lower their rates.

    Overall, the track record for the Obama administration on Obamacare premiums is dismal, despite President Obama’s promise to lower premiums by $2,500 annually for the average family. In addition to the hikes released Tuesday, Virginia, Washington, Indiana and Ohio state officials have admitted that Obamacare customers in their states will be hit with cost increases in order to maintain their now-mandatory health coverage. (RELATED: Virginia First To Release Post-Obamacare Premium Proposals: Rate Hikes For All) The increases are likely to make it even more difficult for Obamacare exchanges to maintain their newly enrolled customers. While the Obama administration has touted its 8 million sign-ups (months after open enrollment ended, the federal government still has yet to reveal how many people paid for their plans), experts worry whether low-income customers will be able to keep paying their premiums every month. Rising costs may make continued insurance enrollment even more difficult for some.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/03/obamacare-update-now-even-more-states-report-double-digit-premium-hikes/#ixzz33h5I8IkVPosted 4th June 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  6. MAY30New Report Debunks ‘Eight Biggest Myths of Obama Lied About Care’(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration continues to espouse eight pervasive “myths” about the Affordable Care Act (ACA),  John R. Graham, senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, charges in a new report released Thursday.(See Biggest Myths of Obamacare.pdf)“The myths peddled by the Administration to sell ObamaCare are not harmless fairy tales. They have resulted in a program that is harming people’s access to health care,” Graham stated.“Favorable media coverage of the 8 million people who have enrolled in health insurance via exchanges has allowed the administration and its allies to revive discredited claims about Obamacare’s benefits.”But “the numbers touted by the administration disguise the fact that many of these people lost previous coverage in the period prior to open enrollment, and people are no longer free to acquire the health insurance they want,” he said.Myth No. 1: If you like your health plan, you can keep it.The health insurance policies of six million Americans have already been cancelled, and most of the policies purchased in the individual market by another 19 million people do not comply with ACA requirements, Graham pointed out.He also quotes a government memorandum suggesting that nearly all employers with employee health care plans that are currently “grandfathered” in will lose that protection by making even small changes to their coverage. Eventually, nearly all businesses will be forced into more expensive, government-regulated plans, he predicts.Myth No. 2: If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.Many health care plans sold on federal and state exchanges have a limited number of in-network physicians to choose from, Graham says, pointing out that 70 percent of doctors in California are not in their state exchange’s network. And with millions of newly insured people seeking care from a dwindling number of physicians, “there is no realistic way to meet this demand.”Myth No. 3: There is an “employer mandate” to offer affordable coverage.Employers who don’t offer health benefits can be fined $2,000 for each employee, which is considerably lower than the cost of providing health insurance. So many employees will stop offering coverage, Graham predicts.The ACA allows self-insured employers to require workers to pay up to 9.5 percent of their annual wages in premiums, he adds, but an employee making $50,000 a year would have to pay $15,000 for family coverage, and employees who declined the coverage would not be eligible for federal subsidies on the exchanges. “Few workers would willingly spend nearly one-third of their take-home pay on health insurance,” Graham says.Myth No. 4: Health reform will lower the cost of health insurance by $2,500 a year for the average family.Graham points out that “because of Obamacare’s mandates and regulations, coverage will be more expensive for everyone outside a small portion of older, low-income adults who can obtain highly subsidized coverage in the exchanges.”Myth No. 5: There is an “individual mandate” that ensures everyone has health coverageThe ACA’s “individual mandate” requires that most legal residents of the U.S. buy a qualifying health insurance policy or pay a fine. However, “the individual mandate was effectively deferred until at least 2016 when the Obama administration’s Department of Health and Human Services allowed people to decide for themselves if they qualify for a ‘hardship exemption’,” Graham writes, “to reduce the liability of fining people before the November 2016 election.”Since there is a congressional election every two years, he adds, “the individual mandate is highly unlikely ever to be imposed.”Myth No. 6: Individuals cannot be denied individual coverage due to pre-existing conditions.This was only true if they applied for Obamacare coverage before March 31, 2014,” Graham writes. “If they missed that deadline, they cannot get coverage at all until November 15, 2014, unless they experience a life-qualifying event, such as getting married or having a child. In the individual market, prior to Obamacare, people could apply whenever they wanted to.”Myth No. 7: Health insurers no longer can cancel a policy after an insured individual gets sick.“Before Obamacare, a health insurer could only rescind a policy if the insured had misrepresented her health status on her application,” Graham says. “On the contrary, Obamacare has caused many cancellations.”And despite the fact that “nearly three-fourths of states agreed to allow insurers to reinstate canceled health plans…it appears that most insurers were not able to do so.”Myth No. 8: Medicare has been strengthened.“In general, the Medicare spending cuts exceed the new benefits by a factor of more than 10 to 1,” Graham points out. “As a result, one of every two people expected to participate in Medicare Advantage over the next 10 years (7.5 million of 14 million) will lose their coverage entirely.”To make matters worse, “Medicare’s chief actuary believes the planned cuts in fees may cause some doctors to retire and force some hospitals out of business” just as demand for health care increases.“The real costs of Obamacare will continue to burden Americans, despite the apparent success of the first open enrollment,” Graham concluded.http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/new-report-debunks-eight-biggest-myths-obamacarePosted 30th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  7. MAY27This Family Thought Obama Lied About Care Was ‘the Answer’… Until They Found Out Their Plan ‘Doesn’t Even Work’Nick and Rachel Robinson were excited about the possibilities that Obamacare offered them when they found out they were expecting a third child.Photo credit: Shutterstock“It’s one of those times where you hear the news and there’s this immediate sense of joy and excitement like, ‘Yay, a new kid. That’s awesome!’” Nick Robinson told NPR. But the happy news also came with a new set of worries. “What are we going to do? How are we going to pay for this? This is intense.”When the option of the Affordable Care Act became available, the Robinsons believed it was the answer to what they were looking for. Nick’s company didn’t offer health benefits and neither did Rachel’s position as a wedding photographer.“I was like, ‘Oh, here’s the answer! This is simple!’” he told NPR. “‘It’s a cheaper insurance plan, there’s no pre-existing condition stuff.’”But the Robinsons soon learned the HMO Blue Cross Blue Shield plan they pay about $375 each month for wasn’t quite what they expected.For example, when it came to finding an obstetrician in Texas for their upcoming baby earlier this year, Rachel said she called all 28 practices listed as acceptable options for their plan, but could find none to take her as a patient.“Some would just come right out and say, ‘We don’t take Obamacare,’” she said. ”Or the best one was, ‘The doctor takes it here at the actual practice, but whatever hospital you use … does not take that insurance.’”NPR noted that there were practices that accepted HMO plans, but the doctors rotated and Rachel wanted a relationship with only one physician.“It was mind-numbing, because I was just sitting there thinking, ‘I’m paying close to $400 a month just for me to have insurance that doesn’t even work. So what am I paying for?’” she told NPR.The Robinson family is not the only one to have reported problems finding doctors who will accept their plans, even though they’re listed on the insurance websites. A former Marine in California recently shared a similar frustration.The Robinsons were told by Blue Cross that the doctors listed should accept the plan they purchased.Given their frustrations with finding a doctor who would accept Obamacare insurance, the Robinsons dropped their plan and decided to pay $4,000 for a midwife and a home delivery instead, an option they previously rejected. NPR reported that the Robinsons paid for the birth of their child in April out of pocket, but filed for reimbursement afterward through a Christian-based cost-sharing plan.“We’re so happy with where we are now, but this is not OK. And I’m extremely confident that, that’s not what the architects of this plan had in mind,” Nick told NPR.Rachel gave birth to a healthy baby boy on April 28.Listen to the Robinson’s experience with the Affordable Care Act in NPR’s report online.http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/27/this-family-thought-obamacare-was-the-answer-until-they-found-out-their-plan-doesnt-even-work/
    Posted 27th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  8. MAY23Obama’s Creative New Way of Describing the Obama Lied About Care Mandate, is simply a free-market tool “to encourage people to buy insurance.”? L.M.A.O What a liar and Con Man




    Encourage” is an interesting characterization of what both Republicans and Democrats consistently called a “mandate” during the debate over the Affordable Care Act, and during the legal fight that went to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2012 that the mandate was constitutional as a tax. The law also contains subsidies for lower income Americans to purchase health insurance, which would be a carrot for some to buy insurance, and a stick for all who didn’t.Although the health law relies on penalties to get people to buy private insurance plans, the Merriam-Webster definition of “encourage” is “to make (someone) more determined, hopeful, or confident,” “to make (something) more appealing or more likely to happen,” or “to make (someone) more likely to do something : to tell or advise (someone) to do something.”In 2014, the penalty for an adult without insurance is $95, and $47.50 per child – or 1 percent of a household income, whichever is greater. That penalty increases to $325 per adult and $162.50 per child, or 2 percent of a household income – whichever is greater. In 2016 the penalty rises to $695 per adult, $347.50 per child, or 2.5 percent of a household’s income. After 2017, the fine increases with the rate of inflation.The financial penalties perhaps would meet the third definition of encourage: “to make (someone) more likely to do something : to tell or advise (someone) to do something.” Meanwhile, the Medicaid expansion would also likely fall under the traditional definition of encourage, at least for those who qualify.
    Nevertheless, the Obamacare law is most known for the mandate that individuals buy insurance either through their job, through subsidies if they qualify or through the marketplace exchanges on Healthcare.gov and in the states. The law further mandates that all employers with more than 50 workers provide government-approved health insurance plans.Obama spoke Thursday night at a private home in Chicago at a fundraising event for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee where he was critical of Republicans.“They operate on a single theory — which is, if government is dismantled and folks at the top can do more and more without restraint, that everybody else is going to benefit from it,” Obama said. “I don’t know if they actually believe it, but that’s what they say and this is not a situation of equivalence where the Democrats are this far-left crazy group and we’re not willing to meet in the middle.”“If you need a better example than that, take a look at a health care law that uses the private sector to encourage people to buy insurance and has brought health care inflation down to its lowest rate in 50 years,” Obama continued. “And you would think that I had dismantled the entire free-market system — despite the fact that we now have somewhere between 13 and 15 million people who have insurance now that didn’t have it before. So I need a new Congress. But at a minimum, I’ve got to have a Democratic Senate.”http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/23/obamas-creative-new-way-of-describing-the-obamacare-mandate/Posted 23rd May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  9. MAY20THE FULL SCALE OF THE OBAMA Lied About CARE LAUNCH DISASTER IS REVEALEDRemember back in the old days, when we had an inquisitive media filled with “reporters” who would do whatever it took to get the real facts of a story, especially if they thought powerful officials might be lying to the American people?  We’ll probably get such an environment back, if a Republican becomes President in 2016.  But ever since Barack Obama was elected, the media has served more as a volunteer ignorance militia, blindly disseminating whatever talking points the Administration gives them with very little challenge.  When vital information is withheld from the American people, Obama’s palace-guard media shrugs and says, “Hey, what are you gonna do?”

    Well, one thing you can do is file Freedom of Information Act requests, and if the Obama Administration illegally refuses to respond, you can file FOIA lawsuits.  Only independent watchdog groups do that sort of digging now.  The “mainstream media” stirs in its easy chairs, roused from fond nappy-time dreams of how much fun they had at the second Obama inaugural, and harrumphs in confusion as each new nugget of long-buried truth is excavated by these outsiders.  It’s nothing short of astonishing that none of the big FOIA bombshells are coming from our huge, well-staffed, highly funded media organizations.  And they’re not exactly eager to pump the headlines full of astonishing truth, even when someone else drops it into their laps.

    Judicial Watch, which did investigative work the mainstream media willfully refused to do on the Benghazi and IRS scandals, just emerged from the Obama Temple of Doom with yet another long-lost treasure of hard information: a 106-page document from the Department of Health and Human Services, revealing the breathtaking scope of the ObamaCare launch disaster.  In accordance with standard Obama scandal protocols, all of this information was kept from the public until a few crucial news cycles had rolled past.Let us note, as too much reporting on these latter-day revelations fails to do, that this HHS document was procured with a lawsuit, not a Freedom of Information Act “request.”  Judicial Watch made such a request in October 2013, but the Obama Administration illegally refused to comply, prompting the watchdog group to follow up with court action in late November.The people who call themselves “reporters” will probably relegate this new document to Page A-26 and claim it’s all “old news.”  The important thing to remember is that they refused to report it, or even push hard for the information, back when it was piping-hot news, and might have caused public anger to grow incandescently hot.  Obama’s political team understands that every scandal grows less damaging over time, if you have a friendly media that doesn’t make a big deal about the outrageous stonewalling necessary to drag out damaging revelations.One of the amazing facts in this HHS document was already revealed long after it would have provoked a firestorm of national outrage: only one ObamaCare enrollment was received on the first day of history’s most expensive website launch.  But the other details unearthed by Judicial Watch paint a portrait of staggering incompetence and mendacity:
    • On October 1, there were 43,208 accounts created and 1 enrollment. (Page 49)
    • As of October 31, 2013, there were 1,319,425 accounts created nationwide – but only 30,512 actual enrollments in Obamacare. (Page 19)
    • On October 1, 2013, at the end of the first day (4:30), the Senior Advisor at Center forConsumer Information and Insurance Oversight, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Brigid M. Russell, sent out an email to her staff with a subject line celebrating “2 enrollments!” The body copy of the email read: “We have our second official FFM enrollment! The first two Form 834s sent out are to: 1) CareSource in Ohio, 2) BCBS of North Carolina. (Page 90)
    • Official figures contained in the HHS report provide conflicting figures as to the number of enrollments. FFM [Federally Facilitated Marketplace] statistics show 23,259 cumulative to-date applications submitted as of 10/2/13 and 286 completed plan selections. Earlier numbers show 356 enrollments created as of 7pm on 10/2/13 that were completed with Form 834s sent. (Pages 91-92)
    • An October 2, 2013, email from HHS Special Assistant Marianne Bowen indicated serious problems with congressional enrollments: “The Congressional issue (68 attempts for Direct enrollment) was an issue stemming from incomplete applications being sent through (started, not finished, sent anyway) and the way the issuers are assigning unique numbers. Turns out there were only 4 complete Direct Enrollment applications that went through, the other 64 were not complete.” (Page 93) [The U.S. Congress has approximately 24,000 professional staffers.]
    • On October 2, 2013, the Obamacare website had 70,000 page views but only 5,000 were unique visitors, and 48% of registrations failed. The large number of page views may have been the result of visitors repeatedly hitting the “refresh” button due to long waiting times. (Page 106)
    It cannot be stressed enough that all of this information was kept from the American people, for no good reason.  ObamaCare isn’t some national-security project whose failure would jeopardize public safety, if it became known to America’s enemies.  Every one of these developments should have been forthrightly admitted to the public immediately.  There is no justification for the Obama Administration keeping us in the dark “for our own good,” to prevent angry voters from acting against the wishes of their benevolent masters in the next election.Corporatist government-business projects like ObamaCare should be held to far higher standards of accountability and transparency than purely private-sector enterprises, because corporations are ultimately responsible to shareholders, survive only through sustainable business models, and have government regulators breathing down their necks.  (And as we saw from the GM recall debacle, when the government becomes senior partner in a corporation, those regulators grow notably less enthusiastic.)  There’s no question ObamaCare would be dead and gone if it were a private business; CEO Barack Obama would spend the rest of life in court, or jail, fending off lawsuits from defrauded customers.  A document such as the one Judicial Watch unearthed would become prized evidence at the messy ObamaCare Inc. bankruptcy hearings.But instead, we get far less transparency and accountability when Big Government and Big Business get together to unleash their mutant progeny upon the population.  We get spokespeople and their willing media enablers lying about how everything is going fine, when it clearly isn’t.  The people who preside over unspeakable disasters are allowed to retire gracefully, with thanks for all their hard work.  Top officials cite their lack of awareness of critical problems as a defense against being held responsible for failure.And even when the media knows that everything they’ve been instructed to relay to us about ObamaCare was a lie, they grant default credibility to the next set of fairy tales, such as the lingering mystery of just how many of the reported ObamaCare “enrollments” are bogus – a question Judicial Watch asks in their press release:On April 17, 2014, President Obama announced that eight million people had signed up for health insurance on Affordable Healthcare Act exchanges. That figure, however, may be substantially over-inflated. According to testimony in May by the America’s Health Insurance Plans association before the House Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Oversight, “Because of the challenges that surfaced with the launch of the Exchanges in October 2013, some consumers were advised to create a new account and enroll again. As a result, insurers have many duplicate enrollments in their system for which they never received any payment.”“Once again, Judicial Watch is able to get information through FOIA that no one else had gotten – the specifics about the unmitigated failure of the Obamacare healthcare.gov collapse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama administration tried to cover this up, Congress failed to follow through, but we managed to get the truth about the $667 billion Obamacare website.  Imagine what would have happened to Obamacare if the American people knew only one person was able to enroll on its first day?  What other Obamacare failures is President Obama hiding?”We’re forced to rely on industry analysts reading tea leaves to guess at the percentage of those 8 million claimed “enrollments” that turn out to be invalid due to non-payment, distorted data, or duplicate data entry – twenty percent?  Thirty?  Forty?  But meanwhile, for a few precious news cycles, the President got to tout an 8 million figure the media knows is wrong, and they let it pass without much in the way of challenge… never mind the flinty-eyed skepticism they should be displaying, coupled with shouted demands for the release of hard data.ObamaCare is an enduring example of Big Government incompetence and deception, mirrored precisely in the currently exploding VA scandal, which gives Americans a very accurate forecast of what our ultimate, hellish single-payer socialized future will look like.  Your future under the combined domination of Big Government and Big Business will be a series of expensive frauds.  Truth will be treated like a radioactive isotope that must be kept buried until its political half-life has expired.  And if you grow angry when the facts are finally revealed, mainstream media “reporters” will be standing by to insult you for obsessing over old news.Update: The expanding Serco scandal is another example of the mainstream media sleeping through bad news for ObamaCare.  Serco is a contractor that was caught by local media paying a huge staff of employees at an ObamaCare “processing center” to do nothing all day.  Another such office has been uncovered in Arkansas… by another Missouri news station.  Apparently none of our vaunted mainstream media “reporters” could be bothered to follow upon a story of outrageous taxpayer money wasted in the name of President Boyfriend’s “signature achievement,” so Missouri reporters went to Arkansas to continue the investigation.Update: Have document requests been filed with the Obama Administration by the local reporters investigating the Serco scandal mentioned above?  Why, yes, they have.  And maybe one day, six months or a year from now, after a couple of lawsuits, we might finally get to see those documents.  But for right now, the usual stonewall is in effect, as the high and mighty mainstream press slumbers on.http://www.humanevents.com/2014/05/20/the-full-scale-of-the-obamacare-launch-disaster-is-revealed/Posted 20th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  10. MAY17My Insured Daughter Could Go Blind Because of Obama Lied About Care Red Tape.My daughter is suffering from a variety of health conditions that includes her second pituitary tumor, major loss of vision in her left eye, swelling of her knees and ankles, fibrous dysplasia in her nose that is now affecting her right eye and Cushing’s disease.


    After doing some research of everything put together, she fits the textbook criteria for a genetic disorder known as 

    “McCune-Albright syndrome is a disorder that affects the bones, skin, and several hormone-producing (endocrine) tissues.”“People with McCune-Albright syndrome develop areas of abnormal scar-like (fibrous) tissue in their bones, a condition called polyostotic fibrous dysplasia. Polyostotic means the abnormal areas (lesions) may occur in many bones; often they are confined to one side of the body. Replacement of bone with fibrous tissue may lead to fractures, uneven growth, and deformity. When lesions occur in the bones of the skull and jaw it can result in uneven (asymmetric) growth of the face. Asymmetry may also occur in the long bones; uneven growth of leg bones may cause limping. Abnormal curvature of the spine (scoliosis) may also occur. Bone lesions may become cancerous, but this happens in fewer than 1 percent of people with McCune-Albright syndrome.”
    She’s had the fibrous dysplasia for several years and it just suddenly started growing like crazy. She says it’s bothering her good eye and her breathing through her right nostril, so she and her husband started calling to get her some medical help and get her tested for McCune-Albright syndrome.
    First they called her regular eye doctor who said they needed to see this other specialist who turned out to be an eyelid specialist. This doctor told them he couldn’t help and recommended that she see a neuro-ophthalmologist who in turn told them that she needs to see someone that specializes in fibrous dysplasia. None of these specialists would see her for what she needs nor would they order the test for McCune-Albright.
    They called a highly recommended geneticist in the area and the earliest they can get in is a month from now. The problem is that the fibrous dysplasia around her right eye and nostril has been growing rapidly in the past couple of weeks and they fear that another month might cause damaged to her good eye, along with restricting her breathing through her right nostril.
    In the course of trying to get her treatment, they are finding out that due to more Obamacare regulations that specialists are restricted to only treating patients that fit in with their specialty. If there are multiple conditions, they may end up having to see 2-3-4-5-6 different specialists. Each one will charge a fortune meaning the total cost of treatment will be 2-3-4-5-6 times more expensive than what it could have been before Obamacare.
    By the time she runs the gamut of Obamacare red tape, she may lose part or all of the vision in her good eye and who know what else. I just looked at her eye and nose and not only is there noticeable growth but she is getting some purple bruising under her eye next to the nose. Obamacare doesn’t care about the patient. Obamacare is meant to run everyone through the same cattle chute and bleed them dry financially and they don’t care what happens to you physically in the process.
    I’m sure that if Obama or Mrs. O suffered from the same conditions my daughter has and had to go through the same rat race of red tape, that there would be some major changes made to Obamacare. But, they never have to worry about their healthcare and they don’t give a darn about anyone else’s!
    Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/15591/insured-daughter-go-blind-obamacare-red-tape/#JxGZO3xwtH41Y3Rk.99Posted 17th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  11. MAY16AP: ‘Frustrated’ Consumers ‘Losing Doctors’ Under Obama Lied About Care., “No matter how we reform healthcare, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period


    We addressed Obamacare’s sticker shock earlier; now it’s time for a burst of “access shock” — which we’ve written about extensively over recent months. TheNew York Times covered this trend earlier in the week, and now the Associated Press is joining the chorus:Some consumers who bought insurance under President Barack Obama’s health care law are experiencing buyer’s remorse after realizing that their longtime doctors aren’t accepting the new plans. Before the law took effect, experts warned that narrow networks could impact patients’ access to care, especially in cheaper plans. But with insurance cards now in hand, consumers are finding their access limited across all price ranges — sometimes even after they were told their plan would include their current doctor.
    Indeed, critics did warn consumers about this consequence of Obamacare, but many people foolishly trusted President Obama’s unambiguous, endlessly-repeated promises:


    “No matter how we reform healthcare, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. Period.”
    The AP story proceeds with individual examples of those victimized by Democrats’ violated “keep your doctor” vow:Michelle Pool is one of those customers. Before enrolling in a new health plan on California’s exchange, she checked whether her longtime primary care doctor was covered. Pool, a 60-year-old diabetic who has had back surgery and a hip replacement, purchased the plan only to find that the insurer was mistaken. Her $352 a month gold plan was cheaper than what she’d paid under her husband’s insurance and seemed like a good deal because of her numerous pre-existing conditions. But after her insurance card came in the mail, the Vista, California resident learned her doctor wasn’t taking her new insurance. “It’s not fun when you’ve had a doctor for years and years that you can confide in and he knows you,” Pool said. “I’m extremely discouraged. I’m stuck.” … Many consumers are still learning. They hear “Obamacare” and think it’s free like Medicaid or Medicare, said John Foley, an attorney and navigator. “They don’t expect to pay anything,” said Foley. “For a couple more dollars a month you can get a really good plan and they’re like, ‘This is free. I don’t want to pay for this.'” Even with pricier plans, some consumers have access problems. James Potts’ $647-per-month silver plan was issued by the same company that had insured him with a different plan cancelled under the Affordable Care Act. The 64-year-old property insurance agent assumed his doctors would remain the same under the insurer’s new plan, but didn’t double check. When Potts got a nasty cold, he called three facilities near his home in Wichita Falls, Texas, and was shocked to find none took the insurance, including his primary care doctor. “It was a waste of money for me,” he said. “I couldn’t find doctors that would talk to me.”

    The Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein flags a particularly interesting quote from an insurance executive, and serves up a well-earned “I told you so:” 

    In a line that says a lot about where health care is heading under Obamacare, an insurance executive offering plans through the law was quoted in the New York Times on Tuesday as saying,“We have to break people away from the choice habit that everyone has.”Marcus Merz, the chief executive of PreferredOne, made the remark in an article describing the trend toward narrow networks in health care plans…Before the health insurance exchanges opened last October, I had written about a looming issue for Obamacare that I called “access shock.” As many liberal commentators boasted that offerings on the insurance exchanges were going to be priced lower than expected, I pointed out, to the extent that this was true, the reason was that insurers were stripping down their plans so they covered fewer providers…Now, insurers are publicly boasting about how great it is that they’re trying to deprive consumers of choices.

    Indeed, Obamacare is actively breaking many Americans’ “choice habit” from coast to coast, with someObamacare exchanges offering just one or two“options” to consumers — and restricting access to people’s preferred doctors and medical facilities in the process. Obamacare supporters may be congratulating themselves for ridding Americans of the whole “health care choices” scourge today, but that’s absolutely not how the law was sold. Throughout the debate, the president and his allies recited the phrase “choice and competition” over and over, assuring casual listeners that everyone could maintain the arrangements they liked under the reforms, which would also lower everyone’s rates through expanded choices, all while bending cost curves down. None of it was true.Read More: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/05/16/…Posted 16th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  12. MAY14Cash for Obama Lied About Care ShirkersWhen Obamacare operatives aren’t busy trashing the private health insurance market and squandering billions on useless technology, they’re busy … being idle. File the latest example of government health care profligacy under “Caution: Your tax dollars not at work.”

    According to at least one Obamacare paper-pusher, employees at an application-processing center in Wentzville, Mo., are getting paid to sit around and do nothing. Investigative reporter Chris Nagus of the St. Louis television station KMOV News 4 spoke to the whistleblower. “They want to hire more people even though we still don’t have work to keep the people that we have busy,” the worker revealed. “There are some weeks that a data entry person would not process an application.”

    The worker — or rather, shirker — also spilled the beans on how his colleagues are “told to sit at their computers and hit the refresh button every 10 minutes.” Another former worker at the processing facility added that the company “is a JOKE! There is nothing to do — NO WORK.”

    You will not be surprised to learn that the company in charge of these Obamacare layabouts is embroiled in scandal — around the world, no less.

    Multinational tech management company Serco won a $1.2 billion contract with the federal Center for Medicare and Medicaid last summer to “support” the beleaguered Obamacare health care exchanges. (According to the latest estimates, nearly half a billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies have now been squandered on inoperable or defunct health care exchanges in Massachusetts, Oregon, Nevada and Maryland.) In addition to the office in Missouri, Serco oversees Obamacare processing centers in Rogers, Ark., Lawton, Okla., and London, Ken., which are projected to “employ” up to 10,000 people.

    Not long after Serco snagged its billion-dollar Cash for Obamacare Shirkers contract, news broke in Britain of a massive probe of fraud involving Serco’s parent company. The firm allegedly overbilled the government by “tens of millions of pounds” on a public contract to electronically monitor parolees. Investigators found that Serco had billed British taxpayers for tracking criminals who were dead or still in prison.

    Just this week, British watchdogs called on the U.K. government to ban Serco from any further government work.

    The company is also in hot water for manipulating a prison van escorting contract in London. And in Australia, Serco has been investigated and fined $15 million for mismanaging asylum detention centers across the country, where more than a dozen detainees have escaped and riots and chaos reigned.

    Will someone on Capitol Hill follow the lead of KMOV-TV and find out what exactly Serco’s shirkers are doing (and not doing) with our money?

    The see-no-incompetence Obama administration, for its part, has no worries, as usual. “Serco is a highly skilled company that has a proven track record in providing cost-effective services to numerous other federal agencies,” Medicare spokesman Brian Cook said in response to questions last year about Serco’s integrity. Serco’s American subsidiary is one of the largest federal prime contractors in the U.S., with oversight of our patent application and visa application processing systems, as well. Egad.

    Serco is just the latest in a parade of shady federal health care contractors — from fraud-riddled Seedco to feckless CGI Federal — who are ripping off American taxpayers. While the White House amuses itself with selfies and hashtags, the Obamacare clunker keeps burning up our billions to pay do-nothings and destroyers. It’s the slush fund from hell.
    http://cnsnews.com/commentary/michelle-malkin/cash-obamacare-shirkersPosted 14th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  13. MAY13IT’S OFFICIAL: OBAMA Lied About CARE SPARKS 2015 DOUBLE-DIGIT PREMIUM HIKES, States of Washington and VirginiaBarack Obama’s controversial Obama Lied About Care program warned that the health law would fail to reduce insurance costs and could result in double-digit premium jumps. Now it’s official: 2015 filings in the states of Washington and Virginia show large groups of customers paying proposed rate hikes as high as 14.2% and 16.6% more, respectively, in each state. In Washington state, Group Health Options has proposed premium rate hikes of 14.2%. Group Health Cooperative advanced an 11.2% rate spike. Community Health Plan of Washington’s filings revealed a proposed 8.4% premium jump. Virginia insurers are also proposing double-digit price hikes due to Obamacare. Virginia’s 110,000 Anthem HealthKeepers customers are looking at an average 8.5% rate spike with some of Anthem’s customers facing a 16.6% increase in the price of their plans. CareFirst Blue Choice’s 32,000 Virginia customers can look forward to a proposed 14.9% increase in costs. Obamacare remains deeply unpopular. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, just 41% of Americans now support Obamacare.Posted 13th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  14. MAY13Study: Obama Lied About Care Employer Mandate Will Disproportionately Hurt Low-Wage WorkersObamacare’s twice-delayed employer mandate will hit low-wage workers the hardest, according to a study released Friday.The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Urban Institute released a report examining the effects of repealing the employer mandate or moving ahead. The employer mandate peg of the health care law will barely affect the uninsured rate, researchers found.“Employers with 50 or more workers not offering coverage pre-ACA are the same employers that are highly likely to not offer in the future, therefore incurring the ACA’s penalties. Because the nonoffering firms are much more likely to be firms dominated by low-wage workers, low-wage employees will bear the greatest brunt of the penalties imposed,” the study found.The study acknowledges an argument often advanced by both conservatives and businesses that hiring will likely be stunted by the arbitrary cut-offs in the mandate, imposing different requirements and starting dates for companies employing with below 50, 50-99, and 100-plus workers.But the federal government expects to gain billions in penalty payments from companies that choose not to obey the mandate in the end. These costs “are likely to be passed back to the workers in the form of reduced wages,” particularly low-wage employees.Few workers would lose health coverage in the absence of the mandate. Were it entirely eliminated, employer coverage would fall by just 500,000, according to the study; nongroup coverage would correspondingly rise by 300,000 and Medicaid would grow by 100,000 people. The net increase in the uninsured would be just 200,000 — a relative hike of just 0.6 percent.The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) is a supporter of the health care law. It donated $13 million to Enroll America, a White House-connected nonprofit promoting Obamacare enrollment, after outgoing Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius requested the funding from top executives, according to a recent federal report. (RELATED: Report: Obamacare outreach group gets $13 million at administration’s request)They’re not the first pro-Affordable Care Act contingency to advocate trashing the employer mandate, once considered a key component of the health care law. After the Obama administration’s initial delay of the mandate last July, notorious Obamacare supporter Ezra Klein advocated at the Washington Post for the mandate’s repeal.“Frankly, eliminating it — or at least utterly overhauling it — is probably the right thing to do,” Klein wrote. “It’s a bad bit of policy.”It’s one of the few areas of Obamacare policy where both sides of the aisle can agree. Since the Clinton administration, conservative organizations have vehemently opposed the prospect of an employer mandate — and after two delays of Obamacare’s, former supporters are rethinking it as well.“Eliminating the employer responsibility requirements should substantially diminish employer opposition to the ACA,” the study concluded.While businesses and much of the public would likely welcome dumping the mandate, it would require raising another $46 billion in taxes over the next decade to even things out. The federal government expects to raise serious cash from businesses that don’t comply through penalty payments. In the absence of the mandate, Medicaid and Obamacare enrollments (likely with subsidy payments) will probably rise slightly.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/09/study-obamacare-employer-mandate-will-disproportionately-hurt-low-wage-workers/#ixzz31cyOniqpPosted 13th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  15. MAY12Obama Lied About Care Exchanges Price Tag: $4.9 BillionWhen the federal health exchanges launched and crashed last fall through Healthcare.gov, half-a-million dollars went to waste as government officials continued to throw money at the problem. At the state level, the numbers are just as bad, if not worse. According to numbers published by POLITICO and put out by the non-partisan Kaiser Family Foundation, failing state exchanges have already cost taxpayers $454 million and in the end will cost as much as $4.9 billion. Nearly half a billion dollars in federal money has been spent developing four state Obamacare exchanges that are now in shambles — and the final price tag for salvaging them may go sharply higher.Each of the states — Massachusetts, Oregon, Nevada and Maryland — embraced Obamacare, and each underperformed. All have come under scathing criticism and now face months of uncertainty as they rush to rebuild their systems or transition to the federal exchange.The $474 million spent by these four states includes the cost that officials have publicly detailed to date. It climbs further if states like Minnesota and Hawaii, which have suffered similarly dysfunctional exchanges, are added.Their totals are just a fraction of the $4.698 billion that the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation calculates the federal government has approved for states since 2011 to help them determine whether to create their own exchanges and to assist in doing so.One aspect the POLITICO piece didn’t cover is how many Obamacare enrollees have come at this great cost. Lets start with Oregon, where zero people have been enrolled in the system. Forbes has more: Indeed, all told, federal taxpayers spent $474 million on just four Exchanges that appear destined for the junk heap: Massachusetts, Oregon, Nevada and Maryland. If other states with similarly dysfunctional exchanges (Minnesota and Hawaii) are included, the total would rise by an additional $360 million. That’s $834 million spent in just a half dozen states that collectively enrolled 270,000 people—in excess of $3,000 per enrollee just to get signed up!Looking back, it would have been much more efficient to cut the 45 million uninsured in this country a check for health insurance but instead, government bureaucrats decided to overhaul the system in the most inefficient, expensive way possible. When President Obama brags about 8 million “enrollees,” of whom just 65 percent have actually paid for their plans, it’s important to keep in mind just how much those enrollees cost.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/05/12/obamacare-exchanges-price-tag-49-billion-n1836861Posted 12th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  16. MAY12Filings Show Obama Lied About Care Premium Rises to Outpace InflationConsumers enrolled in Obamacare will see an increase in their insurance premium rates next year that will “easily” outpace inflation, with every insurer in at least one state opting for rate increases, The Wall Street Journal reported.
      
    According to official filings by insurance companies in Virginia for 2015, average rate increases range from 3.3 percent to as high as 16.6 percent for those enrolled in the online exchange, depending on the type of plan a consumer holds.

    The rate increases are directly related to the new costs insurers face under the Affordable Care Act due to the higher expense of insuring less healthy, previously uninsured enrollees, and also because of the new fees insurers are facing under the new healthcare law, one company, Anthem HealthKeepers Inc., told the Journal. 

    Virginia is the first state to publicly release rate proposals for 2015, with other states expected to follow as early as this week, according to the Journal. In most parts of the country, figures will not be available until late summer.

    In 2014, insurers participating in Obamacare were required to charge the same premium to all customers, regardless of medical history, and were restricted to the amount they could vary premiums by age, with strict limitations to out-of-pocket maximums.

    Predictions of rate increases have varied widely, but the projections for Virginia fall short of some expectations. Speculation nevertheless continues about the rise of future premiums under the new healthcare law.

    Administration officials, including outgoing Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, have long said they expect rates to increase but believed provisions in the legislation designed to compensate insurers with higher medical claims would hold down rate increases. 

    Virginia is one of the 36 states participating in the federal online insurance exchange through HealthCare.gov, and the Obama administration has estimated that 216,000 Virginians enrolled in the exchange by the March 31 deadline, the Journal reported.


    Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obamacare-healthcare-Virginia-premium/2014/05/12/id/570768#ixzz31XBJ14bT
    Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!Posted 12th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  17. MAY11REVEALED: 74% OF OBAMA Lied About CARE ‘ENROLLEES’ ALREADY HAD INSURANCE



    A devastating new McKinsey & Co. report finds that Obamacare’s purported purpose – providing coverage for the previously uninsured – has failed.The report concludes that 74% of Obamacare enrollees at the end of the first open enrollment period already had insurance; just 26% reported being previously uninsured. Of those who were previously uninsured, the figure drops to only 22% when considered alongside whether the individual has activated his plan by paying his first month’s premium.According to the Associated Press, at least 4.7 million Americans had their health insurance plans canceled due to Obamacare. Many of those individuals simply went through the Obamacare exchanges to buy policies to replace the ones President Barack Obama’s healthcare program outlawed.The McKinsey & Co. study also revealed that nearly half (48%) of individuals who said they do not plan to enroll in 2015 were “unaware of the penalty for lack of coverage.” The so-called “individual mandate” imposes graduated penalties on individuals who choose not to purchase care. Even after respondents were informed of the penalty, only 29% of those currently uninsured said they plan to enroll in 2015. Obamacare remains deeply unpopular nationally. According to the latest Pew/USA Today poll, Obamacare’s approval rating now stands at a record-low 41%.http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/05/11/Revealed-74-of-Obamacare-Enrollees-Already-Had-InsurancePosted 11th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  18. MAY10Obama Lied About Care Exchanges Spend Average $922 per EnrolleeFederal and state-run insurance exchanges on average spent $922 per enrollee to sign up people for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act, according to a new report by a Washington class-action law firm.The report calculates the health  law’s federal and state-run insurance exchanges spent more than $7.39 billion through the March 31 open-enrollment deadline.The report came from Jay Angoff, a partner with Mehri & Skalet PLLC who previously worked for the Health and Human Services Department, and cited  data from HHS and the Congressional Research Service.States that opted to set up their own exchanges under the health law known as Obamacare paid an average $1,503 per enrollee. The federal exchange operating in 36 states averaged $647 in costs per enrollee, the report said.Ingrid Babri, an associate at the firm and co-author of the report, said she was surprised such data had not been calculated sooner. “It’s important for policy makers to know how much it costs each state to insure people,” she said.The five jurisdictions with the highest cost-per-enrollee costs were Hawaii ($23,899), District of Columbia ($12,467), North Dakota ($7,089), Delaware ($6,825) and Wyoming ($6,323), the report said. The District yesterday voted to apply a new tax on all health-related insurance products to help pay for its Obamacare exchange.Alyene Senger, a health research associate at The Heritage Foundation, said the latest federal data from late April shows the government has sent at least $5 billion to states to help build state health exchanges.“What’s unclear is if the federal government will recoup any of the millions of taxpayer dollars that have been wasted on botched state exchanges such as those in Oregon, Maryland and Massachusetts,” she said. “It’s also uncertain how much more it will cost to keep the state exchanges going or to transfer the systems onto the federal exchange.”http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/07/report-obamacare-exchanges-spend-average-922-per-enrollee/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialPosted 10th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  19. MAY9Reports: More Obama Lied About Care Cancellations, Premium Hikes On the Way, The Obama administration estimated that as many as 93 million Americans will lose their existing coverage under the new law,The Obamacare “winning streak” continues apace. Kaiser Health Newsreports on the increasing likelihood of more and more large employers dumping employees into Obamacare’s exchanges. An untold number of employees will discover that they can’t keep their plan, especially if they’re a high-risk, high-cost employee. The Obama administration estimated that as many as 93 million Americans will lose their existing coverage under the new law, despite what the president promised repeatedly. We wrote about “targeted dumping” back in 2011. Those concerns are now being realized:
     Can corporations shift workers with high medical costs from the company health plan into online insurance exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act? Some employers are considering it, say benefits consultants. “It’s all over the marketplace,” said Todd Yates, a managing partner at Hill, Chesson & Woody, a North Carolina benefits consulting firm. “Employers are inquiring about it and brokers and consultants are advocating for it.” Patients with preexisting medical conditions like diabetes drive health spending. But those who undergo expensive procedures such as organ transplants are a burden to the company as well. Since most big corporations are self-insured, shifting even one high-cost member out of the company plan could save the employer hundreds of thousands of dollars a year—while increasing the cost of claims absorbed by the marketplace policy by a similar amount. And the health law might not prohibit it, opening a door to potential erosion of employer-based coverage.
    The workers most likely to be subjected to this strategic abandonment are older and sicker individuals; in other words, they come with the highest price tag from an insurer’s perspective. How might an influx of that sort of consumer into the Obamacare exchanges impact premiums? More stories like this, perhaps?

    There’s a reason why insurers are pleading with the White House to reject regulations that would limit total expenditures in programs some have described as bailouts. Whether through bailout-style payments or sharply increased premiums, taxpayers will end up footing the bill for rising costs and outlays. Americans are already bracing for significant premium hikes heading into 2015, which have been forecast by insurance companiesbrokers, and even the administration. Many of the new rates will be announced this fall. More consumers will also receive cancellation notices informing them that their preferred plans are being terminated. Public opinion on Obamacare hasn’t budged, with polling remaining ugly on both the national level and within thecontext of key 2014 races. I’ll leave you with this surreal request from the state of Massachusetts, which is scrapping its failed Obamacare exchange. Surprise — they want more taxpayer money to do so. A lot more. And that’s on top of the huge sum they’ve already wasted:
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/05/09/reports-more-obamacare-cancellations-premium-hikes-on-the-way-n1836066

    Posted 9th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  20. MAY6Powerful: Gosnell Movie Producer Breaks Down Reading Grand Jury ReportIf you’re wondering why filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, and journalist Magdalena Segieda are launching the biggest crowd-funding campaign ever attempted to try and produce Gosnell: The Movie to expose late-term abortionist and convicted murderer Kermit Gosnell, this two-minute video will explain everything.For just a glimpse of what occurred in Kermit Gosnell’s ‘House of Horrors,’ McElhinney read a few excerpts from the case’s grand jury report, revealing two of Gosnell’s illegal third trimester abortions. She reads how Gosnell tried to pressure a young woman to abort her baby even after she changed her mind when learning the abortionist “burns” babies after they’re aborted. Unlike many young women that entered his clinic, this particular mother escaped and proceeded to give birth to a beautiful baby girl. The details eventually lead McElhinney to break down in tears. Watch the powerful moment here:Considering the troubling content of these reports and how Gosnell treated these precious babies as disposable trash, it’s no wonder McElhinney had to fight to get through them. I applaud her courage in sharing them, for these horrific stories need to be told.Seven days remain for these filmmakers to reach their $2.1 million mark to produce this important film. If you want to help them see their efforts to fruition, it’s as easy clicking this button.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2014/05/06/powerful-gosnell-movie-producer-breaks-down-reading-grand-jury-report-n1834138?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pmPosted 6th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  21. MAY6Obama Lied About care: FBI Investigating Oregon’s Meltdown, Nevadans Brace for Cancellations, Premium Spikes
    If you had Maryland in your “which state will abandon its insanely expensive Obamacare exchange next?” office pool, you’ve already seen the bad news: Massachusetts has clinched silver in the wasteful incompetence Olympics. In some sense, Maryland did beat Massachusetts to the punch, but Martin O’Malley’s crew decided to spend millions of additional money to adopt Connecticut’s exchange technology, rather than transitioning over the Healthcare.gov. Nitpicks aside, the mother of all failures remains Oregon, where the FBI has joined the investigation into that state’s now-defunct Obamacare marketplace:
    The FBI reportedly is probing the failed launch of Oregon’s ObamaCare insurance exchange, joining several other agencies looking into the multimillion-dollar program that was scrapped last month. The Oregonian and KATU first reported on the preliminary investigation. The law enforcement arm of the Department of Health and Human Services’ inspector general also is involved, according to The Oregonian. The state exchange, called Cover Oregon, stood out as perhaps the worst-run of all the ObamaCare exchanges. The state decided last month to abandon the system and default to the federally run insurance exchange, on HealthCare.gov. The Wall Street Journal reports that the FBI has interviewed several people as part of the inquiry. The Oregonian reported that the bureau held a 90-minute meeting with a former Republican lawmaker who detailed potential wrongdoing — including suspicions that the state showed the feds a misleading demonstration to keep money flowing.
    That’s probably not a development Oregon Democrats are too excited about. Gov. John Kitzhaber (D) oversaw the Cover Oregon Chernobyl and appears to havemisled the public about the extent to which he was aware of its imminent, $300 million collapse. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D) merely voted for the unpopular law, falsely reassuring concerned citizens that they would be able to keep their preferred plans and doctors. Both Kitzhaber and Merkley could be beatable this November — and Beaver State Republicans have a decent shot at retaking the Senate in Salem, too. Since we’re on the subject of Democrats’ 2013 “lie of the year,” the Las Vegas Review-Journal is reporting that 90,000 small business employees in Harry Reid’s state could be on the brink of receiving dreaded Obamacare cancellation letters this fall:
     Local business owners might be hoping the Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandates cover sticker shock. The law’s employer coverage mandate doesn’t take effect until 2015, but early plan renewals are starting to roll in. And for some businesses, the premium jumps are positively painful. Local insurance brokers are reporting spikes ranging from 35 percent to 120 percent on policies that renew from July to December. The increases are especially acute among employers with workforces made up of younger, healthier men. That’s because Obamacare prohibits offering lower rates to healthier groups. It also narrows the allowed premium gap between older and younger enrollees. “It’s like if there were no more safe-driver discounts with State Farm,” said local insurance broker Frank Nolimal of Assurance Ltd. “Everybody has the same rate, whether you have three DUIs, or you’re a (nondrinking) churchgoing Mormon.” The changes put as many as 90,000 policies across Nevada at risk of cancellation or nonrenewal this fall, said Las Vegas insurance broker William Wright, president of Chamber Insurance and Benefits. That’s more than three times the 25,000 enrollees affected in October, when Obamacare-compliant plans first hit the market.
    Who is in the crosshairs, and how are they likely to be affected?
     Some workers are at higher risk than others of losing company-sponsored coverage. Professional, white-collar companies such as law or engineering firms will bite the bullet and renew at higher prices because they need to compete for scarce skilled labor, Nolimal said. But moderately skilled or low-skilled people making $8 to $14 an hour working for landscaping businesses, fire-prevention firms or fencing companies could lose work-based coverage because the plans cost so much relative to salaries. Employees who keep their coverage might see leaner take-home pay, which could hurt the economy. Nolimal said one business client whose monthly premiums will rise from $160 to $340 in June plans to shift most of the increase onto his employees.
    Someone had better tell Gramps that the Koch brothers have somehow infiltrated his home state’s largest newspaper. Meanwhile, the Obamacare “winning streak” continues in places like Jeanne Shaheen’s New Hampshire and Mark Udall’sColorado — and the American people are about as excited as you might expect. I’ll leave you with conservative Senate candidate Joni Ernst giving Iowa voters a sense of how she feels about Obamacare:


    She’s a hog-castratin’, heat-packin’ mother and military veteran who’s hoping to take on a trial lawyer Democrat who doesn’t think much of farmers or Iowa’s well-liked Republican Senator. Those optics seem…favorable, no? Fun fact about this race, via Allahpundit: “If Ernst pulls the upset, she’ll be the first woman ever elected to Congress — either chamber — from Iowa. Gonna be some highlynuanced “war on women” messaging from Democrats there this fall.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/05/06/fbi-cover-oregon-n1833714Posted 6th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  22. MAY5Nine Obama Lied About Care Predictions That Have Come TrueIt directly affects the personal life of every American, and it controls or regulates a complex sector of the American economy that is slightly larger than the entire economy of France.If you guessed Obamacare, you’ve been paying attention for the past four years.Four years ago, many health policy analysts, including those at The Heritage Foundation, predicted some of the effects this law would have on Americans. These are all coming true.Here are nine of our predictions that have come to pass—and it’s not over yet.1. The individual mandate is an enforcement nightmare.As a candidate, President Obama worried that an individual mandate to buy insurance would be unenforceable. He changed his mind once he became president. This year—the first year that the mandate penalties are to be imposed—he has already started backtracking on the enforcement of the provision he signed into law.2. The law will create new disincentives to work.Between Obamacare’s higher taxes and its subsidies that drop off if you raise your income, there’s not a lot of incentive here to work harder and better your situation.3. The law, particularly the employer mandate, will impose new costs on businesses that undercut jobs and wages.The employer mandate has been delayed until 2015, but the uncertainty Obamacare has created—and its 18 new tax hikes—have put a huge dent in job creation.4. The law undermines competition and further consolidates health insurance markets.Heritage Foundation analysis of federal and state exchanges shows that the law has, in general, reduced competition and consolidated health insurance markets. Between 2013 and 2014, the number of insurers offering coverage on the individual markets in all 50 states has declined nationwide by 29 percent.5. The law guarantees major premium increases.As Heritage predicted, the average annual premiums for single and family coverage in 2014 are rising in the state and federal health insurance exchanges all around the country. In 11 states, premiums for 27-year-olds have more than doubled since 2013; in 13 states, premiums for 50-year-olds have increased more than 50 percent.>>> Get more details on all of these Obamacare effects6. The law discourages insurance enrollment among the young.The law’s insurance rules and new benefit mandates will make it cheaper for many younger Americans simply to remain uninsured and pay the penalty fine. It’s not surprising that young people have been staying away.7. The law’s Medicare savings would not financially strengthen Medicare.The law’s proponents originally promised that “savings” from Medicare changes would be spent simultaneously in two places: helping Medicare and expanding Obamacare. But money can be spent only once, so that didn’t work.8. The law’s Medicare changes will result in reduced benefits and threaten seniors’ access to care.The law’s impact is fairly straightforward: Fewer Medicare providers, reimbursed at rates progressively reduced over time, will create access problems for patients. Medicare cuts have been underway for several years now.9. The law compels taxpayers to fund abortion and weakens protections of the right of conscience.Obamacare mandates health plans that include coverage of abortion. It also spawned the Health and Human Services regulatory mandate that forces American employers to provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs. It is safe to say that four years ago, millions of Americans did not expect that the national health care law would become a vehicle for an aggressive government infringement of personal liberty or coerce Americans to fund medical procedures and drugs in direct violation of their ethical and religious convictions.Is it any wonder public opinion is against this debacle? It’s unfair, unworkable, and unaffordable. We need real health reform that puts patients back at the center and increaseschoice for Americans.http://blog.heritage.org/2014/05/05/9-obamacare-predictions-come-true/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbellPosted 5th May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  23. MAY1GREAT NEWS: OBAMA Lied About CARE’S ENROLLMENT NUMBERS ARE ONLY ABOUT 33 PERCENT BOGUSNo serious analyst believes the ObamaCare “signup” totals pushed by the White House are accurate.  The media makes a pretense of relaying these numbers as though they were valid data, when every single reporter knows they are not.  In this way, talking-point energy is generated; there’s lots of chatter about 7 million “signups” on April 1, or 8 million today, or whatever figure the Administration is pushing out, but the caveats are muttered in a very low voice… usually as a single sentence about how the Administration refuses to release the total of paid and valid ObamaCare policies sold, or their demographic breakdown.  Video news reports frequently forget to mention these qualifications at all.  Print reporters usually claim the total of paid policies is “unknown,” even though everyone knows the Department of Health and Human Services has the number.  If it was good news, they would of course release it immediately.Thanks to work by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, we have a better idea of why the Most Transparent Administration in History is guarding those figures as closely as Barack Obama’s activities on the night of September 11, 2012.  Previous estimates from the insurance industry held that 20 to 25 percent of the reported ObamaCare signups were unpaid and invalid, but the actual numbers from the federal exchange system turn out to be considerably worse:
    Data provided to the committee by every insurance provider in the health care law’s Federally Facilitated Marketplace (FFM) shows that, as of April 15, 2014, only 67 percent of individuals and families that had selected a health plan in the federally facilitated marketplace had paid their first month’s premium and therefore completed the enrollment process. Nationwide, only 25 percent of paid enrollees are ages 18 to 34. The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations today invited the leaders of some of the nation’s largest insurance providers and their trade groups to testify at a hearing, “PPACA Enrollment and the Insurance Industry,” on Wednesday, May 7, 2014, at 10:15 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building.House Energy and Commerce Committee members sent letters requesting specific enrollment data, including the number of individuals who have paid their first month’s premium and demographic breakdowns. The committee has compiled the data that provides a snapshot of the true enrollment picture as of April 15, 2014, after the official end of the open enrollment period. Due to the administration’s repeated and unilateral extensions and changes, as well as the fact that many insurers have reported that individuals will still have time to pay their first month’s premium, the committee plans to ask the insurers in the federally facilitated marketplace to provide an enrollment update by May 20, 2014.On April 17, 2014, President Obama declared the success of his law, claiming that 8 million Americans had signed up for health insurance, but data from the insurance providers reveals that the president’s figure is largely misleading. As of April 15, 2014, insurers informed the committee that only 2.45 million had paid their first month’s premium for coverage obtained through the federally facilitated marketplace. While the administration has relied on questionable nationwide figures to boast the law’s success, the state-by-state breakdown compiled by the committee underscores the serious problems facing some states.The Committee makes the necessary footnotes about this figure: it doesn’t include the state exchanges – two of which, California and New York, cover very large populations – and the utter chaos caused by Obama’s unilateral tinkering with his “signature achievement” mean it will still be a while before the final numbers come in.  The big questions would therefore be: Are payment rates on the state exchanges substantially higher than the federal 67 percent rate, and do the last-minute “surge” of applications received in the final days before the extended deadline expirted have a higher payment rate?All indications are that the state exchanges have been a mixed bag.  Some of them are working more smoothly than the federal system, while others – like the recently deceased Cover Oregon system, upon which $305 million of our money was wasted – are in much worse shape.  Is the shockingly low federal payment rate a result of system errors, or is it because many of the enrollees simply didn’t send in their first premium payment?  (Is there actually some number of them who don’t think they have to pay, because ObamaCare is supposed to be “free?”)  It seems unlikely that the state payment rates will be good enough to drag the overall total anywhere near 80 percent overall.As for the “surge” enrollments, I would think it likely they have a worse percentage of follow-through payments, both deliberately and as a result of glitches in the over-stressed system.  The people sliding in under the wire, right before the illegally rewritten deadlines expired, by definition were not as serious about obtaining coverage as people who signed up early and paid as quickly as possible.That demographic breakdown isn’t looking too good, either.  As Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner recalls, the Administration was looking for 40 percent of enrollees to come from the “young sucker” demographic of 18 to 34, paying exorbitant premiums (with plump taxpayer subsidies) to cover the cost of insuring older, less healthy customers.  The House Energy and Commerce study found only 25 percent of paid and valid policies were sold through the federal exchanges to that age group.  The demographic death spiral is going to play out state-by-state anyway, no matter which exchange the policies were purchased through; some states may end up with a sustainable mixture of young and old customers, while others do not.It’s a stunning national scandal that we have to speculate about these figures at all.  The biggest government program in modern history operates under a shroud of secrecy for purely political reasons, because its defenders are terrified that the onslaught of bad news would build energy for repeal and tip the balance of tight 2014 congressional elections.  It cannot be stressed enough that President Obama and his people are deliberately lying about the number of ObamaCare enrollments – they know what the true number of paid policies is.I’ve always suspected they would sit on the real data until the actual number of paid and valid enrollments got somewhere near the 7.1 million number Obama announced during his “mission accomplished” speech on April 1, at which point their media pals will quietly concede the April 1 numbers were false, but it doesn’t really matter any more.  As with every other Obama scandal, the deceptions needed to “win” a news cycle quickly become old stories no one is supposed to care about, once their usefulness has expired.The House Energy and Commerce Committee notes that they compiled their figures by doing exactly what the Administration told them to do:For months, the committee and members of the press have urged the administration to provide rudimentary details about enrollment under the law, including information regarding the makeup of the risk pool and who had actually paid for their health care plans. Administration officials repeatedly insisted they were incapable of collating that data and that the insurance providers are the only ones with those details. The committee followed the administration’s suggestion and went directly to the insurance providers.“In a sad reversal away from its vows of transparency, the Obama administration, from inside the Oval Office on down, has gone to extraordinary lengths to keep basic details of the health law from the public. Tired of receiving incomplete pictures of enrollment in the health care law, we went right to the source and found that the administration’s recent declarations of success may be unfounded,” commented full committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI). “We need a complete picture of how this law is working. We will continue to strive for transparency and hold the administration accountable for this law’s shortcomings and broken promises.”Chairman Upton is being far too polite by calling this a “sad reversal” from Obama’s vows of transparency – when has he actually delivered any?  Opacity, deception, and stonewalling are standard operating procedure on everything from Operation Fast and Furious, to Benghazi, to this ObamaCare propaganda.  Tomorrow’s headlines are the only battlefield this Administration cares about.  They trust their media allies to clean up behind them, bayoneting wounded deceptions to ensure nothing of yesterday’s narrative survives as the front line moves relentlessly forward.If the percentages computed by this survey of insurance providers holds true after state and “surge” data are added, the actual number of valid ObamaCare policies as of April 1 would be less than 5.5 million.  We’re also still obliged to estimate how many of these folks were previously uninsured, but if the 67 percent rate holds up for them too – insurance industry experts have always maintained that the previously uninsured have a worse rate for following through with initial payments – we could end up with less than a million previously uninsured buying coverage.  That’s the number President Obama would have been “celebrating” if he hadn’t been lying when he said “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period.”  That’s what these titanic sums of taxpayer money, coupled with severe damage to both American health care and the Constitutional relationship between citizens and the State, were expended to “achieve.”  And the people who forced all this upon us still won’t be honest with the American people about what they have done. http://www.humanevents.com/2014/05/01/great-news-obamacares-enrollment-numbers-are-only-about-33-percent-bogus/Posted 1st May 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  24. APR25CO Court Halts Obama Lied About Care Abortion Pill Mandate for Catholic Campus OutreachA Colorado federal court ordered to halt the Obamacare abortion pill mandate for the Fellowship of Catholic University Students due to the statute’s direct violation of its sincere religious beliefs.The group filed the lawsuit in December explaining: FOCUS holds, as a matter of religious conviction, that it is immoral for FOCUS to intentionally participate in, pay for, train others to engage in, enable or otherwise support or facilitate access to contraceptives, sterilization, abortion, abortion-inducing drugs, devices, and services.
    Plaintiffs claimed the mandate therefore directly violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which forbids the government from “substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability.”They also demanded their Free Exercise, Establishment, and Free Speech rights be respected per the First Amendmentof the U.S. Constitution and called into play their guaranteed liberties of due process and equal protection under the Fifth Amendment.In 1998, the year FOCUS co-founder Curtis Martin launched the group, he met Pope John Paul II. According to their website, the Pope listened to Curtis’ vision for the Catholic campus outreach and “simply told Curtis, ‘Be soldiers.’” Little did he know how true to life the imperative statement would become.The Catechism of the Catholic Church explicitly condemns abortion or taking any part in assisting an abortion: Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception….Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life….More than two dozen catholic organizations have filed suit decrying the unconstitutional nature of the Obamacare abortion pill mandate.The federal court’s preliminary injunction will stand until the Supreme Court makes a ruling in the Hobby Lobby case. The decision is expected by summer.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/sarahjeanseman/2014/04/25/denver-court-halts-obamacare-abortion-pill-mandate-for-catholic-uni-n1829404


    Posted 25th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  25. APR23Aerotek Employees Witness Major Jump in Health Care CostsWe continue to hear more stories about the Affordable Care Act gone wrong. Tonight, employees with Aerotek tell us they were notified their health care costs were sky rocketing.

    Aerotek is a contractor for Toyota. One employee tells us the premium for his family’s bronze plan is going from around $50 a week to $250 a week.

    His family is now scrambling to figure out how they’ll make ends meet. They tried to look at plans on healthcare.gov, but open enrollment closed a few weeks ago.

    “Whenever you’re starting out there you know you aren’t making a ton of money, you’ll make good money but not a ton of money. And $200 a week, that’s a hefty chunk. I don’t care who you are. $200 a week is a hefty chunk. That’s a house payment, that’s a car payment, that’s all these bills grouped together. So, I don’t know what’s gonna happen.”

    We’re told the change is happening because Toyota, which previously paid more than 60 percent of Aerotek’s health care costs, is no longer allowed to cover for it’s partner company under the Affordable Care Act.

    Some employees tell us they hope Toyota or Aerotek pay the difference. We’ll continue to seek out more details and report them as they become available.
    http://www.tristatehomepage.com/story/d/story/aerotek-employees-witness-major-jump-in-health-car/21330/o3tPMms2lEuRHns2LeUccwPosted 23rd April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  26. APR21Surprise! Substandard Care ( We Warn You This Would Happen) Doctors Forced to Rush Patients Through Appointments Thanks to Obama Lied About CareSince before Obamacare was signed in 2010, conservatives have warned the law would turn doctors’ offices into DMV style clinics with physicians rapidly rushing through patients in order to survive under the legislation. Further, grave warnings were given about doctors retiring early due to Obamacare making the industry too expensive to practice in. Four years later, 6 out of 10 doctors say they’ll be retiring early and now, patients are being rushed through appointments, including at the offices of specialists. Joan Eisenstodt didn’t have a stopwatch when she went to see an ear, nose and throat specialist recently, but she is certain the physician was not in the exam room with her for more than three or four minutes.”He looked up my nose, said it was inflamed, told me to see the nurse for a prescription and was gone,” said the 66-year-old Washington, D.C., consultant, who was suffering from an acute sinus infection.When she started protesting the doctor’s choice of medication, “He just cut me off totally,” she said. “I’ve never been in and out from a visit faster.”These days, stories like Eisenstodt’s are increasingly common. Patients — and physicians — say they feel the time crunch as never before as doctors rush through appointments as if on roller skates to see more patients and perform more procedures to make up for flat or declining reimbursements.It’s not unusual for primary care doctors’ appointments to be scheduled at 15-minute intervals. Some physicians who work for hospitals say they’ve been asked to see patients every 11 minutes.And the problem may worsen as millions of consumers who gained health coverage through the Affordable Care Act begin to seek care — some of whom may have seen doctors rarely, if at all, and have a slew of untreated problems.
    Because liberals don’t seem to understand the concept of supply vs. demand, they failed to recognize early on that an influx of new patients without new doctors would cause a shortage and lessen the quality of care. Well, here we are.Obamacare was sold on the idea that the government shouldn’t come between a patient and their doctor. Further, people were told the law would get them more treatment and expanded care, not less. Primary care and specialty care offices are already seeing the devastating effects of government meddling in the healthcare system. We’re seeing exactly the opposite of what was promised on every single level.

    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2014/04/21/surprise-doctors-rushing-through-patients-in-their-offices-n1826962Posted 21st April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  27. APR21THE TRUTH BEHIND OBAMA Lied About CARE’S PHONY 8 MILLION SIGNUPShe U.S. media, following a carefully prepared script from the White House, have declared that Obamacare is now a total and complete success because 8 million people have signed up for health insurance through government-run exchanges.The tone of the partisan victory cries is unmistakable.
    The total exceeded the initial forecast by 1 million people and capped a notable comeback after a disastrous debut last fall gave rise to predictions the law would collapse in its maiden year,” the Los Angeles Times gleefully reported on April 18.  “The health law, often called Obamacare, instead has brought about the largest increase in insurance coverage in the United Sates in half a century since Medicare and Medicaid were created.”The equally jubilant New York Times, however, did concede that the White House and its media allies weren’t being totally forthcoming about their statistics, although the concession came eight paragraphs into its lead story.  “The administration did not release two other crucial statistics that would help determine the success of the law:  the number of people among the eight million who bought insurance for the first time and the number who paid for their premiums.”Well, that’s an understatement if ever there were one!Polling data has revealed that a substantial portion of the 8 million signups have come from two sources:  previously insured people who had their “substandard” private policies cancelled by government edicts and were forced to buy Obamacare policies to replace them… and people signing up for free coverage through Medicaid.Last December, the Associated Press estimated that 4.7 million Americans lost their coverage due to Obamacare rules.In other words:  Obama rigged the system so millions of people would have their insurance policies cancelled… and now is bragging that those same millions have purchased the only alternative now on offer, his government-run plans.It would be like a stickup man robbing you of your wallet and then bragging that he’s a humanitarian because he’s willing to loan you some money… at 25% interest.The truth that the U.S. media are carefully covering up is that Obamacare is horrendously expensive for what you get.A young acquaintance of mine just moved to New York to begin his first job with a wife and new baby.  For a first job right out of college, he’s lucky:  He is earning $60,000 a year.  After taxes, he takes home $3,900 a month… and, of course, in New York City his rent is sky-high.My young friend was shocked to discover, however, that his share of his employer-provided health insurance would be $800 per month – with his employer paying two-thirds of the premium.  And that’s the lowest tier offered.Shopping for alternatives in the marketplace, he found that the cheapest alternative to his employer’s Obamacare policy is… $1,100 per month.This is the reality of what Obamacare really means to ordinary, working Americans not eligible for government “subsidies”:  a massive new expense they can’t afford.But that only tells half the story.  Many Obamacare plans are just as much “catastrophe” plans as the ones they are replacing:  Bronze and Silver policies have high deductibles of $6,500 or more… and family caps as high as $12,500.  In other words, families will still pay thousands of dollars out of pocket for many health services.When the reality of that finally sinks in, many consumers will stop paying their premiums… especially when, as many experts predict, they increase substantially after this November’s elections.In 2010, my family’s policy through Blue Cross cost us $350 per month with, admittedly, a high deductible of $5,000 per person and $10,000 per family.Thanks to the government’s collusion with the insurance companies, which have raised premiums by about 25% a year ever since Obamacare passed, the same policy now costs $850 per month.  We are “lucky” in that our policy is “grandfathered” and we don’t have to buy Obamacare – yet.  But the same identical coverage, bought through Obamacare, would cost us $1,580 per month.In British Columbia, Canada, the same type of coverage costs $133 per month for a family of three or more.People outside of the U.S. are often baffled by the opposition of ordinary Americans towards Obama and his signature legislative accomplishment.They don’t realize that the law was forced through Congress through legislative subterfuges… that not a single Republican voted for it… that even Democrats admitted they didn’t know what was in the law (“we have to pass it to find out what’s in it,” as Nancy Pelosi famously put it)… that the law has been overwhelmingly unpopular from the beginning… and that it’s been, in essence, one lie and broken promise after another.When Obama told the American people 29 separate times that “if you like your health care plan, you can keep it,” and “if you like your doctor and hospital, you can keep them,” we now know he was flat-out lying.Obama and his insurance company co-conspirators knew that most people would have their insurance policies cancelled, whether they liked them or not, and would be forced to buy overpriced Obamacare policies.That’s why the White House refuses to release the statistics that really tell the truth about Obamacare:  how many people signing up previously had insurance but lost it.In the end, the media can only spin this story for so long.  Reality is going to bite, big time.Obamacare premiums are going to skyrocket, and soon, and people like my friend, struggling to make ends meet, will find that their Obamacare policies are their single biggest expense outside of housing.That is why the Democrats are about to face electoral defeat in November, when the Republicans regain control of both houses of Congress.Then the long, hard work of repairing the damage Obamacare has done to the U.S. healthcare system will begin.  The media’s victory cries are premature.http://www.humanevents.com/2014/04/21/the-truth-behind-obamacares-phony-8-million-signups/Posted 21st April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  28. APR21GAO REPORT DETAILS OBAMA Lied About CARE SHAKEDOWN




    There are many ways in which the Obama Administration benefits from a sycophantic media.  One of the biggest is the way media memory banks are flushed and rebooted every couple of months, preventing Americans (especially the fabled Low Information Voters, who pay only cursory attention to the news) from developing any sense of historical memory about what this Administration has done.  With a few exceptions so huge that they just wouldn’t fit in the Memory Hole – most notably Obama’s “if you like your plan, you can keep your plan” lie – everything happens in a vacuum where Obama and his agenda are concerned.  Every day is Day One of the Obama presidency.This was especially evident when the media allowed Obama to take his absurd “victory lap” on April Fool’s Day, touting the alleged success of ObamaCare in reaching its 7 million enrollment target.  For one thing, the original enrollment target was double that amount; 7 million was the result of some hasty goalpost-moving after the Affordable Care Act was passed.  Also, the media didn’t ask (or invite its audience to ask) the most cursory questions about the number touted by Team Obama, such as how many of those “enrollments” were actually paid and valid insurance policies.
    rucially, the media’s aggressive shredding of inconvenient history kept it from putting ObamaCare’s enrollment “achievement” in any sort of larger context whatsoever.  The vast majority of those “enrollments” were people whose previously satisfactory health care plans were destroyed by ObamaCare; as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) put it, government agents busted their car windows, then other government agents came along to sell them new windows, while the President touted the success of the Department of Window Repair.  Also, the “success” of this operation relied heavily upon the little detail that failure to buy the product was against the law.  We sold 7 million units of a product people are legally required to purchase!  Yay!And then you’ve got to consider the amount of money spent on advertising this product, which is absolutely staggering.  As the April 1 deadline approached, the Administration spent a lot of time whining about how people didn’t know about ObamaCare or understand how it works, with the unspoken assumption that they didn’t understand they would be required to pay a stiff fine if they didn’t buy a policy.  That “feature” of the plan had to be advertised very delicately, so as not to inflame public anger against the massively unpopular ACA, especially among young people.  But all of that public ignorance certainly wasn’t due to a lack of money spent on boosting ObamaCare.  Indeed, the Administration’s complaints were actually another indictment of its competence.  They spent $684 million of our tax dollars pushing ObamaCare at federal and state levels… but by the White House’s own admission, none of it mattered as much as President Obama’s desperate eleventh-hour pitch on a comedy website.And even that gigantic expenditure wasn’t enough, because in one of those Administration scandals that seems to be constantly simmering on the back burner, outgoing Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius shook down the very industries she regulates for extra cash and resources to promote ObamaCare, funneled into one of those non-profit groups the IRS seems so keenly interested in… when they’re not Obama’s political allies, of course.So while Tea Party and pro-life groups were getting dragged into spider holes and cocooned with red tape by the politicized Internal Revenue Service, Sebelius was making phone calls to corporations she had make-or-break regulatory power over, and encouraging them to slip some money to the Obama-allied nonprofit group Enroll America.  On Sunday, the New York Times reported on new details emerging from a government report on this unusual arrangement:The Government Accountability Office provided new details on Sunday of how the Obama administration raised money from outside organizations to promote enrollment in health insurance under the health care law.Republicans said such solicitations were meant to circumvent limits on government spending imposed by Congress. But in a report to Congress, the accountability office did not give a legal opinion on the propriety of the fund-raising. Administration officials said it was legal. Under federal law, they said, the secretary of health and human services can encourage support for nonprofits that promote public health.And under ObamaCare, virtually everything that happens in America is now tied to “public health.”  The new ObamaCare-enriched iteration of Big Government has given itself nearly unlimited power to move resources between the State and its Little Partners in a large sector of the economy.  Give it a couple of years, and virtually any “request” the government makes of those Little Partners can be justified as a matter of “public health.”  It is becoming very difficult to tell where the State ends, and “private” industry begins.Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, “contacted the chief executive officers of five organizations to solicit support for one outside entity, Enroll America,” which ran a national campaign to help people sign up for insurance, the report said. Ms. Sebelius has announcedthat she plans to leave her post.Specifically, the report said, Ms. Sebelius “requested financial support for Enroll America from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and H&R Block.” She also requested “nonfinancial support, such as technical assistance, from Ascension Health, Johnson & Johnson and Kaiser, which consists of the Kaiser Foundation Health Plans and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.”Interesting that Sebelius announced her retirement right before this report was released.  I can already hear the White House and its good friends in the media singing the “It’s Old News, Let’s More Forward, What Difference Does It Make?” chorus in unison.It apparently wasn’t just the HHS secretary leaning on these corporations for “donations,” either:Health and Human Services officials told investigators that they were not aware of any federal employees outside their agency who had solicited funds on behalf of Enroll America.However, the report says a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation employee told investigators of a 2012 conversation in which a White House official “indicated a hope that R.W.J.F. would provide a significant financial contribution to support” Enroll America.The report identifies the official as the deputy assistant to the president for health policy, but does not give her name, Jeanne M. Lambrew.The foundation said the White House had estimated that groups like Enroll America would need $30 million. It said it had made grants to Enroll America totaling $13 million, but denied they were in response to the secretary’s call.Well, of course they did.  Everyone knows how this game is played.  Speak up now, and something bad might happen to you.  It doesn’t have to take the form of mob-style leg-breaking threats to crush a business with regulations, or investigate a foundation into IRS oblivion, either.  A lot of these organizations are all-in on ObamaCare; no matter how badly it fails, they stand to lose enormous investments and income streams if it gets repealed, and they don’t care how much of the tab taxpayers are left holding.  Leaning on the Little Partners for outside money and in-kind assistance will get easier as the ObamaCare monster grows.  We’re up to two and a half trillion in spending on a program that was sold to taxpayers with a mere $900 billion price tag.  Nobody profiting from that gravy train will do anything to derail it, especially if they made big sacrifices to get it rolling.It remains to be seen whether all of this will add up to any sort of prosecution, especially since Sebelius is riding off into the sunset after managing the greatest debacle in the history of the Internet.  Newsmax notes that Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), one of the senators who requested this GAO report, used to say the Sebelius shakedown was “arguable an even bigger issue” than Iran-Contra, but now the New York Times quotes him saying merely that he hopes Sebelius’ successor “will not ask the entities she regulates to support the president’s allies.”It’s not corruption if the people who write (and re-write) the rules make it legal, right?  Let’s have another three cheers for a $2.5 trillion program that spent north of $700 million, some of it squeezed out of hyper-regulated industries by the woman who regulated them, in order to sign up a net 1.5 million uninsured Americans, under the threat of legal penalties if they refused the sales pitch.http://www.humanevents.com/2014/04/21/gao-report-details-obamacare-shakedown/Posted 21st April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  29. APR18Only four percent of Americans are newly insured this year, according to a Gallup poll released Thursday. Even more interesting, is the fact that nearly half of the newly insured chose to get their insurance outside of the Obama Lied About Care exchanges:
     These findings are based on interviewing with more than 20,000 U.S. adults, aged 18 and older, conducted as part of Gallup Daily tracking from March 4-April 14. Gallup asked those who have health insurance if their policy is new for 2014, and if so, whether they had insurance last year and if they got their new insurance through a federal or state health exchange.Overall, 11.8% of U.S. adults say they got a new health insurance policy in 2014. One-third of this group, or 4% nationally, say they did not have insurance in 2013. Another 7.5% got a new policy this year that replaced a previous policy. The rest either did not respond or were uncertain about their previous insurance status.The key figure is the 4% who are newly insured in 2014, which most likely represents Americans’ response to the individual mandate requirement the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This estimate of the newly insured broadly aligns with the reduction Gallup has seen in the national uninsured rate from 2013 to the first days of April 2014. However, the calculation of the newly insured does not take into account those who may have been insured in 2013 but not in 2014.The ACA envisioned that the new healthcare exchanges would be the main place where uninsured Americans would get their insurance this year, but it appears that a sizable segment of the newly insured Americans used another mechanism. These sources presumably include employee policies, Medicaid, and other private policies not arranged through exchanges.Interesting. So when is Obama’s vision of his law providing healthcare for millions of uninsured Americans supposed to come to fruition? It’s seem even when the White House makes something mandatory, extends the deadline for months, and fines individuals for not complying, it still can’t seem to get the result intended.http://townhall.com/tipsheet/sarahjeanseman/2014/04/18/poll-only-4-of-us-adults-are-newly-insured-half-choose-obamacare-alternative-n1825827Posted 18th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  30. APR18Dobson wins temporary ObamaCare exemptionDOBSON WINS TEMPORARY OBAMACARE EXEMPTIONAP: “Christian radio broadcaster James Dobson has won a temporary injunction preventing the federal government from requiring his ministry to include the morning-after pill and other emergency contraception in its health insurance. A federal judge in Denver issued the injunction Thursday. Dobson sued in December, saying the Affordable Care Act mandate to provide the contraception violates the religious beliefs of his Colorado Springs-based ministry, called Family Talk. The U.S. Supreme Court is considering similar challenges from Hobby Lobby and other employers. Dobson is founder and president of Family Talk, which has a nationally syndicated radio show, newsletter and website. The lawsuit says the ministry has 28 full-time employees. He’s best known as founder of the conservative Focus on the Family ministry. He left that group and launched Family Talk in 2010.”[Flashback – From Dobson’s original announcement of his challenge: “I believe in the rule of law, and it has been my practice since I was in college to respect and honor those in authority over us. It is my desire to do so now. However, this assault on the sanctity of human life takes me where I cannot go. I WILL NOT pay the surcharge for abortion services. The amount of the surcharge is irrelevant. To pay one cent for the killing of babies is egregious to me, and I will do all I can to correct a government that lies to me about its intentions and then tries to coerce my acquiescence with extortion. It would be a violation of my most deeply held convictions to disobey what I consider to be the principles in Scripture. The Creator will not hold us guiltless if we turn a deaf ear to the cries of His innocent babies. So come and get me if you must, Mr. President. I will not bow before your wicked regulation.”]http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/18/dobson-wins-temporary-obamacare-exemption/Posted 18th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  31. APR18This thing is working’? Widows of Alabama county workers dropped from health plans.




    Obama touts rising enrollment in ObamaCare and declares “this thing is working,” one Alabama county has reported another negative side effect from the law — widows of county workers getting dropped from their insurance. A report by Huntsville-based WHNT said that more than a dozen widows of retired Madison County employees lost their coverage earlier this year. They originally had been covered under the county’s self-insured plan. But, according to WHNT, officials learned that it would have been too expensive to keep providing that coverage and comply with the Affordable Care Act’s coverage mandates. The county instead joined a statewide network that dozens of county governments already are in. That plan, though, does not offer coverage to husbands and wives when their government employee spouses die. WHNT reported that one county commissioner is trying to restore the insurance for widows of county workers, though it’s unclear whether he’ll be successful. “What I’m trying to do is get this coverage back to them,” Madison County Commissioner Roger Jones said. “A lot of these people are on fixed incomes. Some of them are living on Social Security and very little else, and health insurance is very important to them.” The widows reportedly still get 18 months of Cobra coverage once their old insurance expires. The Madison County case comes as the Obama administration aggressively steps up its defense of the law and its performance. At a surprise press conference on Thursday, Obama reported that 8 million people have signed up on the federal and state insurance exchanges. “This thing is working,” Obama said, adding: “The repeal debate is and should be over.” The 8 million figure is a marked improvement over sign-up figures in late 2013, when the exchange websites were emerging from the disastrous launch in October. Still, the administration has not broken down the numbers to get at the heart of how many people really have obtained coverage under the law. Many people were dropped from their old insurance policies last year, and then went into the exchanges. The administration has not said how many of the 8 million were previously insured, and how many were previously uninsured — those figures would help paint a picture of the net gain in coverage. The administration also has not said how many of the 8 million have paid their first month’s premium, and technically are enrolled. Republicans bristled at the president’s tone in the White House briefing room Thursday afternoon. While the president cites the millions gaining coverage and new protections under the law, Republicans note that many also have lost their old policies despite being told they wouldn’t. “While the President repeatedly pats himself on the back over the number of people that were forced to sign up for his insurance scheme, millions of Americans are experiencing real and significant repercussions,” Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., said in a statement. “The President has now taken to mocking those that point out the negative consequences. The impacts are very real. “It’s clear that the President remains totally focused on coverage instead of care. He is either ignoring reports from across the country — or he isn’t hearing them. Either way, he is out of touch with Americans who have lost their doctor, had their insurance cancelled and watched their premiums spike all because of this failing law.”http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/18/widows-alabama-county-workers-dropped-from-health-plans/Posted 18th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  32. APR17Obama taunts GOP, takes nationally televised victory lap on Obama Lied About Care






    Obama said Thursday more than 8 million Americans selected a private health plan through his signature health overhaul, topping the most recent tally by a half-million people and offering the president an opportunity to blast Republicans for criticizing his efforts.
    “This thing is working,” he said, cautioning his law will not solve everything that ails the country’s health care system.PHOTOS: Armed and liberal: Left-leaning celebrities who are pro-gunHe then openly criticized GOP lawmakers for trying to repeal his law.“They still can’t bring themselves to admit that the Affordable Care Act is working,” he said.Republicans say Mr. Obama’s enthusiasm is fleeting, because a portion of Americans who’s signed up have not paid their first premiums and are not actually enrolled.
    They also are betting that consumers will see higher premiums, narrower doctor networks and higher out-of-pocket costs in the months to come.

    Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/17/obama-taunts-gop-takes-nationally-televised-victor/#ixzz2zAziw9j9
    Follow us: @washtimes on TwitterPosted 17th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  33. APR17Uninsured Face Tax Penalty Alongside Obama Lied About Care DeadlineUninsured Face Tax Penalty As ACA Deadline…Uninsured Face Tax Penalty As ACA Deadline Arrives
    The tax for choosing not to enroll in Obamacare begins at only $95 per person or one percent of an individual’s income. However, this tax increases over the years, reaching $695 per person or 2.5 percent of an individual’s income by 2016.http://townhall.com/video/uninsured-face-tax-penalty-as-aca-deadline-arrives-n1825368?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pmPosted 17th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  34. APR17Welcome to Obama’s America, where a government takeover of health care means you have to call your congressman to get the medicine you need to function.
    A New York woman suffering from a neurological disease that has required four brain surgeries has been dropped by all of her doctors and denied medications due to her Obamacare plan.
    “I’ve been vomiting. I lost 22 pounds. The pain is unbearable,” said Margaret Figueroa, 49, on Wednesday. “My medication helps me function during the day.”
    Figueroa suffers from a disease known as Arnold Chiari Malformation and Syringomyelia. Even though the Obamacare plan she purchased assured her that she was covered, her insurance card was denied when she went to fill her prescriptions. Then she learned that none of her doctors accept her Obamacare plan. Figueroa says she cannot find a doctor who accepts her Obamacare plan; indeed, there are only six doctors in all of Staten Island who take her plan, none of whom she’s been able to get appointments with.Figueroa’s congressman, Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY), intervened to help her obtain some of her vital prescriptions. Grimm says he’s already received calls from at least a dozen Staten Island residents facing the same problem with Obamacare’s “narrow networks” – extreme restrictions to doctor and hospital access imposed by Obamacare.
    “Even though the insurance company cashed your check, it doesn’t mean it (the policy) has been implemented,” said Grimm at a Wednesday press conference with Figueroa. “That’s the problem – that the back end of Obamacare hasn’t been fully built. You can go on the front end of an application and look at a list of plans, but what they don’t tell you is that many of those plans don’t have doctors yet.”Well, Obama promised “hope” and “change.” The “change” is that you can’t get a doctor or meds and the “hope” is that you have a Republican congressman who’ll help you get

    http://www.rightwingnews.com/obamacare/brain-surgery-patient-can-only-get-meds-with-help-from-congressman-because-of-obamacare/Posted 17th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  35. APR17Alabama widows kicked off of insurance because of Obama Lied About CareWHNT in Alabama brings us another example of the law of unintended consequences. Widows of former Madison County employees had continued health-insurance coverage thanks to the self-insurance policies carried by Madison County — or at least they did until January 1. The imposition of ObamaCare coverage mandates forced the county to drop its coverage or pay an additional $25 million a year.  The end result? Widows got kicked out of their coverage (via Daniel Halper at TWS):

    The widows who were dropped in January had always been covered under the county’s old self-insured health care plan. But officials told WHNT News 19 that the program had to be abandoned when they were informed that new mandates in Obamacare would amount to an extra $25 million per year, money that Madison County Chairman Dale Strong said the county simply doesn’t have. Instead, commissioners decided to join a statewide insurance network that 50 other county governments also participate in.
    “In joining with this large group, it does not provide for spouses when their husbands die or their wives die,” said Strong. “So that’s where we are, how do we do this.”
    Commissioners reviewed their options at Wednesday’s work session, but a clear answer has yet to emerge. Jones said he’ll continue to push for reinstatement, but Chairman Strong said other factors will have to be considered.WHNT ends with this curious note:
    Widows of retired county employees still receive 18 months of Cobra coverage after their regular health insurance coverage expires.That’s true, but only if the plan is still in place, and only if they can afford to pay the full price for it. If the plan no longer exists, and the new plan doesn’t include eligibility for spouses or widows, it’s not clear how COBRA would work for them. Even if they had access to a different plan through COBRA, it will be both more expensive overall and much more expensive for the widows as COBRA requires consumers to pay the full retail price for those plans. (I used COBRA for nearly 18 months myself after leaving my former career to work full time in new media.) If they are on fixed incomes already and on the edge of poverty, as these commissioners note, then COBRA will be nothing more than a bitter joke to these widows.

    This is, of course, an anecdote involving just one county and a few dozen widows. How many other counties — and businesses — had to make this same decision? How many other widows got the shaft this year?
    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/17/video-alabama-widows-kicked-off-of-insurance-because-of-obamacare/Posted 17th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  36. APR16CBO: ObamaCare premiums and healthcare spending will rise by less than expected, because…lower payment rates for providers, narrower networks of providers, and tighter management of their subscribers’ use of health care than employment-based plans do





    1.CBO found that individual policies on those marketplaces have narrower networks of doctors and lower reimbursement rates for health-care providers than is typical of employer-sponsored health plans.

    2.As a result, CBO expects the federal government to spend about $165 billion less over the next decade on subsidizing health-insurance plans for lower earners than the office projected two months ago. Total spending on those subsidies is projected at $1.032 trillion between 2015 and 2024.




    The Congressional Budget Office released a report this morning that has received a lot of attention from ObamaCare’s many staunch media advocates because it essentially concludes that the cost of expanding coverage through the exchanges will be billions less than the CBO was predicting just a couple of months ago. That’s great news for the president’s crowning legislative achievement, right?
    Health-insurance premiums for plans sold on the Affordable Care Act’s exchanges will be lower than previously expected, according to a report released Monday by the Congressional Budget Office.
    The findings, by Congress’s nonpartisan spending analysts, result largely from the fact that insurance companies have redesigned plans on the government-run exchanges to shave costs. CBO found that individual policies on those marketplaces have narrower networks of doctors and lower reimbursement rates for health-care providers than is typical of employer-sponsored health plans.
    As a result, CBO expects the federal government to spend about $165 billion less over the next decade on subsidizing health-insurance plans for lower earners than the office projected two months ago. Total spending on those subsidies is projected at $1.032 trillion between 2015 and 2024. The report was part of a broader federal spending update released Monday.Did you catch that? Let’s go straight to the report for a closer look:
    A crucial factor in the current revision was an analysis of  the characteristics of plans offered through the exchanges in 2014. Previously, CBO and JTC had expected that  those plans’ characteristics would closely resemble the characteristics of employment-based plans throughout the projection period. However, the plans being offered through the exchanges this year appear to have, in general, lower payment rates for providers, narrower networks of providers, and tighter management of their subscribers’ use of health care than employment-based plans do. …
    The lower exchange premiums and revisions to the other characteristics of insurance plans that are incorporated into CBO and JCT’s current estimates have small effects on the agencies’ projections of exchange enrollment. Although lower premiums will tend to increase enrollment, narrower networks and more tightly managed benefits will tend to reduce the attractiveness of plans and thereby decrease enrollment. The net effect on projected enrollment in the exchanges is small.In a nutshell, the CBO initially made its projections under the assumption that the plans offered through the exchange would be largely similar in terms of benefits to the sorts of plans being offered by employers — but that definitely isn’t going to be the case. The narrowed networks that insurers are using to keep costs down and the lower reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals are things that neither consumers nor providers tend to like in the long run — which will likely mean more strain on the system and higher costs further down the road.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/15/cbo-obamacare-premiums-and-healthcare-spending-will-rise-by-less-than-expected-because/Posted 16th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  37. APR16Obama administration won’t extend Obama Lied About Care enrollment
    The Obama administration said on Tuesday that a midnight deadline for most people to finish health-insurance applications for private coverage this year wouldn’t be extended amid signs that enrollment waits had dissipated.

    Aaron Albright, a spokesman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, confirmed there would be no further changes to an extension that pushed the end of insurance enrollment until April 15 for those who were “in line” on HealthCare.gov by March 31. The federally run site is the main portal for buying insurance under the Affordable Care Act.

    People who are considered to have complex cases involving persistent technical problems can still qualify to enroll outside of the standard sign-up period, as will people who have changes in their circumstances that affects their insurance coverage, such as a job loss or a divorce. …
    But on Tuesday, some enrollment centers that had long lines on the eve of the official deadline said that those had mostly cleared over the first two weeks of April.
    Read the ArticlePosted 16th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  38. APR15McCaughey: ‘A Million or More’ Obamacare Subscribers Will Default(CNSNews.com) – A leading Obamacare critic sees trouble ahead for people who signed up for health insurance on the new government exchanges.First, even the insurance companies that issue the plans are worried about “public pushback” from rising insurance premiums, Betsey McCaughey, the former lieutenant governor of New York and author of the book “Beating Obamacare,” told Fox News’s Neil Cavuto on Monday.”That’s only part of the bad news,” she said. “You’re also going to see a million people or more default. In other words, they have paid their first premium, but when they discover what it really means to have a $3,000 or $5,000 deductible on their plan, they go to their doctor again and again and have to pay full freight, even though they’re paying a premium, they’re going to stop paying their premium.”Another big problem ahead is the 25 million to 30 million people who currently get on-the-job coverage are going to lose it in the coming months, when their employers realize that they’re not going to be able to renew those old plans and they’re stuck between the very costly Obamacare plans or sending their workers and their families on to the exchanges.”And finally you are going to hear a lot of desperation from cancer patients when they discover these Obamacare exchange — Obamacare exchange plans won`t let them go to any specialty cancer hospitals, even though the data show that, for example, women with ovarian cancer live longer when they`re treated at a high-volume cancer hospital.”According to McCaughey, the CEOs of Aetna and CareFirst-Blue Cross/Blue Shield have warned about double- and even triple-digit premium increases in the next few months.McCaughey spoke to Fox News after the Congressional Budget Office released a new report estimating that the health care law’s coverage provisions will result in
    lower net costs to the federal government.  The estimated net costs for 2014 — $36 billion, $5 billion less than the previous projection for the year –stem almost entirely from spending for subsidies that are to be provided through insurance exchanges and from an increase in spending for Medicaid.McCaughey has said that the Affordable Care Act was designed from the very beginning to vastly expand Medicaid, a single-payer system. Those plans went awry when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it’s up to the states to expand their Medicaid programs.http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/mccaughey-million-or-more-obamacare-subscribers-will-defaultPosted 15th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  39. APR15The Legal Challenge to Obamacare You Probably Haven’t Heard of (And Why It Matters)A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., is debating a challenge to a provision of the Affordable Care Act that could completely destroy the law’s stated goal of offering affordable health insurance coverage.

    “What you’re asking for is to destroy the individual mandate, which guts the statute,” Judge Harry Edwards of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said during a hearing in March, according to ABC News.Edwards, an appointee from the Carter administration, is joined by two other judges: Thomas Griffith (appointed by George W. Bush) and A. Raymond Randolph (appointed by George H.W. Bush).The case, Halbig v. Sebelius, deals with the American Health Benefit Exchanges, known more commonly as the “exchanges.” The exchanges were created with the idea that if enough people use them to sign up for health insurance coverage, the cash put into the system would then make it easier and more affordable for people without coverage to enroll.Obamacare dictates that individual states can either set up and operate their own exchanges or the federal government will do it for them. Only 16 states and the District of Columbia currently run on their own exchanges. The remaining 34 states have elected to rely on the federally operated exchanges.And this is where we run into an issue: Depending on various factors, including income levels, people signing up through the state and federal exchanges may be eligible for subsidies that could drastically reduce the cost of health insurance coverage. The little-known challenge being argued in the District of Columbia deals with the government’s definition of who is eligible for these tax credits.
    The IRS claims it has the authority under the law to grant subsides to people enrolling in both the state and federal exchanges. The challengers, however, argue that only the states have the authority to grant tax subsidies and that it’s unlawful for the federal exchanges to do the same.“This is yet another example where the president and his agencies are playing fast and loose with the text of the law because they are trying to get the result they want,” said Carrie Severino, chief counsel for the Judicial Crisis Network, according to ABC News.The IRS believes that it has the power to “dispense billions of dollars in federal spending that Congress never authorized,” Michael A. Carvin, a lawyer who is representing challengers of the Obamacare provision, said in court briefs.An official with the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, said the architects of Obamacare likely didn’t expect so many states would decline to establish their own exchanges.“Congress gave states the power to veto exchange subsidies,” Cato’s Michael Cannon said. “That’s the last thing President Obama wants, so the president decided to issue the subsidies in federal exchanges, even though he only had the authority to issue them for state exchanges.”If the challenge wins, it could mean that the federal government would have to cease dispensing tax subsidies, meaning coverage would be anything but affordable in 34 states.The Department of Justice disagrees with the challengers, saying they are misinterpreting Obama’s signature domestic policy.“Congress made clear that an exchange established by the federal government stands in the shoes of the exchange that a state chooses not to establish,” the DOJ said in court briefs.Judge Edwards has referred to Carvin’s Obamacare argument as “preposterous.” Judge Randolph, on the other hand, agreed with the challengers that the health care law was “poorly written” and “cobbled together.” Meanwhile, Judge Griffith has only weighed in to ask if it’s the job of the federal appeals court to “fix the problem” if Congress has failed to make itself clear.The three judges are expected to offer their decision in the next few months. If they rule against Obamacare, the federal government can request that a larger panel of judges review the same case.http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/15/the-legal-challenge-to-obamacare-you-probably-havent-heard-of-and-why-it-matters/Posted 15th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  40. APR14Coming attractions for the Obamacare disaster filmBetsy McCaughey, who knows as much about Obamacare as anyone who wasn’t involved in writing it, offers apreview of the new disasters about to unfold as the health care law kicks in. If the law were a disaster film, her article could serve as the trailer for part 2.She expects a wave of premium defaults, and explains why even the 
    First-time insurance purchasers, especially those living paycheck to paycheck, will be shocked by ObamaCare’s high deductibles, about $3,000 for the silver plan (the most commonly selected) and $5,000 for the bronze plan (the most affordable).Basically, you’ll have to pay thousands out of pocket for appointments, tests and prescriptions until you reach your deductible.Millennials who heard Obama say on “Between Two Ferns” that they can buy a health plan for the price of a cellphone contract won’t be laughing when they realize what the $5,000 deductible means. (It’s like a cellphone contract that makes you pay $5 a text for your first thousand texts.) Rather than pay thousands out of pocket for care while also paying premiums, some will quit paying premiums.Makes perfect sense to me. The billion dollars or so of Obamacare advertising, marketing, and promotion neglected to mention that you would need to lay out several thousand dollars each year before you could collect a dime in benefits. Misleading advertising?Then there are the premium hikes coming our way:Consumers reeling from Obama­Care premium shock are in for another jolt when the 2015 rates come out.Overall, consumers had to pay far more for individual plans this year. In some states (Delaware and New Hampshire), rates went up 90 percent or even 100 percent, according to a newly released Morgan Stanley analysis.And insurance executives already are warning about double- or triple-digit hikes for next year.We already have focused on keep your doctor, keep your insurance as lies of the year. But how about the Obama claim of average savings of $2500 a year? For people getting triple digit increases, hat promise is going to rankle.McCaughey estimates that 25-30 million people are going to lose their coverage, dwarfing the numbers who lost coverage in individual plans this year.For the same reasons that millions of policies in the individual market were canceled last year, employers who buy plans in the small-group market will have a hard time renewing their old plans this year. Many will have to choose between providing the more costly ObamaCare benefit package or dropping coverage altogether.And to top it all, the extremely emotional issue of cancer care is lurking. As McCaughey points out, cancer is the disease we most fear, and it is also a disease that great progress has been made against. However, to benefit from these advances, a patient may need to go to one of the top cancer treatment centers but such centers are no longer available to millions of people under their new exchange plans.Many plans exclude all specialty cancer hospitals, even though research shows that women with ovarian cancer, for example, live a year longer when they are treated at high-volume cancer hospitals instead of local facilities. But insurers say they’d have to raise premiums for exchange plans even higher if this growing outrage over access to cancer centers forces them to broaden their networks.Politically, Obamacare will be disaster for Democrats, because practically, it is a disaster for Americans.http://americanthinker.com/blog/2014/04/coming_attractions_for_the_obamacare_disaster_film.htmlPosted 14th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  41. APR9Survey: US sees sharpest health insurance premium increases in years.Americans have recently been hit with some of the largest premium increases in years, according to a Morgan Stanley survey of insurance brokers.The investment bank’s April survey of 148 brokers found that this quarter, the average premium increase for customers renewing an insurance plan is 12 percent in the small group market and 11 percent in the individual market, according to Forbes’ Scott Gottlieb.The hikes — the largest in the past three years, according to Morgan Stanley’s quarterly reports — are “largely due to changes under the [Affordable Care Act],” analysts concluded. Rates have been growing increasingly fast throughout all of 2013, after a period of drops in 2012.While insurers were hiking premiums since 2012 by smaller amounts, the lead-up to the Obamacare’s launch has seen the average rate at which premiums are growing fourfold.The small group market saw a jump from a growth rate of close to 3 percent during Morgan Stanley’s September 2013 survey to just above 6 percent three months later in December — the month before a surge of Obamacare regulations hit insurance companies.Over the next three months, the rate doubled again to the current average small growth premium growth rate of 12 percent.Individual policies saw a much starker jump after the Obamacare exchanges launched, in anticipation of the health care law going live in 2014. Morgan Stanley’s September 2013 survey, like the previous three quarters, found a fairly constant growth rate around 2 percent — but in December, the rate had shot up to above 9 percent.Morgan Stanley’s results echo what consumers are already seeing: the Affordable Care Act’s intensive regulation of the insurance market is driving health care premiums up strikingly.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/04/07/survey-u-s-sees-sharpest-health-insurance-premium-increases-in-years/#ixzz2yPmRNQhMPosted 9th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  42. APR7Obama Lied About Care Consumers Decry Higher Costs, Fewer OptionsAs vulnerable Democrats uneasily defend their votes for Obamacare, and prominent White House alumni predictsignificant changes to it, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is confidently asserting that Democrats are “embracing” the unpopular law. Sundry press reports tell a different story, including this assessment from aNew York Times reporter:

    Then again, Pelosi’s wildly unrealistic Obamacare assertions have become the stuff of legend. Why might Democrats feel motivated to “disassociate” themselves with Obamacare? Beyond the polling, the law’s outcomes are directly contradicting the promises upon which the law was sold — and average people are noticing. In California, newly enrolled consumers are complaining about their new coverage network’s narrow options, while taxpayers aren’t pleased about footing the bill for costly and ineffective promotional campaigns:

     “They can’t find any doctor — let alone a quality one — to accept their new insurance.”
    And in North Carolina — where incumbent Sen. Kay Hagan has literally run away from Obamacare questions — many customers continue to face unexpected boutsof sticker shock:


     “Almost everyone I’ve talked to, their insurance has gone up.”
    The woman in that clip appears to be one of the many uninsured Americans who are wary of Obamacare due to high prices. Numerous independent studies have shown that only a small fraction of the “newly insured” through Obamacare’s exchanges lacked previous coverage. The Washington Post reported last month that as many as 90 percent of eligible uninsured Americans had declined to obtain insurance through Obamacare plans, with the largest factor being unaffordable costs. Insurance industry sources say premiums will rise substantially in 2015, as aggregate health costs surged at the fastest rate in years last quarter.
    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/04/07/video-obamacare-consumers-decry-higher-costs-fewer-options-n1819620Posted 7th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  43. APR5The ‘Little-Noticed’ Consequence of Obama Lied About Care That Will Leave Many Americans Out of Luck




    Americans thinking about buying health insurance on their own later this year, or maybe switching to a different insurer, are probably out of luck. The policies are going off the market as a little-noticed consequence of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.With limited exceptions, insurance companies have stopped selling until next year the sorts of individual plans that used to be available year-round. That locks out many of the young and healthy as well as the sick and injured, even those who can afford to buy without government subsidies.“Now they’re stuck,” said Bonnie Milani, an independent insurance broker in Los Angeles, who says she warned her customers last year that the change was coming. “It just closes everything down.”

    The next wide-open chance to sign up comes in November, when enrollment for 2015 begins in the government-run insurance marketplaces created by the health care law. Companies are following that schedule even for the plans they sell outside the federal and state exchanges.The health care law allows insurers to keep selling all year. But it also creates the conditions prompting them to stop.The law, which requires nearly all Americans to be insured or pay a fine, bans insurers from rejecting customers because of poor health. The companies say that makes it too risky to sell to individuals year-round.
    “If you didn’t have an open enrollment period, you would have people who would potentially enroll when they get sick and dis-enroll when they get better,” said Chris Stenrud, spokesman for insurer Kaiser Permanente. “The only insured people would be sick people, which would make insurance unaffordable for everyone.”The change makes individual policies work more like the job-based plans that already cover far more Americans.But those who act fast may still be able to get in this year, depending on where they live.Following the lead of the government marketplaces, some companies are extending off-marketplace sales for a week or a month to help people who hit snags trying to enroll by last Monday’s deadline. Rules vary from state to state.After those extensions, eligibility for coverage during 2014 is guaranteed only for people who experience certain qualifying life events, such as losing a job that provided insurance, moving to a new state, getting married, having a baby or losing coverage under a parent’s health plan.
    fileInsurance broker Steve Bobiak of Frackville, Pa., said he learned only a couple of weeks ago that insurers were cutting off new policies.“It’s lousy communication out there,” he said. “If we don’t know, my God, how do they expect other people to know? It’s terrible.”A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation in mid-March found that 6 out of 10 people without insurance weren’t aware of the Affordable Care Act deadline of March 31. The Obama administration, insurance companies and nonprofit groups scrambled to spread the word, often with messages that focused on the savings available to many people through government-subsidized plans sold on the marketplaces.There wasn’t much public discussion about people who prefer to buy policies outside the state or federal marketplaces, sometimes finding better deals or options more to their liking.Health and Human Services spokesman Aaron Albright pointed to a note buried on the HealthCare.gov website: It says “in some limited cases some insurance companies may sell private health plans outside the marketplace and outside open enrollment” that satisfy the law’s coverage mandate. It doesn’t say how to find any companies doing that. Albright had no further comment.Gary Claxton, a health law expert at the Kaiser Family Foundation, said it’s “highly unlikely” that companies will offer such coverage after the deadline window fully closes. Some do still offer temporary plans, lasting from a month to a year. But those plans don’t cover pre-existing conditions and don’t get buyers off the hook for the law’s tax penalty.Nate Purpura, spokesman for eHealthInsurance.com, which sells policies from 200 companies across the nation, said at this point he knows of none planning to offer major medical insurance after this month, except to people with qualifying life events.For people trying to get an off-marketplace plan through an open enrollment extension, some insurers are selling them through April 15, and others through the end of the month. Purpura said eHealth will offer such plans in at least some areas of these states: Arizona, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Utah, Virginia and Washington state.Kaiser Permanente will offer extensions that mirror the state or federal marketplace in the area where a plan is sold, Stenrud said. The federal marketplace extension for online enrollment is April 15. But Oregon, for example, is giving marketplace buyers until April 30.After that, Stenrud said, without a qualifying life event, the door closes until Nov. 15.http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/04/the-little-noticed-consequence-of-obamacare-that-will-leave-many-americans-out-of-luck/Posted 5th April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  44. APR3Other OBAMA Lied About CARE TAX A $100 BILLION HIT TO BUSINESSES, CONSUMERSObama did his victory dance Tuesday amid better-than-expected (reported) enrollment in his namesake Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance tax looms in the shadows. Its $100 billion impact over the next 10 years, business advocates say, could ultimately hurt people Obamacare claims to help.In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Bernie Marcus, co-founder and former chairman and CEO of Home Depot, asserts small and mid-sized businesses will bear the brunt of the health insurance tax — known as HIT in business circles — and “Many will be forced to raise their employees’ share of premium payments or, worse, lay off workers to pay the escalating costs of health care for their core employees.”Yet Obama insists happy days are here again, and here to stay, thanks to his signature legislation. The proof, the president said, is that some 7.1 million Americans have signed up for Obamacare as of the March 31 deadline, according to administration numbers.President: ‘Act Is Here to Stay’“The Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” Obama triumphantly declared in a Rose Garden speech. Despite all the Web site “glitches,” the implementation delays and the Americans who have lost their insurance due to Obamacare, the president calls it all “progress.” He blasted Republicans and other critics of the big-government program.“Many of the tall tales that have been told about this law have been debunked. There are still no death panels. Armageddon has not arrived,” he said. “Instead, this law is helping millions of Americans, and in the coming years it will help millions more.”But the worst is yet to come, according to critics closely watching the impending healthcare tax.The tax is expected to generate revenue of about $8 billion this year and as much as $14.3 billion by 2018.CBO: ‘Passed Through to Consumers’The Congressional Budget Office has said the tax will be “largely passed through to consumers in the form of higher premiums.”In his op-ed, Marcus writes that millions of Americans will be “paying much higher premiums because of this tax, with the added cost rippling through the economy and stifling job creation.”Marcus notes that “the National Federation of Independent Business projects the health-insurance tax will add an additional $475 per year for the average individually purchased family policy—nearly $5,000 over the course of a decade. Small businesses will take an even bigger hit, with the cost of an employer-provided family policy rising a projected $6,800 in the next decade.”And the NFIB projects the private sector will trim at least 146,000 jobs through 2022 due to the health insurance tax.“That’s like vaporizing some of the largest employers in the country. Just the low-end estimate—146,000 jobs—is still more than the total number of employees currently working for companies like Costco, Microsoft and Delta Airlines,” Marcus writes.Businesses across the country are expressing concern about the impact of the Affordable Care Act.A Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce survey of 341 Wisconsin CEOs released in January found more than one-fifth of respondents were concerned about health insurance, and 18 percent worried about government regulations.CEOs: Expect Higher CostsAccording to the survey, 93 percent of respondents said they offer employer-sponsored health insurance coverage to their employees. Of those, 87 percent said their costs would increase. Forty-two percent said their premiums would rise between 11 percent to 20 percent; 40 percent said rates would rise between 1 percent to 10 percent.Respondents say they will pass on some or all of their higher health-care costs to employees. Specifically, 54 percent said they would increase employee contributions, and 22 percent said they would reduce benefits.One executive, when asked “what is holding back the economy,” said: “I think most companies trimmed back in [2009] and have been reluctant to make any bold moves because of all the unknown big issues driven by the government,” according to WMC. Another said: “Lack of trust, direction and leadership at the federal level.”“The jobs never created because of the health-insurance tax will be a ‘death of a thousand cuts’ on Main Street that adds up to a major wound for the economy,” Marcus wrote in the op-ed. “As a result, NFIB predicts total gross domestic product in 2022 will be $23 billion to $35 billion smaller than it would have been absent the HIT.”http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2014/04/02/obamacare-tax-another-100-billion-hit-businesses-consumersPosted 3rd April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  45. APR2Pennsylvania Republicans Join Big Labor In Healthcare FightThe Keystone State has traditionally been regarded as a union stronghold, but recently some lawmakers have taken steps to break their politically motivated partisan influence. Republican lawmakers introduced legislation to change the state’s taxpayer-funded union dues collection system and close loopholes that protect union members from anti-stalking laws. Despite these advances, the Workforce Fairness Institute (WFI) was disappointed to find out that while some lawmakers in Pennsylvania are boldly taking on labor bosses, others are joining forces with them in a healthcare dispute between two private companies.Over the years, WFI has successfully highlighted the ongoing battle between lawmakers and union bosses in states like Pennsylvania specifically drawing attention to instances where Big Labor has gone too far. Most recently, we brought attention to 10 members of a Philadelphia-based Ironworkers union, Local 101, who were charged with assault and arson. We have also recently written about a longstanding Pennsylvania law that exempts union organizers in a labor dispute from criminal statutes, making it nearly impossible to prosecute intimidating organizers engaging in thuggery.Although national union organizations are witnessing a dramatic decrease in membership, healthcare has been one of few markets where union membership has actually grown. As state-led union groups fight to retain their footprint in the Commonwealth, groups like the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) are trying to find ways to engage in local matters. One such example is between Highmark Inc. and the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC).SEIU Healthcare Pennsylvania has recently endorsed legislation that is spearheaded by Republican lawmakers Representatives Jim Christiana (R-15) and Senator Randy Vulakovich (R-40). House Bills 1621 and 1622, and Senate Bills 1247 and 1248 would force Highmark and UPMC to renew a decade-long contract. Highmark is the state’s largest insurer, and UPMC is the largest employer and also a dominant western Pennsylvania healthcare provider. UPMC chose to not renew the contract based on Highmark’s decision to acquire the West Penn Allegheny Health System (WPAHS), putting them in direct competition not just as insurers, but also as providers.It’s clear why SEIU has decided to take part in the fight: they have a stake in the success of WPAHS. According to the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette, the “SEIU wants to maintain its 2,000 or so WPAHS union positions, which make up about 10 percent of SEIU Healthcare’s total Pennsylvania membership of more than 20,000 employees.”The SEIU’s engagement in the private healthcare battle isn’t about a patient’s “life-or-death challenge” like their ads would lead Pennsylvanians to believe, it is about preserving their union membership (read: revenue) and footprint in the Commonwealth. This disingenuous approach was on full display when they were recently asked about Highmark’s CEO William Winkenwerder earning $4.3 million last year. Despite publicly attacking UPMC for their executive pay, SEIU declined to comment about the Highmark chief’s compensation, which is not a common practice for organized labor.To be clear, WFI is not anti-union. We advocate for fairness in the workforce and believe that employees should have the opportunity to make informed decisions about workplace rules in an environment that is neither threatening nor pressure filled. Our organization is dedicated to ensuring that the private sector can thrive without the unfair and unnecessary interference of government bureaucrats, union organizers and special interests.We encourage lawmakers in Pennsylvania to continue taking steps that ensure workers are never put in a position where their safety and freedoms are threatened, which is currently the case in Pennsylvania. At the same time, legislation affecting industry must never undermine the free market while giving unions bosses, such as those at the SEIU, a leg up with ample opportunity to organize and retain their stranglehold over Pennsylvania.http://townhall.com/columnists/fredwszolek/2014/04/01/pennsylvania-republicans-join-big-labor-in-healthcare-fight-n1817531/page/fullPosted 2nd April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  46. APR2Who Will Pick Up The Pieces When Obama Lied About Care Crashes and Burns?Despite all the hoopla from the Administration and its media shills about how wonderful it is that a certain, arbitrary number of American citizens have “signed up” for ObamaCare by particular benchmark dates, the fact remains this federal law is rotten from start to finish. It remains one of those rare pieces of legislation that contains on balance not one positive provision; not a single worthwhile crossed “t” or dotted “i.”Still, we taxpayers continue to pay billions for ObamaCare’s implementation, even as it forces millions of citizens into healthcare plans that do not meet their needs and into relationships with doctors not of their choice. As the finest healthcare system on the planet unravels and burns because of ObamaCare, our generation’s Nero fiddles and bloviates about how great it is, and how “easy-peasey” it is to become an ObamaCare member, in the childish phraseology of Valerie Jarrett, one of the President’s key advisers.In the 2013 edition of his annual Wastebook, Republican Sen. Tom Coburn lists the year’s most wasteful government programs, all funded by taxpayer dollars. Some of these programs range from tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars — such as $390,000 spent by NASA to dress a man in a green costume to teach kids about global warming on YouTube. Others — like the $65 million in federal relief funds for Hurricane Sandy spent by state and local politicians on tourism-related television ads — reach nine figures and beyond. The point of the Wastebook is to illustrate by concrete examples the amount of federal waste occurring every day, all across America.Yet, there is one government program that needs no special attention, and ranks as the most wasteful, ineffectual attempt at federal micromanagement since Prohibition: ObamaCare. The damage wrought by ObamaCare can be measured in many ways: its astronomical economic costs, its negative impact on personal freedom, or the irreparable damage visited on America’s healthcare system. By whatever yardstick one uses, the law is and will be a disaster.Often, wasteful government programs are limited in their impact to economic loss, such as funding irrelevant scientific studies with no real-world application. Other examples, like the $1.7-billion NSA data center under construction in Utah that cannot keep its equipment from melting down, have serious civil liberties implications that spread the damage far beyond economic costs.In a class by itself is ObamaCare, which not only hands taxpayers another $17 trillion in long-term unfunded liabilities, and forces employers to choose betweenreligious freedom and crippling IRS fines, but also directly affects the health and well being of every single American. This nightmare scenario hits doctors, patients and hospitals even as the healthcare industry struggles to meet an ever-changing flood of regulatory requirements that already were making healthcare more expensive and less efficient, not better.The cognitive dissonance displayed by top Obama Administration officials — seeing the reality of ObamaCare, yet denying any problem is more than just a temporary “glitch” — only exacerbates this devastation. Rather than hit the brakes and find a viable, long-term solution to close the Pandora’s Box they have opened, Democrats have turned a blind-eye to Obama’s illegal “work-arounds” that defy the rule of law and jeopardize the balance of power between the White House and Congress. Some of these “fixes” were passed in a matter of seconds, without even so much as a heads-up to members of Congress that a vote was occurring. Each change, delay, or “Executive decision” has only served as warning to Americans that the trouble we see now is just the tip of the iceberg; a small glimpse of things to come.Clearly, electoral politics are more important to Democrats than the general welfare of the American public, as revealed right off the bat in the rush to launch ObamaCare even before its $379 million website was functional (and it still is notworking correctly). Winning elections and achieving legislative “victories” was the true motivation for this shoddily constructed model of healthcare “reform.” Now, as we say in the South, many of these Democrats who supported ObamaCare as legislation, are being hoisted on their own petard – staring at defeat this November.There are legislative and appropriations measures Republicans in the House, and even the Senate, can take in the interim to slow down parts of ObamaCare; as well as to stop the President’s unlawful steps to delay certain provisions to make his Administration look better, or at least not look so bad. It is to be hoped that between now and the 2016 national election, those steps will be taken.The overarching goal, however, must be to ensure that the Republican nominee for President two years hence defeats Hillary Clinton or whoever the Democrats nominate. This is essential because ObamaCare will crash and burnit will fail. And we must do everything in our power to make certain no supporter of this legislative monstrosity is residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to pick up the pieces when the downfall comes.http://townhall.com/columnists/bobbarr/2014/04/02/who-will-pick-up-the-pieces-when-obamacare-crashes-and-burns-n1817707/page/fullPosted 2nd April 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  47. MAR29There’s one born every minute. The six undeniable elements of the Obama Lied About Care scamlatest delay to ObamaCare – is it the 29th? the 30th? I can’t keep track anymore – should leave no doubt in anyone’s mind that this ill-conceived law is a complete and utter disaster. I don’t think there is anyone left outside the partisan Democrat world (and the mainstream media, which is just another way of saying the same thing) who fails to sense that at this point.
    But it’s one thing to sense something. It’s another to be able to quantify it. To demonstrate factually what a scam ObamaCare is, there are six specific elements we can identify:1. The way it was passed in the first place. Remember: The Senate passed its version of the bill with 60 votes, exactly the number needed to shut down a Republican filibuster with no votes to spare. Then Ted Kennedy died and was replaced by Republican Scott Brown – before the House and Senate had a chance to reconcile their different versions. Now Republicans would have the votes to filibuster any conference committee report. The only way to pass ObamaCare at this point was to muscle reluctant House Democrats to pass the Senate version without changes, let President Obama sign it into law, and then have Harry Reid abuse reconciliation rules to make later changes. This included promises made, and broken (of course) to pro-life House Democrats like Michigan’s Bart Stupak that ObamaCare would result in taxpayer funding of abortions.2. Everyone’s total ignorance of what they were voting for. The bill was 2,700 pages long. It wasn’t finalized until days before the vote. They were in such a hurry to pass it, no one had time to read it before voting. No one. Not a problem, said Nancy Pelosi: “We have to pass it so you can find out what’s in it.” We found out all right.3. “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance.”4. How did you like that rollout? The web site didn’t work. Enrollment is way below projections. Premiums soaring. Networks limited. People kicked off their plans. Delays. Selective exemptions. Unless you’re looking for an exemption on the basis of your religious faith, there’s almost certainly a loophole for you! Those of you who really believe things are better when government runs them, I present to you, ObamaCare.5. Remember the reason they said they were doing it in the first place? Because there were 48 million uninsured Americans and that simply wouldn’t do? Well, we’re days away from the ObamaCare enrollment deadline. We now have . . . 47 million uninsured Americans. Great job, Democrats. You ripped an entire system – which had some flaws but for the most part worked well – from its foundations to accomplish that? None of the assumptions they made about ObamaCare have come true. Only 9 percent of the heretofore uninsured have signed up, and many more lost the insurance they had – and can’t afford the ObamaCare-approved alternatives! They don’t even know how many have paid their premiums. And thousands have had their hours cut by employers trying to avoid the mandate. Many jobs that could have been created never were by employers trying to stay under the mandate threshold. It’s a classic case of Democrats having no understanding of how their heavy-handed actions cause unintended consequences, and then insisting that when the consequences occur it can’t possibly be their fault.6. Journalistic silence. This is really the one component that makes all the others possible. A recent report from the Media Research Center shows that in recent months, ABC, NBC and CBS have spent a combined 31 minutes reporting on ObamaCare’s problems. They spend more time talking about President Obama’s golf game. (By the way, I part company with many of you here. I don’t care how much golf he plays. You can do your jobs from a golf course. His problem is that he doesn’t do his job well no matter where he’s doing it from.) The lamestream media believe so fervently in the power of government to do good, they simply refuse to undercut this belief by reporting the truth about what happens when it’s put into action.Journalists have spent more time attacking people hurt by ObamaCare than they’ve spent telling the truth about the problems inherent in the law. But even a media coverup of that magnitude can’t hide what people can clearly see with their own eyes, and what they experience in their own lives. These six components of a total scam and an utter disaster. Anyone who still denies that, at this point, is so in the tank for the left-wing big government agenda, all you can do is just hope that one day they wake up.Meanwhile, the rest of us are hoping to wake up from the nightmare that is ObamaCare.Read More: http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/62032Posted 29th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  48. MAR26Shannon’s Story: ObamaCare is Destroying Middle Class Families





    Published on Mar 25, 2014Tell Congressman Peters that ObamaCare isn’t working for Americans. Sign our petition at http://www.LieOfTheYear.orgPosted 26th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  49. MAR25House committee accuses Sebelius of ‘misleading’ about not knowing how many paid first-month Obama Lied About Care premiums
    House Ways and Means committee chairman Rep. Dave Camp and health subcommittee chairman Rep. Kevin Brady held up “new evidence” Tuesday to accuse the Obama administration of “misleading” Congress about supposedly not keeping track of how many Obamacare customers have paid their first-month premiums.Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius recently testified before Ways and Means that the administration is not keeping track of how many Obamacare enrollees have paid their premiums.But the Committee on Ways and Means is calling nonsense.“New evidence obtained by the Committee strongly suggests that the Administration knows who has enrolled and paid their first month’s premium. In fact, there is specific information about who has paid their premium that Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is collecting and using to make payments to insurers. On January 16, 2014, CMS posted a series of FAQs on the http://www.regtap.info portal. The portal is used by insurers to receive basic information about how to receive payments, what information is required of them and in what format, etc.,” according to the Ways and Means Committee.“The Committee has obtained FAQ 671, which states, ‘[S]ubmitters will include the full enrollment and payment profile for January (i.e. all active enrollments for January effectuated through January 15th) … The January restatement template should contain all enrollments effective during the month of January. It will capture what was already submitted to CMS in December (effectuated enrollments through 12/15) but will also capture enrollments effectuated after 12/15) … submitters will include the full enrollment and payment profile for February (i.e. all active enrollments for February effectuated through January 15th). It will include enrollments that were previously effectuated for January and that are still in place in February,’” according to the Committee.Camp and Brady sent a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, obtained by The Daily Caller, laying out their accusation and demanding answers on how many people have paid their premiums.“We have recently obtained information that suggests your most recent testimony before the Ways and Means Committee was at best evasive and perhaps misleading….Insurers are submitting information to CMS about who has effectuated their enrollment, i.e., who has paid their premium. Please provide this information in its most updated form immediately,” Camp and Brady wrote in their letter.“It will give the Committee and the American people real time information about the number of individuals who have paid their first month’s premium and are eligible for a tax credit or cost-sharing subsidy. That in and of itself is relevant and important data. Equally important, it provides an accurate, if not precise, estimate of the number of individuals in total who have paid their first month’s premium,” Camp and Brady wrote

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/25/new-evidence-house-committee-accuses-sebelius-of-misleading-about-not-knowing-how-many-paid-first-month-obamacare-premiums/#ixzz2x0LYPKaxPosted 25th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  1. MAR24 the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby –The U.S. Justice Department is telling the Supreme Court that killing a human embryo by preventing the embryo from implanting in his or her mother’s uterus is not an “abortion” and, thus, drugs that kill embryos this way are not “abortion-inducing” drugs.
    On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. The crux of the administration’s argument in this case is that when Christians form a corporation they give up the right to freely exercise their religion–n.b. live according to their Christian beliefs—in the way they run their business.It is in the context of this case, that the administration is making its argument that killing an embryo seeking to implant in his or her mother’s womb is not an abortion.The dispute involves a regulation that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued under the Affordable Care Act. This regulation says that virtually all health insurance plans must cover, without any fees or co-pay, all FDA-approved “contraceptives.”But what the FDA and the regulation call “contraceptives” include drugs and devices that sometimes work not by preventing conception but by ending a human life after conception. In other words, in these circumstances, the mandated drugs and devices are not contraceptives at all, but post-conception killing agents.When the Justice Department petitioned the Supreme Court to take up the Hobby Lobby case last September, the administration conceded in its petition that among the mandated drugs and devices were some that did indeed prevent human “fertilized eggs”—n.b. human embryos–from implanting in their mothers’ wombs.“The FDA has approved twenty such methods, ranging from oral contraceptives to surgical sterilization,” Solicitor General Donald Verrilli said in the administration’s petition asking the Supreme Court to take up the case. “Four of the twenty approved methods—two types of intrauterine devices (IUDs) and the emergency contraceptives commonly known as Plan B and Ella—can function by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg.”In a footnote, Verilli added: “Both the government and the medical amici supporting the government concede that at least some of the contraceptive methods to which the plaintiffs object have the potential to prevent uterine implantation.”According to a collection of citations posted on a Princeton University website, medical dictionaries, embryology texts, and a federal commission, have all defined fertilization as the beginning of a new human life with the formation of an embryo.An “embryo,” says the Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary, is “[a]n organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus.””The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote,” says  the text of Langman’s Medical Embryology.An “embryo,” said the U.S. government’s 1997 National Bioethics Advisory Commission on Cloning Human Beings, is “the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus.”Even though science says human life begins at “fertilization,” the Obama Administration claims in its brief to the Supreme Court in the Hobby Lobby case, which was filed in January, that the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, came to this conclusion as a matter of “religious conviction.”“The Greens maintain the sincere religious conviction that human life begins at conception, that is when sperm fertilizes an egg,” Solicitor General Verrilli said in the brief.But this is not true.In their original complaint in federal court and in their brief to the Supreme Court, the Greens do not state—as the administration contends—that they have a “sincere religious conviction that human life begins at conception.” What they do state is that they have “a sincere religious objection” to providing coverage for drugs and devices that kill human embryos—which, as per the science recorded in embryology texts, come into being at fertilization.“Plaintiffs have a sincere religious objection to providing coverage for Plan B and Ella since they believe those drugs could prevent a human embryo—which they understand to include a fertilized egg before it implants in the uterus—from implanting in the wall of the uterus, causing the death of the embryo,” the Greens said in their original complaint in federal court.“Plaintiff have a sincere religious objection to providing coverage for certain contraceptive intrauterine devices or ‘IUDs’ since they believe those devices prevent a human embryo from implanting in the wall of the uterus, causing the death of the embryo,” the Greens told the federal court.“Plaintiffs consider the prevention by artificial means of the implantation of a human embryo to be an abortion,” said the Greens.In their brief to the Supreme Court, the Greens point out that the government has conceded that there is no dispute about the fact that the drugs and devices the administration is trying to force Christian business owners to cover can in fact prevent a human embryo from implanting in the womb.“The government concedes in its petition, as it has throughout this litigation, that the drugs to which Respondents object can prevent an embryo’s ‘implantation’ in the womb,” said the Green’s brief.“Based on that concession,” says the Green’s brief to the Supreme Court, “the en banc court found ‘no material dispute’ on the issue, and, thus, that the court ‘need not wade into scientific waters here.’”The issue then is not when human life begins. Science has long since settled that.  Nor is it whether the drugs and devices mandated by the government can end a human life by preventing a human embryo from implanting in the uterus.The question is whether the government can force a Christian business owner to cooperate in ending a human life by that means.In its final brief to the Supreme Court, the Obama administration again conceded that the drugs and devices the administration wants to force Christian business owners to provide coverage for can act by preventing a human embryo from implanting in the uterus.“According to FDA-approved product labels, a copper IUD is a device inserted into the uterus by a health care providers that works … possibly by preventing implantation (of a fertilized egg in the uterus),” says Solicitor General Verrilli in this brief.“Plan B is an emergency contraceptive in pill form that … may inhibit implantation (of a fertilized egg in the uterus) by altering the endometrium, but it is not effective once the process of implantation has begun.”“Ella, another emergency contraceptive, is a pill that … may affect implantation (of the fertilized egg in the uterus),” Verrilli told the court.Having repeatedly conceded that the drugs and devices the administration wants to force Christian business owners to buy for their employees can in fact terminate the life of a human embryo by preventing “implantation,” the administration is now arguing to the Supreme Court that terminating the life of a human embryo by preventing the embryo from implanting in the womb is not an “abortion.”“Although respondents describe the devices and drugs as ‘abortion-inducing,’” says the administration’s brief to the court, “federal law, which defines pregnancy as beginning at implantation, does not so classify them.”The administration attempts to establish this claim—that terminating a human life by preventing implantation is not an “abortion”—by pointing the court not to a statute enacted by Congress, but to a federal regulation issued during the Clinton administration.This regulation–62 Fed Reg 8611 (Feb. 25, 1997) 45 CFR 46.202(f)–was promulgated by the FDA. It addressed what it called “postcoital emergency contraception” and said it was “intended to encourage manufacturers to make this additional contraceptive option available.’Like the Obama administration’s argument to the Supreme Court, this FDA regulation conceded that what it called “emergency contraception” may in fact prevent a post-conception “fertilized egg” from implanting in the uterus.The regulation does not use any form of the words “abort” or “abortion,” but it does say this: “Taking ECP’s [Emergency Contraception Pills] provides a short, strong, burst of hormone exposure. Depending on where you are in your cycle and when you had unprotected intercourse, using ECP’s may prevent ovulation, disrupt fertilization, or inhibit implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus.”So, the FDA and the Obama Administration want Americans to believe an “emergency contraceptive” can act post-conception to kill a “fertilized egg”–but that does not mean it induces an abortion.It just kills a human being.http://cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/doj-supreme-court-killing-human-embryo-womb-not-abortionPosted 24th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  2. MAR24GALLUP SUGGESTS OBAMA Lied About CARE RESPONSIBLE FOR INCREASED RACIAL POLARIZATIONBarack Obama’s healthcare law may have been responsible for pushing whites to vote Republican and polarizing the country at historic levels, according to a new Gallup analysis.On the four-year anniversary of Obamacare, the implication of the Gallup study is that Obama’s policies–not his race or personality–have been the impetus for the increasing level of racial polarization.The Gallup study found that in 2010, “nonwhites’ net party identification and leanings showed a 49-point Democratic advantage, and whites were 12 percentage points more Republican than Democratic.” That “resulting 61-point racial and ethnic gap in party preferences is the largest Gallup has measured in the last 20 years.””It is unclear precisely what role Obama’s race has played in these changes. However, the shifts do not appear to be an immediate reaction to his becoming president,” Gallup wrote. “Whites became slightly more Republican during 2009, the first year of Obama’s presidency. However, the biggest movement came during the next year, when Obama signed the healthcare overhaul into law.” This is when he “saw his approval rating sink and his party lose its large majority in the House in that year’s midterm elections.”The level of overall racial polarization has increased during Obama’s presidency. The study found that the average party preferences for nonwhites have consistently shown a “roughly 47-point Democratic advantage under Clinton, Bush, and Obama.” During the same time, however, “whites have become increasingly Republican, moving from an average 4.1-point Republican advantage under Clinton to an average 9.5-point advantage under Obama.””During the last few years, those racial and ethnic divisions have grown, mostly because whites have drifted more toward the GOP,” Gallup concluded. “Thus, party preferences by race during the Obama years, though similar in nature to the past, have seen some movement that has resulted in slightly greater racial polarization than before.”The study found that after the historic Tea Party-fueled midterm elections that gave Republicans back their House majority in 2010, whites are “somewhat less likely to align with the Republican Party now than they were in 2010 and 2011” when the GOP became more moderate. Republicans, though, still show a “roughly 10-point advantage” among whites, which Gallup noted will “remain the majority racial group in the U.S.” Those numbers may favor Republicans in midterm elections, but the study also noted that Democrats’ “decisive advantage among racial and ethnic minorities allows them to more than offset the Republicans’ advantage among whites” in national elections.Read More: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/03/24…Posted 24th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  3. MAR23If you follow the news, you’re familiar with the fact that many projections are showing that Americans will face much higher health premiums next year due to Obama Lied About Care. A new report from Avalere Health confirms

    Avalere Health, a market research and consulting firm, estimates some consumers will pay half the cost of their specialty drugs under health overhaul-related plans, while customers in the private market typically pay no more than a third. Patient advocates worry that insurers may be trying to discourage chronically ill patients from enrolling by putting high cost drugs onto specialty tiers.Under the law, insurers can’t charge an individual more than $6,350 in out-of pocket costs a year and no more than $12,700 for a family policy. But patients advocates warn those with serious illnesses could pay their entire out-of-pocket cap before their insurance kicks in any money.Insurers say prescription drugs are one of the main reasons health care costs are rising.One of the goals of health care reform should be to “bend the cost curve.” One of the ways that Obamacare is trying to achieve that is to force consumers to pay more for prescription drugs.This comes on the heels of a separate Avalere report this month that, aside from prescription drugs,premiums overall will skyrocket.Read More: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/kevinglass/2014/03/23…
    Posted 23rd March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  4. MAR23Another Glitch: Newly discovered HealthCare.gov error giving bad info on premium aidA newly discovered glitch in the main ObamaCare website reportedly is giving thousands of people the wrong information about whether they qualify for premium subsidies. The Philadelphia Inquirer discovered the glitch while entering hypothetical incomes into the calculator on HealthCare.gov. The newspaper found that the calculator is using the wrong year’s poverty guidelines — a simple mistake that, for months, has resulted in would-be enrollees getting inaccurate guidance. Because of the glitch, some people may be initially told they qualify for subsidies when they don’t. Others may be told they don’t qualify when they do. It’s unclear how many people have been affected, but the mistake raises the possibility that thousands are giving up the hunt for insurance after being told, inaccurately, that they don’t qualify for government aid. “It’s just another one of those, ‘Why did they do that?'” Robert Laszewski, president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, told the Inquirer. HealthCare.gov, and some of the state-run sites, were marred by technical problems after they launched last October. Many of those problems have been addressed, but the Inquirer report shows that glitches are still being rooted out. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services is fixing the newly discovered problem with the income calculator. A spokesman told FoxNews.com there is a “small difference” but “we have updated this tool for clarity.” The incorrect information has only been generated since about mid-February. CMS stresses that the estimates in question are unofficial, and customers are told that on the website itself. “The window shopping tool on the learn side of HealthCare.gov is intended only to be used as an unofficial estimate that consumers can use before completing their application, which is where they get their official determination,” spokesman Aaron Albright said. “We encourage consumers to complete their Marketplace application, where they will get an accurate determination of their tax credits.” The calculator in question is a tool meant to help those window-shopping for policies. It gives customers an initial estimate of whether they would qualify for subsidies. Most federal programs are using 2014 poverty levels as the basis for these kinds of estimates, but the Affordable Care Act mandated that the 2013 guidelines be used this year (in part because sign-ups began last year). Yet, HealthCare.gov continued to use the higher 2014 guidelines. The result is that people whose incomes are just over the high end of the 2013 guidelines are told they qualify, only to find out later they don’t. Likewise, those just over the low end are told they don’t qualify — according to the Inquirer, only if they ignore that message, and click through to use another tool on the site, will they find out they do qualify. The Inquirer reports this mostly would affect people in states that have not expanded Medicaid. While the administration apparently is addressing the problem, its discovery comes a mere 10 days before the enrollment deadline. The White House and other branches of the administration are in a full court press to get people signed up — and inaccurate estimates telling people they don’t qualify for subsidies is another setback. The insurance industry is waiting to see whether the administration enrolls enough young, healthy people to help offset the cost of taking on older, sicker patients. Meanwhile, the American Medical Association, which originally supported the Affordable Care Act, is raising concern about another obscure aspect of the law which they claim could stick doctors with the tab for patients who skip out on paying their premiums. The American Medical Association warned the rule could pose a “significant financial risk” for doctors and hospitals, and on Wednesday blasted out guidelines to help members try and avoid those costs. At issue is a 90-day “grace period” which lets patients who are not paying their premiums keep coverage for 90 days before it can be canceled. Under the rule, insurers are responsible for paying any claims during the first month of that period — but not necessarily for any claims during the final 60 days. “Managing risk is typically a role for insurers, but the grace period rule transfers two-thirds of that risk from the insurers to physicians and health care providers,” AMA President Ardis Dee Hoven said in a statement.http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/21/another-glitch-newly-discovered-healthcaregov-error-giving-bad-info-on-premium/?intcmp=latestnewsPosted 23rd March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  5. MAR22Obama Lied About Care Con is pillaging America,We begin with premiums. As revealedby The Hill, they are about to “skyrocket,” with costs in some parts of the country increasing by as much as 200 percent. Unsurprisingly, this revelation runs completely counter to the Obama administration’s claims, most recently advanced by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in last week’s testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee. “The increases are far less significant than what they were prior to the Affordable Care Act,” the Secretary said.
    Except that they’re not. A report by eHealth explains that premiums in the individual health market have risen 39 percent for individuals, and 56 percent for families, since February 2013. Minus the subsidies, the average cost of an individual plan is now $274, and a family plan is now $663 per month, up from $446 last year. And despite Sebelius’s contention, these figures are higher than those recorded between 2005 and 2013, when individual and family premiums rose at a rate of 37 percent and 31 percent, respectively.

    Administration officials counter that subsidies will bring those costs down. That is certainly true, but those so-called reductions aren’t reductions at all. They merely shift the part of a premium’s cost from the individual or family insurance consumers to the taxpayers at large. This cost-shifting goes a long way towards explaining why a plan the president and his party promised would cost $900 billion over a decade when it was first introduced, quickly tripled to $2.7 trillion.

    With regard to those premium increases, the biggest driver should have been the most obvious: Americans are now required to purchase “essential health benefits,”another wildly misleading euphemism designed to obscure yet another, but far more pernicious aspect of cost-shifting embodied in ObamaCare. There is nothing remotely essential in requiring a 50-year-old man to be covered for maternity and newborn care, or senior citizens to be covered for pediatric services.
    Thus, many insurers are utterly baffled by Sebelius’s contention, especially in light of the disastrous rollout of the healthcare.gov website. “It’s pretty shortsighted because I think everybody knows that the way the exchange has rolled out… is going to lead to higher costs,” said one senior insurance executive who requested anonymity. That same executive said he expects insurance rates to triple in the “populous swing state” from which he hails.
    Other insurance executives were equally frustrated with another cost driver, namely the administration’s unconstitutional penchant for changing the parameters of the law. They cited the administration’s decision to allow people to keep their old insurance policies instead of forcing them onto the exchanges, the limited amount of money government has to help cover the costs of older and sicker patients, and the under-enrollment of the so-call “young invincibles” that could help keep costs down. “We’re exasperated,” the same unnamed executive contended. “All of these major delays on very significant portions of the law are going to change what it’s going to cost.”
    The lack of enrollment by young healthy Americans could be the deciding factor in determining those costs. The current data is not breaking well for an administration that projected the percentage of ObamaCare purchasers in the 18 to 35 age group would be 40 percent. As of March 1, approximately 4.2 million Americans had selected an ObamaCare plan. Less than 1.1 million, or only 25 percent of them, belonged to that demographic. From October through February, the number of signups averaged out to 840,000 per month. In order to reach the 40 percent figure by the end of this month, more than 900,000 people would have to sign up for the plan—and everyone of them and their covered family members would have to be between the ages of 18 and 35.
    And once again, note the term “sign ups.” On Tuesday, embattled White House Press Secretary Jay Carey was finally forced to admit what many Americans have known for a long time: sign ups isn’t remotely the same as pay ups. “We can point you to major insurers who have placed that [pay up] figure at 80 percent, give-or-take, depending on the insurer,” Carney said. That means one-in-five don’t have actual coverage. When Fox News correspondent Ed Henry originally asked Carney why the administration continues to use the word “enrolled,” Carney declined to answer.
    The lack of candor is hardly an anomaly. The president and his party promised that health insurance would be more affordable, saving families as much as $2500 per year in costs. That was a baldfaced lie. But it was the lesser of two baldfaced lies with which insurance companies had to cope. The greater lie was the president’s oft-repeated promise that Americans could keep their doctor and their healthcare providers. Faced with bad or worse, insurance companies chose bad: in response to the Obama administration’s benefit mandates, taxes and regulations, they narrowed provider networks to keep premium costs down.
    Unfortunately, even that option didn’t work. Despite narrow, sometimes drastically narrow, networks that deprived many Americans of critical care formerly provided by their “bad apple” insurance policies, premium prices still increased by double digits in most markets.
    Remarkably, the administration’s “solution” for the problem will inevitably exacerbate it. The HHS sent a letter to insurance companies informing them that they must provide “reasonable access” to doctors and hospitals beginning next year, including an expansion of access to “essential community providers” from 20 percent to 30 percent. In addition, healthcare regulators will looking at other cost-cutting features in insurers’ plans, in an effort to determine if they are “discriminatory” with regard to discouraging sick Americans to sign up for healthcare.
    As is typical with this administration, the term “reasonable access” is left undefined, doubtless to give them case-by-case leverage against those insurers they wish to single out for the kind of political humiliation that deflects blame away from the Obama administration and a Democratic Party wholly responsible for this mess. As for the word “discrimination,” is there even a scintilla of doubt that it will be used as a club to browbeat those same insurers?
    Another undefined term could be far more problematic. ObamaCare gives customers a 90-day grace period for unpaid premiums before insurers can cancel their coverage. Yet insurers are only responsible for claims made in the first 30 days. During the next 60 days, insurers can place subsequent claims in a “pending status”‚Äìand ultimately deny payment for them if insurance is cancelled, leaving healthcare providers on the hook. The administration contends the grace period rule is limited to those who have already paid one month’s premium, and requires insurance companies to notify healthcare providers “as soon as practicable” when those customers are in arrears.
    The American Medical Association (AMA), which shamelessly shilled for the passage of ObamaCare, grasped the implications. “Managing risk is typically a role for insurers, but the grace period rule transfers two-thirds of that risk from the insurers to physicians and health care providers,” AMA President Ardis Dee Hoven said in a statement. On Wednesday, they provided their members with guidelines to help them manage that possibility. But even those guidelines couldn’t obscure the truth. “The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) regulations do not specify how the health insurance issuer must notify you when one of your patients enters the grace period,” they stated.
    Perhaps the biggest and most painful truth about ObamaCare was illuminated by theWashington Times’ Joseph Curl, who reminds us that original impetus behind the bill was to insure the 46 million Americans President Obama warned us were only “one illness away from financial ruin.” As Curl noted the above enrollment figures of only 4.2 million, or just 9 percent of the 46 million cited by Obama, he asked the obvious question: We changed the $2.7 trillion health care system to sign up 4.2 million people?
    If data compiled by Goldman Sachs are correct, even that paltry number is misleading. The investment bank projects that the Obamacare exchanges will end up actuallyenrolling 4 million people—but only 1 million of them will have been previously uninsured.
    Regardless, the bill’s cheerleaders remain defiant. When Obama appeared on her TV show, useful idiot Ellen DeGeneres contended that “everyone’s very grateful” for Obamacare. The terminally clueless Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), who defied the available data and contended that ObamaCare has “dramatically” slowed the growth in healthcare costs, insisted Democrats “couldn’t be prouder” of the bill and that it would backfire for the GOP as a campaign plank. Slate’s David Weigel believes all Democrats have to do is “find Obamacare success stories.”
    Again, reality bites. As The Hill reveals, opposition to ObamaCare remains near its all time high with a 53 percent disapproval rating. ABC’s Jeff Zeleny revealed that “privately several Democrats tell ABC News they’re increasingly worried the health care law is political poison.” As for ObamaCare stories, here’s a compilation of 50 negative ones—rom every state in the union
    Yet the ultimate reality is the simplest one for the American public to grasp. The president and his administration have taken a duly enacted law and made a complete and unconstitutional mockery of it, altering or delaying every onerous piece for nothing more than transparent political considerations. They have done so with complete complicity from Congressional Democrats, who have made an equal mockery of the constitutionally-mandated separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. That’s how the president, his administration and Democrats havedemonstrated, not talked about their “pride” for ObamaCare.
    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/61900?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=fda6067166-Call_to_Champions&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-fda6067166-297703129
    Posted 22nd March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  6. MAR21Obama Lied About Care architect Zeke Emanuel claims in his new book that the health care reform law will result in “the end of employer-sponsored insurance.”Barack Obama’s claim that “if you like your plan, you can keep it” — a talking point developed in his first 100 days in office by a tiny but influential left-wing messaging group called the Herndon Alliance — his administration has long planned to disassemble the current U.S. insurance industry as well as alter health care reform.The Daily Caller reported last June that the Obama administration was making moves to squash self-funded insurance plans, which small businesses use and which could represent the “Achilles heel” for Obamacare implementation, prompting Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell to introduce the Self-insurance Protection Act (SIPA). Obama also admitted in front of Republican congressmen in 2010 that 8 to 9 million Americans would lose their health insurance under his new health reform law.Since Obamacare implementation began, Emanuel, brother of former Obama White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, has been vocal about things that his law seeks to destroy, diminish or replace.Emanuel also wrote in his book “Reinventing American Health Care” that “insurance companies as we know them are about to die” and be replaced by Obamacare-created health systems called Accountable Care Organizations (ACO).“For the next few years insurance companies will both continue to provide services to employers and, increasingly, compete against each other in the health insurance exchanges. In that role they will put together networks of physicians and hospitals and other services and set a premium. But because of health care reform, new actors will force insurance companies to evolve or become extinct,” Ezekiel wrote in the book.“The accountable care organizations (ACOs) (which I discuss in Chapter 8 of my new book) and hospital systems will begin competing directly in the exchanges and for exclusive contracts with employers.”

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/20/obamacare-architect-law-will-cause-the-end-of-employer-sponsored-insurance/#ixzz2wcmYQA2LPosted 21st March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  7. MAR20RI health exchange urges parents use dating, hookup apps to nag children into Obama Lied About CareHealthSource RI, Rhode Island’s state-run Obamacare exchange, created a “Nag Toolkit” for dating sites.Obamacare’s open enrollment period ends on March 31.HealthSource RI is encouraging parents to “mercilessly” nag their children through hookup, social media apps.
    bamacare exchange is telling parents to create profiles on online dating and hookup apps to “mercilessly” nag their children into signing up for Obamacare.“Help us get your kids insured by nagging them about health insurance where they least expect it,”reads the homepage for HealthSource RI’s “Nag Toolkit.””Your kids don’t want to get health insurance. They also don’t want to get nagged. Let’s find out which one they want less.”    Tweet ThisThe tool teaches parents how to stalk their children on the hookup app Tinder, in which users scroll through fellow users’ Facebook profile photos and select which ones they would like to hook up with.The “Nag Toolkit” tells parents to download the app, add a profile picture with a sign saying “Get health insurance,” and list the same interests as their children to increase their “Tinder compatibility.”Another section of the kit advises parents to create profiles on the online dating website OkCupid and repeatedly message their children, nagging them to get insurance.“Your kids don’t want to get health insurance,” the kit advises. “They also don’t want to get nagged. Let’s find out which one they want less.”It also provides instructions for parents on how to “nag” their children on other social media networks including Twitter, Snapchat, and Vine.HealthSource RI did not respond to requests for comment from Campus Reform.http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=5491Posted 20th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  8. MAR20Gaduate assistants at the University of Kansas (KU) are unsure how they would survive financially if the school goes through with proposed hour cuts as a solution to minimize the costs associated with Obama Lied About Care.







    Obamacare requires large employers to offer insurance to all employees working 30 or more hours per week, and KU is considering limiting graduate assistants to 20 hours to avoid the cost, according to a campus email.”Taking the 10-hour position away from me would put me literally below the poverty line.” – Pantaleon Florez III, KU master’s student   The average assistant currently makes $15,000 to $16,000 for a nine-month appointment and teaches approximately 20 hours per week — but many work second jobs on campus to pay the bills, jobs which they would have to quit if the bill passed.”A lot of us rely on that money to make ends meet,”said Meredith Wiggins, a teachingassistant and graduate student in English who works extra hours at the journalism school’s Bremner Editing Center.”Taking the 10-hour position away from me would put me literally below the poverty line,” said Pantaleon Florez III, a master’s student in education who works for the Student Senate and also tutors through KU Athletics.In 2013, KU employed about 1,740 assistants, according to the KU public affairs office.KU did not respond to requests for comment from Campus Reform in time for publication.Via the Lawrence-Journal World.http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=5498Posted 20th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  9. MAR18Sigh: No, Obama Lied About care Hasn’t Reached ‘Five Million Enrollments’You know the drill by now. The Obama administration releases an enrollment figure, the media credulously repeats it, then we bring you the facts. It’s becoming something of a ritual around these parts. Let’s begin with the spin. Get excited about these inflated numbers, America:
    Back in reality, the generally-accepted estimate of the nationwide non-payment rate is 20 percent — meaning that one-fifth of the “newly enrollment” are not, in fact, enrolled. The administration “counts” anyone who’s placed an Obamacare exchange plan in their virtual shopping cart as signed up. Kathleen Sebelius again testified last week that HHS is not keeping track of who checks out and pays their first month’s premium, which are necessary steps to becoming fully enrolled. (I’ve included that video below). As of a few weeks ago, payment delinquency rates were close to 50 percent in certain states. Nearly half of the few previously-uninsured Americans who have selected plans through Obamacare are not paid up. Also, the overwhelming majority of these “new” enrollees are not obtaining coverage for the first time. Most had insurance prior to Obamacare. According to estimate, fewer than 30 percent of those signing up are first-time enrollees. Two independent studies revealed that roughly 90 percent of eligible consumers who were uninsured before the law’s implementation have chosen not to purchase plans on Obamacare’s exchanges. The top reason cited was lack of affordability. Here’s my back-of-the envelope math about the real progress


    That’s based on the White House’s original target of seven million, which they’ve since tried to pretend never happened. If you take these calculations a step further by only tallying enrollments of (a) newly-insured people who (b) have activated their coverage by paying, the accurate “new enrollment” number sits just north of one million. And that’s using the relatively generous 20 percent nonpayment rate assumption. Remember, according to the McKinsey study, the delinquency percentage among this group is more than double the broader national one-fifth figure. I’ll leave you with Kathleen Sebelius testifying once again that she and her merry band of Obamacare administrators have no idea how many people areactually fully enrolled, or how many of them had coverage before this $2 trillion program took effect:http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/03/18/no-obamacare-hasnt-reached-five-million-enrollments-n1810463?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm

    Phil Klein makes a number of similar points, noting that enrollment has accelerated in March, compared to February’s deceleration.


    Posted 18th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  10. MAR174 of 5 companies may hike deductibles due to Obama Lied About Care



    Four out of five U.S. companies have either already raised deductibles on their employee health plans or are considering it thanks to Obamacare, according to a survey of over 700 businesses by consulting firm Mercer LLC.A third of the companies surveyed have already hiked deductibles or copays and another 48 percent are contemplating options that increase health-care payments by workers themselves, Bloomberg reports.Health-care costs for customers and companies alike are continuing to rise, partly because of Obamacare-instated essential benefits that all health-care plans must now provide.The more controversial benefits insurers must provide in all plans are pregnancy and child-care services, which have received pushback from men, women past childbearing age, and even nuns.While the Obama administration has twice tried to delay enforcement of this rule, many state insurance commissioners rejected the delay in 2013 and plan to do so again this year.Many U.S. companies are taking even more drastic action already. Large businesses like Target, Trader Joe’s and Home Depot have stopped offering part-time employees health insurance at all, instead encouraging them to opt for Obamacare exchanges instead.
    UPS chose to cut its costs by dropping insurance for any employed spouses of their employees. Mercer found that 8 percent of employers have cut spousal coverage as well, and an additional 11 percent of companies are thinking about making such a change in 2015.And while deductibles and copays may be going up for most employees, the caliber of plans may be going down. Businesses are worried about the so-called “Cadillac tax” and are ramping down their health-care coverage accordingly.


    The Cadillac tax willhit businesses that already offer the best health benefits with a 40 percent tax. Companies that provide coverage over an annual value of $10,200 per year for individuals and $27,500 for families will pay the fees and pass $1,200 of them onto their employees per year, according to a report last year from Towers Watson.Obamacare hits some employers for being too generous, others for not being generous enough.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/13/4-of-5-companies-may-hike-deductibles-due-to-obamacare/#ixzz2wFQlfKpsPosted 17th March 2014 by GOP Failed Conservatives 0 Add a comment
  11. MAR17New head of anti-Obama Lied About Care doctor group lives with George Soros’ progressive ex-wifeThe new president-elect of one of the country’s top conservative anti-Obamacare medical organizations lives with billionaire George Soros’ progressive ex-wife in a $55 million estate purchased by Soros.Richard Amerling was recently elected to the presidency of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), which has filed litigation to stop Obamacare as part of its advocacy efforts against President Barack Obama’s health care reform law.Amerling resides with Susan Weber Soros, former executive director of her ex-husband’s Open Society Foundations, and the pair jointly pay for private schooling for Amerling’s children, The Daily Caller has learned.
    Susan Weber Soros, who divorced the Hungarian-born progressive donor in 2005 but remains on good terms with him, enjoys regular travel, sailing, and tennis with Amerling. It is unclear if AAPS board members are aware of Amerling’s relationship with Soros.Amerling’s address on both whitepages.com and Spokeo is listed as 136 Cantitoe Street in Katonah, New York.Susan Soros’ address is also listed on Spokeo as 136 Cantitoe Street in Katonah, New York.George Soros maintains a listed address on address007.com at 136 Cantitoe Street in Katonah, New York.George Soros and Susan Weber Soros, as well as children Elizabeth Soros and Alexander Soros, himself a progressive pro-Obama philanthropist, all have listed residences at 136 Kantitoe Street in Katonah, New York, a