Last week, a television ad featuring Andy Griffith launched to try to raise the public’s support for the new law:
“1965, a lot of good things came out that year, like Medicare. This year, as always, we’ll have our guaranteed benefits, and with the new healthcare law, more good things are coming: free check-ups, lower prescription costs and better ways to protect us and Medicare from fraud. See what else is new. I think you're gonna like it."
Next time, Griffith should check his facts. Medicare benefits simply aren’t guaranteed for all. Seniors participating in private Medicare Advantage will see significant cuts in their plans.
Factcheck.org finds:
“About 10 million Medicare Advantage recipients could see their extra benefits reduced by an average of $43 per month, according to the Congressional Budget Office. And more recently, a detailed analysis by the Medicare program’s own chief actuary, Richard Foster, stated in April:
“Medicare Actuary Richard Foster: The new provisions will generally reduce MA rebates to plans and thereby result in less generous benefit packages. We estimate that in 2017, when the MA provisions will be fully phased in, enrollment in MA plans will be lower by about 50 percent (from its projected level of 14.8 million under the prior law to 7.4 million under the new law).At a time when our country is $13.2 trillion in debt, why would the Obama Administration use your hard-earned money to pay for this deceptive marketing campaign? Because it knows the American people aren’t sold on Obama’s health care changes, and for good reason.
“Even the head of the White House Office of Health Reform, Nancy-Ann DeParle, acknowledges that Medicare Advantage benefits are going to be reduced. ‘I’m sure that some of those additional benefits have been nice,’ the Wall Street Journal quoted her as saying in a July 25 report. ‘But I think what we have to look at here is what’s fair and what’s important for the strength of the Medicare program long term.’”
Politico reported on U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson’s ruling regarding the insurance mandate:
“'Unquestionably, this regulation radically changes the landscape of health insurance coverage in America,' Hudson wrote in a 32-page decision filed Monday morning. 'Never before has the Commerce Clause … been extended this far.'
"Hudson said there was no clear legal precedent allowing the federal government to impose such a rule, even under Congress’s power to require individuals to pay taxes. However, he also conceded there was no clear precedent to the contrary.
“'Neither the U.S. Supreme Court nor any circuit court of appeals has squarely addressed this issue,' Hudson wrote. 'No reported case from any federal appellate court has extended the Commerce Clause or the Tax Clause to include the regulation of a person’s decision not to purchase a product, notwithstanding its effect on interstate commerce.”
Obamacare is a vast overstep of the government’s role in its citizens’ lives as our nation’s founders never envisioned Congress enacting legislation which would require an unwilling citizen to purchase something against his or her will. But the insurance mandate isn’t the only problem with Obamacare. The bill creates a costly, bureaucratic program that we simply can't afford. In a time when the government should be demonstrating fiscal restraint and easing our debt, it instead launched a new trillion-dollar program.
The day after the House passed Obamacare, I introduced a forty-one word bill that would completely repeal this 2,000 page monstrosity. Now, to be perfectly clear, improvements must be made to our health care system, but what was signed into law is not an effective way to go about it.
Americans should carefully watch as this legal battle plays out in Virginia. Not only is your health care on the line, but so is our Constitution.
I expect Members will see the effects of our faltering economy on small businesses. They also may witness families in a pinch due to high unemployment numbers. Auto dealership inventory may be sitting stagnant and home “for sale” signs may not have budged in months.
As families have balanced their budgets and kept a close eye on their own spending, Congress has put spending on the fast-track, racking up our country’s debt level to a whopping $13.2 trillion. Democrats have pushed through more and more bailouts, new bureaucratic regulations, and monstrous policies in this legislative session. During district work period, all voting is put on hold. Now is our time to listen.
This week I posed a question to my Facebook followers: “What topics do you think Members of Congress need to hear about?” I received a myriad of responses, but the underlying principles were the same – fiscal responsibility, limited government, and a strict adherence to the Constitution.
Americans weren’t afraid to answer with specific policy items including everything from more border security, repealing Obamacare, to an audit of the Federal Reserve. Americans clearly have a lot on their minds this summer.
Members of Congress, now is your time to utilize this break to visit with small business owners, farmers and stay-at-home moms. Learn from your constituents and take a moment to find out what they have on their minds. You might be surprised to learn it doesn’t line up with this Congress’ reckless agenda.
Obama skirted around the Senate to appoint Berwick by using a rare recess appointment over the Independence Day holiday break. It’s unfortunate, because Berwick’s take on rationing health care is truly frightening.
Berwick has been an outspoken admirer of the government health programs found in Britain, the British National Health Service, and its rationing arm, the National Institute for Clinical Effectiveness (NICE). Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, detailed some of Berwick’s approaches:
“’I am romantic about the National Health Service. I love it,’ Berwick said during a 2008 speech to British physicians, going on to call it ‘generous, hopeful, confident, joyous, and just.’ He compared the wonders of British health care to a U.S. system that he described as trapped in ‘the darkness of private enterprise.’If these statements don’t give you a good enough idea on Donald Berwick’s health care philosophy, try this:
“The one thing the NHS is good at is saving money. After all, it is far cheaper to let the sick die than to provide care.
“At the forefront of this cost-based rationing is NICE. It acts as a comparative-effectiveness tool for NHS, comparing various treatments and determining whether the benefits the patient receives, such as prolonged life, are cost-efficient for the government.
“NICE, however, is not simply a government agency that helps bureaucrats decide if one treatment is better than another. With the creation of NICE, the U.K. government has effectively put a dollar amount to how much a citizen’s life is worth. To be exact, each year of added life is worth approximately $44,305 (?30,000). Of course, this is a general rule and, as NICE chairman Michael Rawlins points out, the agency has sometimes approved treatments costing as much as $70,887 (?48,000) per year of extended life.
“To Dr. Berwick , this is exactly how it should be. ‘NICE is not just a national treasure,’ he says, ‘it is a global treasure.’”
“’It’s not a question of whether we will ration care,’ he said in a magazine interview for Biotechnology Healthcare, ‘It is whether we will ration with our eyes open.’”
So, it’s Berwick’s position that rationing care may be good enough for everyone else, but what about for Berwick himself?
Byron York recently reported in the Washington Examiner that Berwick and his wife have health coverage “from retirement until death”. While most Americans are concerned with where their health care will come from, Berwick will never have to worry nor will he ever be subject to Obamacare.
Americans should be watchful to see if Berwick pushes through British-style policies in Medicare and Medicaid. But those policies aren’t the only issues in health care we should be guarding against. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said over the weekend at a progressive conference, as reported by Philip Klein of the American Spectator, “We’re going to have a public option. It’s just a question of when.”
President Obama explained his recess appointment saying, “I can’t play political games on these issues. I’ve got a government to run.” President Obama, this isn’t a game. Americans have a right to know more about those individuals you appoint to such lofty levels of public influence.
As the unemployment rate sits at 9.5%, American jobs are literally floating away. Two oil drilling rigs from the Gulf of Mexico recently embarked on a two month journey overseas. Diamond Offshore announced one rig is going to the Nile River delta of Egypt and the other is heading to the Republic of Congo; and their job opportunities went with them.
These rigs were sitting idle due to President Obama’s deep water drilling ban and his administration’s subsequent new moratorium, even though a federal judge struck down the first ban. Diamond Offshore could not wait for the Administration to lift the ban in six months. Instead, the company saw an opportunity for up to $234 million to be generated through drilling off the shores of Congo.
The moratorium must be reconsidered before more rigs float away to aid other country’s economies. Additionally, the rigs already existing in the U.S. need to be utilized, under the highest safely standards, to provide more jobs which our nation so desperately needs.
Other countries are benefiting from offshore drilling while the U.S. is slipping far behind, as reported today in the Investor’s Business Daily newspaper:
According to RigLogix, the U.S. offshore rig fleet of 93 rigs of different types is only being used to 38% of capacity. In the Alaskan offshore, none of the four rigs is under use. In the remaining parts of the U.S. offshore, only two of the 28 rigs are in use, a grand total of 7%.
By contrast, 148 of the North Sea's 159 rigs are under contract, for a 93% utilization rate. Off the coast of Brazil, 68 of the 79 rigs are in use, for an 86.1% utilization rate. West Africa, which includes Republic of Congo, has 67% of its 76 rigs in use. Even Mexico, much maligned for not investing and squandering opportunities, utilizes 52% of its 62 rigs.
Just as the U.S. is falling behind in exports, amounting to only 17% of GDP as the rest of the world sails by with higher numbers, the 34% rig utilization shows how badly we're falling behind offshore.
The off shore drilling moratorium must be reconsidered before more rigs float away to aid other country’s economies. The tragedy that has cost the Gulf so much already should not be exploited like this to further an out-of-touch energy policy the President and Congressional Democrats have promised. The rigs already existing in the U.S. need to be utilized to their fullest capacity and under the highest safely standards to provide more jobs which our nation so desperately needs.
It is not too late for the U.S. to be a leader in deep oil drilling and safe exploration. But, President Obama must act quickly before more oil rigs are thousands of miles away providing jobs and revenue to foreign nations.
When the full effects of ObamaCare are felt, be ready to pay more for lunch at the burger joint down the street. Restaurants are anticipating laying-off workers and passing higher costs onto the consumer in order to deal with the requirements in the Democrats’ new health care law.
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports on the impact expected by one burger chain in particular, White Castle:
“The Columbus-based family owned restaurant chain - known for serving small square hamburgers called "sliders" – says a single provision in the bill will eat up roughly 55 percent of its yearly net income after 2014.
“Starting that year, the bill levies a $3,000-per-employee penalty on companies whose workers pay more than 9.5 percent of household income in premiums for company-provided insurance.
“White Castle, which currently provides insurance to all of its full-time workers and picks up 70 to 89 percent of their premium costs, believes it will likely end up paying those penalties. The financial hit will make it hard for the company to maintain its 421 restaurants, let alone create new jobs, says company spokesman Jamie Richardson.”
Likewise, other restaurants will be hurting. The Plain Dealer went on to note George Ebinger, owner of several International House of Pancake restaurants, who expects penalties for not insuring his 140 workers to cost him $220,000. He could insure those workers, but it will cost approximately half as much to pay the penalties and not insure them.
ObamaCare’s business crippling policies will stunt job-growth at a time when job creation is needed most. After all, unemployment continues to hover right around 10%. This bill needs to be repealed in full, plain and simple.
My vote against ObamaCare and commitment to free enterprise recently earned me the Thomas Jefferson Award by the International Foodservice Distributors Association. Clearly, insurance mandates resulting in cost hikes and penalties to the foodservice and restaurant industry are not the road to economic growth.
Last time Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was at the White House, he did not receive a warm reception to say the least. Today, however, Netanyahu is back in Washington and President Obama has a great opportunity to mend troubled relations between the longtime allies.
The press is encouraging a photo to be taken of the two leaders together, but I also would like to encourage the President to take a public stand in defense of Israel and their right to defend themselves. It is my sincere hope Obama does not pressure Netanyahu to cede eastern land to Palestine in today’s meeting. Likewise, I do not want to see a push for an apology for the May 31 flotilla incident that took a deadly turn. Rather, Israel has a right to settle on its own land and to defend itself from those looking to do harm. Going forward, Israel must be supported by the United States for the long-term safety and security of both nations.
President Obama, second chances do not come along often; please take advantage of this opportunity and restore relations with our longtime friend and ally.
Update:
President Obama certainly did his best this morning to make it appear like the relationship between his Administration and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has always been on solid ground. In fact, he went as far as to say that his commitment to Israel is "unwavering". Personally, I think "unwavering" is a bit strong. After all, it was President Obama who said in an address to the United Nations in September of 2009 that "America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."
This is in line with what Fox News reported in April of this year about America's role on the U.N. Security Council regarding Israel:
"The Obama administration is reportedly signaling another major shift in policy towards one of its staunchest allies, Israel, and this shift could change the way it votes at the Security Council. The change would mean an end to the US' use of its veto power in the United Nations Security Council when certain anti-Israel resolutions are introduced for a vote.
"Reports surfaced a couple of weeks ago, that a senior US diplomat met with Qatar's foreign minister in Paris. They discussed the possibility that the US was giving serious consideration to not using its veto if a vote on Israeli settlements was to come up. It has been the policy of successive administrations to veto virtually all anti-Israel resolutions at the Security Council."
That doesn't sound like an "unwavering" commitment to me.
The Democrats' "deemed as passed" resolution is missing the most basic elements of a standard budget that is expected each year: total outlays, total federal revenue, total proposed changes to revenue, total deficit levels, and total debt levels.
Connie Hair with Human Events points out that "never before -- since the creation of the Congressional budget process -- has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money."
So, knowing full well that our nation is already $13 trillion in debt, House Democrats found it politically expedient to pursue this alternative to a real budget that will allow them to keep up their record levels of spending without having to be fiscally accountable. Now that's leadership for you!
The Republican budget committee has put together a very thorough analysis of this faux-budget - “An Admission of Fiscal Failure”
Contrary to what local and appellate courts ruled previously in this case, the Supreme Court today affirmed that the Constitution of the United States is a document that covers every citizen regardless of gender, age or hometown and as such, the Second Amendment is a right of every American citizen.
The United States Constitution was written to be timeless and universal in its application and as the Senate begins hearings today to confirm the nomination of Elena Kagan to the highest court in our Nation, it’s important to remember that judicial activism has no place in America's courts. It’s my sincere hope that with today’s ruling, we will see a renewed trust and implementation of the Constitutional rights our forefathers designated to be the eternal rule of the land.
The Republican Study Committee has compiled a very informative summary highlighting the shortcomings of this legislative monstrosity:
* Winners and Losers – Instead of using and enhancing existing legal structures like the bankruptcy process, the bill gives the same regulators, who failed to see the current crisis forming, broad new powers to takeover and break up private companies. The Executive Branch would have every opportunity to abuse these powers to pick winners and losers for political reasons.
* Taxpayer Bailouts – Taxpayers will pay the costs of these takeovers upfront out of the Treasury. This taxpayer bailout is supposed to be paid back later by other financial firms, but the costs could quite conceivably rise to trillions of dollars – making repayment out of the question.
* Consumer Restrictions – The bill creates a new agency with jurisdiction over all sorts of financial products offered by banks and non-banks (i.e. Sears or your local mechanic): credit cards, installment plans, mortgages, other loans, check cashing services, etc. In an effort to “protect” consumers from their own decisions, Democrats will make credit more inaccessible for families and entrepreneurs across the country.
* Higher Consumer Costs – To offset the cost of the bill, Democrats are levying a $19 billion so-called “bank tax.” Of course, banks won’t actually pay these costs in the long-run – their customers will pay in the form of higher rates and fees. So say goodbye to your free checking account.
* Hoarding Capital – While banks need to keep their reserves at responsible levels, the stringent new leverage restrictions – chosen by politicians – will leave even credit-worthy consumers struggling to get a loan.
* Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – Who? Despite their intimate involvement in the financial meltdown and their perpetual taxpayer bailout ($145 billion and counting), the bill neglects to make much-needed reforms to these failed and insolvent entities.
