Government Takeover of Health Care

Government Health Care: The Next Step on the Road to Tyranny and Slavery

December 19, 2009

Infowars.com - Democrats deceptively argue that health care is legal under the commerce clause of the Constitution. The commerce clause relates to business, not individuals, but the Democrats have skewed the original purpose and intent of the Constitution.

When asked to point out where in the Constitution authority is granted to force an individual — ultimately at gunpoint — to buy government health care, Speaker of the House Pelosi said: “Are you serious?”

It is said Obama was a constitutional professor at the University of Chicago Law School (even this is a lie — he was in fact “a senior lecturer,” not a professor), so we should assume he has at least some knowledge of the principles of the Constitution. Obama likely knows that the Constitution does not mandate Americans be forced into a contractual agreement with a private party for health insurance.

Apparently, like his predecessor, Obama regards the Constitution as little more than a goddamn piece of paper.

“Nowhere in the Constitution is Congress given the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party or purchase a good or service,” explains the Heritage Foundation. No decision or present doctrine of the Supreme Court justifies such a claim of power.

Is it possible Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have not read Article I of the Constitution? It states that the government’s rights are limited. Article 1, Section 8 reads:

“The Congress shall have Power … To regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes.”

It does not say a word about health care. The federal government only has the power to regulate trade between itself, foreign governments, and the states. Period.

But then the government — including the Supreme Court — has chipped away at the Constitution for decades. Many of the most serious violations of the Constitution came under the reign of a supposed conservative Republican, George W. Bush.

The Democrat health care bill is merely the most recent and most egregious of those constitutional violations. Both parties – essentially the same party – excel at destroying our constitutional rights.

As recently as last week, there was hope this monstrosity in the Senate would die a natural death and hand a defeat to Obama and his big government statists in the House and Senate.

Now that senator Ben Nelson has sold his consent — for Medicaid money to Nebraska — it appears this bill will soon be a done deal.

In a few weeks, the federal government may be making your most important and private medical decisions. Get ready for health care on par with Cash for Clunkers.

Get ready to take the next step on the road toward government tyranny and slavery.

With Nelson on Board, Health-Care Bill Could Pass by Christmas

December 19, 2009

Washington Post - Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), the final Democratic holdout on health care, announced to his colleagues Saturday morning that he would support the Senate reform bill, clearing the way for final passage by Christmas of President Obama's top domestic policy priority.

Asked if he had secured the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) told reporters, "It seems that way."

The Senate is expected to work its way through a series of procedural motions over the next few days, with a vote on the legislation scheduled the evening of Dec. 24th. A conference with the House to produce a final bill would likely extend into January, Senate aides said.

Congressional budget analysts said the revised package, unveiled Saturday morning by Reid, would spend $871 billion over the next decade to extend coverage to more than 30 million Americans by dramatically expanding Medicaid and offering federal subsidies to those who lack affordable coverage through employers.

Those costs would be more than covered by nearly $400 billion over the next decade in new taxes and nearly $500 billion spending reductions, primarily cuts to Medicare, the federal health program for people over 65. The remainder, about $132 billion over 10 years, would go to lowering the federal deficit...

"This bill is a monstrosity, a 2,100 page monstrosity full of special deals," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). "This is not renaming the post office. Make no mistake, this bill will reshape our nation and our lives."

But Republicans also were running out of options in their quest to derail the bill. Locking down Nelson's support meant Reid had cleared a path through the Senate's complex parliamentary minefield. A 60-vote super majority means the minority's primary source of power in the Senate, the filibuster, cannot be sustained.

Under the new abortion provisions, states can opt out of allowing plans to cover abortion in the new insurance exchanges the bill would set up, to serve individuals who lack coverage through their jobs. Plus, enrollees in plans that do cover abortion procedures would pay for the coverage with separate checks -- one for abortion, one for the rest of any health-care services.

Nelson secured full federal funding for his state to expand Medicaid coverage to all individuals below 133 percent of the federal poverty level. Other states must pay a small portion of the additional cost. He won concessions for qualifying nonprofit insurers and for Medigap providers from a new insurance tax, and was able to roll back cuts to health savings accounts...

Instead of a public option, the final bill would allow private firms for the first time to offer national insurance policies to all Americans across state lines. Those plans would be negotiated through the Office of Personnel Management, the same agency that handles health coverage for federal workers and members of Congress.

Starting immediately, insurers would be prohibited from denying children coverage due to pre-existing conditions. A complete ban on the practice would take effect in 2014, when the legislation seeks to create a network of state-based insurance exchanges, or marketplaces, where people who lack access to affordable coverage through an insurer could apply for federal subsidies to purchase policies.

Insurers competing in the exchanges would be required to justify rate increases, and those who jacked up prices unduly could be barred from the exchange. Lifetime limits on coverage would be banned and annual limits would be "tightly restricted," aides said, until 2014, when they, too, would be banned entirely.

Reid's package also would give patients the right of appeal to an independent state board if an insurer denies a medical claim. And all insurance companies would be required to spend at least 80 cents of every dollar they collect in premiums on delivering care to their customers.

Under the proposal, every American would be required to obtain coverage or face annual penalties. Employers, too, could be fined if they failed to offer affordable coverage and their workers sought subsidies in the exchanges. Reid's package would offer additional assistance to the smallest businesses, however, including six years of tax credits, starting in 2010 to help businesses with 25 or fewer workers and average wages of less than $50,000 to purchase policies. And workers who couldn't afford employer-offered insurance but earned too much to qualify for a federal subsidy would be permitted to keep their employer's contribution to their coverage and use the money to buy insurance on the exchanges.

Reid also strengthened cost-containment provisions, expanding the scope of an independent Medicare advisory board charged with reining in runaway Medicare costs. Under the final bill, the board also could make recommendations for Congress, the federal government and the private sector, a change demanded by seniors' groups. And the legislation would provide grants to state governments to test ways to eliminate medical malpractice lawsuits.

The package would rely on nearly $400 billion in new taxes, according to congressional tax analysts, including a new 10 percent tax on indoor tanning salons to be paid by the customer. With the addition of the tanning tax, Reid proposes to scrap an earlier provision that would have imposed a 5-percent levy on cosmetic surgery.

In addition to the tanning tax, the Reid amendment would increase certain levies in the original bill. For example, couples making more than $250,000 a year would pay an additional 0.9 percent in Medicare payroll taxes, instead of the 0.5 percent increase Reid originally proposed. And people who failed to obtain insurance for even one month would face monthly penalties that by 2016 could add up to as much as $750 a year or 2 percent of a person's income, whichever is greater.

Senator Mitch McConnell: They Want Us to Vote on a Healthcare Bill No One Has Seen

“And here’s the most outrageous part: at the end of this rush, they want us to vote on a bill that no one outside the Majority Leader’s conference room has even seen. That’s right. The final bill we’ll vote on isn’t even the one we’ve had on the floor. It’s the deal Democrat leaders have been trying to work out in private.” - Senator Mitch McConnell

December 17, 2009

Infowars - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday regarding the importance of getting it right on health care reform:

“Senators on both sides acknowledge that the health care bill we’re considering is among the most significant pieces of legislation any of us will ever consider.

“So it stands to reason that we’d devote significant time and attention to it.

“Indeed, some would argue that we should spend more time and attention on this bill than most — if not every — previous bill we’ve considered.

“The Majority disagrees.

“Why? Because this bill has become a political nightmare for them.

“They know Americans overwhelmingly oppose it, so they want to get it over with.

“Americans are already outraged at the fact that Democrat leaders took their eyes off the ball. Rushing the process on a partisan line makes the situation even worse.

“Americans were told the purpose of reform was to reduce the cost of health care. Instead, Democrat leaders produced a $2.5 trillion, 2,074-page monstrosity that vastly expands government, raises taxes, raises premiums, and wrecks Medicare.

“And they want to rush this bill through by Christmas — one of the most significant, far-reaching pieces of legislation in U.S. history. They want to rush it.

“And here’s the most outrageous part: at the end of this rush, they want us to vote on a bill that no one outside the Majority Leader’s conference room has even seen.

“That’s right. The final bill we’ll vote on isn’t even the one we’ve had on the floor. It’s the deal Democrat leaders have been trying to work out in private.

“That’s what they intend to bring to the floor and force a vote on before Christmas.

“So this entire process is essentially a charade.

“But let’s just compare the process so far with previous legislation for some perspective. Here’s a snapshot of what we’ve done and where we stand:

The Majority Leader intends to bring this debate to a close as early as this weekend — four days from now, on this $2.5 trillion dollar mistake.

No American who hasn’t been invited into the Majority Leader’s conference room knows what will be in that bill.

This bill has been the pending business of the Senate since the last week of November — less than four weeks ago.

We started the amendment process two weeks ago.

We’ve had 21 amendments and motions — less than two a day.

... “The only conceivable justification for rushing this bill is the overwhelming opposition of the American people. Democrats know that the longer Americans see this bill the less they like it. Here’s the latest from Pew. It came out just yesterday.

“A majority (58 percent) of those who have heard a lot about the bills oppose them while only 32 percent favor them.”

“There is no justification for this blind rush — except a political one, and that’s not good enough for the American people. And there’s no justification for forcing the Senate to vote on a bill none of us has seen. Americans already oppose this bill. The process is just as bad. It’s completely reckless, completely irresponsible.”