Posts

Post-Election Flood of ‘Obamacare’ Rules Expected

/0 Comments/in , , /by

photo credit: SteveKingIAThe bottled-up rules to set up President Barack Obama’s health care reform law are going to start flowing quickly right after Election Day.

But how long will that last? That depends on who wins the presidency.

The once-steady stream of regulations and rules from the Obama administration — instructions for insurance companies, hospitals and states on how to put the law in place — has slowed to a trickle in recent months in an attempt to avoid controversies before the election. Many states, too, have done little public work to avoid making the law an election issue for state officials on the ballot.

But work has been going on behind the scenes — both in the Department of Health and Human Services and at the state level. As soon as Wednesday, the gears and levers of government bureaucracy are likely to start moving at full speed again.

HHS is expected to begin to release the backlog of regulations. And the states will quickly face a Nov. 16 deadline to tell the Obama administration whether they’ll implement a health insurance exchange — a key part of the law about where consumers will purchase health insurance after 2014.

Read more from this story HERE.

Bishop Orders Priests to Read anti-Obama Letter at Sunday Sermons

/10 Comments/in , , /by

CHICAGO — Joining the chorus of Roman Catholic clergy in Illinois criticizing President Barack Obama before next week’s election, Peoria Bishop Daniel Jenky ordered priests to read a letter to parishioners on Sunday before the presidential election, explaining that politicians who support abortion rights also reject Jesus.

“By virtue of your vow of obedience to me as your Bishop, I require that this letter be personally read by each celebrating priest at each Weekend Mass,” Jenky wrote in a letter circulated to clergy in the Catholic Diocese of Peoria.

In the letter, Jenky cautions parishioners that Obama and a majority of U.S. senators will not reconsider the mandate that would require employers, including religious groups, to provide free birth control coverage in their health care plans. “This assault upon our religious freedom is simply without precedent in the American political and legal system,” Jenky wrote.

“Today, Catholic politicians, bureaucrats, and their electoral supporters who callously enable the destruction of innocent human life in the womb also thereby reject Jesus as their Lord,” Jenky added. “They are objectively guilty of grave sin.”

Earlier this year, Jenky delivered a controversial homily criticizing the contraception mandate. The bishop included Obama’s policies in a list of historic challenges the Catholic Church has overcome in previous centuries, including Hitler and Stalin’s campaigns.

Read more from this story HERE.

New Obamacare Tax Form Mandates Americans Report Personal Health ID Info to IRS

/1 Comment/in , , /by

photo credit: majunznkWhen Obamacare’s individual mandate takes effect in 2014, all Americans who file income tax returns must complete an additional IRS tax form. The new form will require disclosure of a taxpayer’s personal identifying health information in order to determine compliance with the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate.

As confirmed by IRS testimony to the tax-writing House Committee on Ways and Means, “taxpayers will file their tax returns reporting their health insurance coverage, and/or making a payment”.

So why will the Obama IRS require your personal identifying health information?

Simply put, there is no way for the IRS to enforce Obamacare’s individual mandate without such an invasive reporting scheme. Every January, health insurance companies across America will send out tax documents to each insured individual. This tax document—a copy of which will be furnished to the IRS—must contain sufficient information for taxpayers to prove that they purchased qualifying health insurance under Obamacare.

This new tax information document must, at a minimum, contain: the name and health insurance identification number of the taxpayer; the name and tax identification number of the health insurance company; the number of months the taxpayer was covered by this insurance plan; and whether or not the plan was purchased in one of Obamacare’s “exchanges.”

Read more from this story HERE.

Second Federal Judge Halts Enforcement of Obamacare Mandate

/0 Comments/in , , /by

photo credit: Spirit JuiceA federal judge in Michigan has become the second in the nation to say he would halt the federal government’s enforcement of the Obamacare mandate that employers pay for abortifacients regardless of their religious views.

Writing that “a preliminary injunction would serve the public interest,” Judge Robert H. Cleland said in a decision issued late Wednesday that he would issue the order.

“The potential for harm to plaintiffs exists, and with the showing plaintiffs have made thus far of being able to convincingly prove their case at trial, it is properly characterized as irreparable.”

The case was brought against the federal government by the Thomas More Law Center on behalf of Legatus, a coalition of Catholic business owners, Daniel Weingartz and his company, Weingartz Supply.

The judge’s decision means the federal government will not be allowed to enforce its abortion mandate against the company until the lawsuit is resolved. The decision does not affect Legatus, the judge ruled, because, as a nonprofit, the rules for that application remain in development.

Read more from this story HERE.

House Investigating Obama’s $8.3 Billion Slush Fund Created to Hide Impacts of Obamacare on Medicare Prior to Election

/2 Comments/in , /by

President Obama had a big political problem: Obamacare destroys the popular Medicare Advantage program, which offers private insurance plans to supplement Medicare. Something like a quarter of Medicare beneficiaries use this program. (It’s funny how free-market competition is both popular and effective when it’s actually tried, isn’t it?)

Obamacare sucks over $200 billion out of Medicare Advantage, something that would have been very noticeable through price increases and benefit reductions during open enrollment… which began in October, right before the election.

If you’re Barack Obama, you solve a problem like that by throwing huge amounts of other peoples’ money at it. So it was that a little “demonstration project” to reward the most effective Medicare Advantage plans was suddenly inflated into a titanic $8.3 billion slush fund – bigger than the 85 previous demonstration projects combined – in order to delay the pain of Medicare Advantage cuts until after the election. The standards for receiving payouts from this “incentive” program were lowered so much that even mediocre plans could receive a “reward.” It wouldn’t do to have seniors opening envelopes that say their premiums have skyrocketed or some of their favorite benefits have been dropped, right before the election!

The House Oversight Committee began investigating this jumbo Slurpee of slush in May, and ran into a Health and Human Services stonewall so obvious that it’s comical. A request for documents on May 23 was ignored by HHS. It was repeated on August 1, and ignored again. House Oversight fired off emails to a couple of HHS staffers, and didn’t get a response for weeks… at which point the HHS Deputy Director for Oversight and Investigation said, “I’m checking on the status and will get back to you,” but never got back to anybody.

Read more from this story HERE.

Supreme Court Justices: Skilled Charlatans, Undeserving of Public Trust & Respect?

/2 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: DonkeyHotey

The ObamaCare decision exposed the Supreme Court as an emperor without clothes. Hoping for deliverance from ObamaCare, many usual critics defended the Court. But with a new term fast approaching, a month before a critical election, Chief Justice Roberts’ handiwork should be remembered as a final wake-up call to consider, once and for all, whether the Court and judicial review merit respect, acceptance and legitimacy.

Upon Paul Ryan’s vice presidential selection, supporters noted his objection that Chief Justice Roberts had “contort[ed] logic and reason to come up with [the ObamaCare] ruling.” Such contortion is nothing unusual except for one thing. The Supreme Court, which normally operates in obscurity, could not escape a glaring spotlight this time, affording a rare opportunity to inform the public about the dark side of what many justices do. This raises questions concerning the utility of elections, what remains of our actual Constitution, the rule of law, and public acceptance of judicial review.

The Roberts opinion as well as attempts to defend it provide easily understood textbook examples of how justices have turned “interpretation” into a scam by manipulating words to mean anything in order to impose their will by authorizing what is constitutionally prohibited and prohibiting what is authorized or required.

Bluntly acknowledging, in order to challenge, the charge that Roberts is “a liar [and] coward,” devoted Roberts apologist Matthew Franck candidly clarified high stakes questions rarely presented to the public. Are all high court justices always honest? Or are many of them, often a majority, just politicians undemocratically, crassly and lawlessly imposing their personal morality based on misplaced public faith in them — blind faith similar to that once placed in witch doctors and medicine men?

If many justices are merely skilled charlatans distinguished from the latter solely by using far more sophisticated and incomprehensible mumbo jumbo, then what they do is illegitimate, their whole enterprise and institution are illegitimate, and they are not entitled to public trust and respect.

Read more from this story HERE.

Constitution, Down But Not Out

/0 Comments/in , /by

It is fair to suggest that Congress came late to declaring a constitution day because for much of American history the Constitution was routinely celebrated on public occasions, most notably on Independence Day, when great orators like Daniel Webster and Charles Francis Adams spoke with reverence of our nation’s founding document. The Constitution, usually along with the Declaration of Independence and a portrait of George Washington, hung on most schoolroom walls. Future voters who passed through those classrooms may not have learned the intricacies of constitutional law, but they did enter upon their lives as citizens knowing that the Constitution is important.

But the passage of time and the remarkable success of our great experiment in government led to complacency and a casual assumption that mere citizens could trust government to respect and nurture a constitution designed originally to protect their liberties against inevitable violations by that self-same government. To be sure, the Bill of Rights (though not part of the original constitution) was not forgotten by mid- and late-twentieth-century activists, but the framers’ great structural design of divided government was largely abandoned to expediency and growing dependency on government.

In that regard, 2012 was not a very good year. The challenge to Obamacare presented the Supreme Court with its greatest opportunity in decades to begin restoring the vertical separation of powers that is true federalism. But the chief justice blinked. Though wishful advocates for liberty and limited government found solace in the majority’s conclusion that the Commerce Clause has limits, the reality is that the power to tax is now an unlimited power to regulate. The powers the Supreme Court has now constituted will permit Congress to do whatever it has the political will to enact. The emperor has no clothes. The Supreme Court has no robes.

But we should not allow Constitution Day 2012 to be a day of mourning. The Constitution is not yet a dead letter. The ingenious framework of horizontally and vertically divided authority; the careful and narrow enumeration of congressional powers; the Tenth Amendment declaration that “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”; the Bill of Rights, including the Ninth Amendment’s confirmation that (in the words of the Declaration of Independence) “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”; and the proposition that (again in the words of the Declaration) “governments are instituted among Men” “to secure these rights” — all of that remains.

What is missing is the resolve to put principle ahead of politics, to put liberty and responsibility ahead of dependency and entitlement.

Read more from this story HERE.

House GOP Passes Budget Including Funding for Planned Parenthood, Obamacare

/5 Comments/in , /by

The Republican-majority House of Representatives on Thursday passed a $1.047 trillion bill funding the federal government through March 2013 that will permit funding for Planned Parenthood and ObamaCare–including the regulation that took effect on Aug. 1 that will require virtually all health plans in the United States to cover, without fees or co-pay, sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that induce abortions.

The vote was 329-91, and the bill now goes to the Senate for expected approval next week.

The bill funds the government for six months into the new fiscal year and for almost five months after the November elections. Congress turned to the stop-gap measure after failing to pass any of the 12 appropriation bills necessary to fund day-to-day government operations.

The Catholic bishops of the United States have unanimously declared the Obamacare sterilization-contraception-abortifacient regulation an “unjust and illegal mandate” that violates the right to free exercise of religion not only of Catholic institutions but also of Catholic business owners and workers.

The bill, a continuing resolution (CR), does not prohibit funding for either ObamaCare programs or Planned Parenthood. Nor does it stop the government from enforcing regulations, such as the mandate from the Health and Human Services Department that nearly all health insurance plans provide contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs free of charge.

Read more from this story HERE.

Despite Earlier Promises to Repeal, Romney Plans to Keep Parts of Obamacare

/6 Comments/in , /by

Photo credit: Ars Skeptica

Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney, who promised early in his campaign to repeal President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, says he would keep several important parts of the overhaul.

‘Of course there are a number of things that I like in health care reform that I’m going to put in place,’ he said in an interview broadcast Sunday on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press.’ ‘One is to make sure that those with pre-existing conditions can get coverage.’

Romney also said he would allow young adults to keep their coverage under their parents’ health-insurance.

Those provisions have been two of the more popular parts of Obama’s Affordable Care Act.

‘I say we’re going to replace Obamacare. And I’m replacing it with my own plan,’ Romney said. ‘And even in Massachusetts when I was governor, our plan there deals with pre-existing conditions and with young people.’

Read more from this article HERE.

The Real Tragedy Of ObamaCare Has Yet To Be Felt By The Poor

/0 Comments/in , /by

One of the most tragic failings of ObamaCare is that it will make it harder for many of the most vulnerable citizens – patients with no option but Medicaid – to get care.

Medicaid is cumbersome, complex, and wasteful – already the worst health care program in the country. But rather than making changes to improve or modernize this program designed to finance care for the poor, the Obama administration is trying to convince states to add at least 16 million more people to Medicaid, including families making more than $30,000 a year.

That means the poorest and most vulnerable patients enrolled today will be competing with millions of new Medicaid patients for appointments to see a limited number of physicians. Those who have the greatest need and nowhere else to go are likely to have the hardest time getting care.

In its ruling in June, the Supreme Court made it optional for states to expand Medicaid to cover new enrollees. Even with generous federal funding, several states have said flatly they cannot afford the expansion, which would cost states at least $118 billion through 2023.

They are resisting not only because of budget concerns but also because this large Medicaid expansion could have catastrophic effects on those who provide society’s health care safety net.

Read more from this story HERE.