-
Obama’s Unaffordable Act
June 19, 2013 | 71 comments
-
Curbing the IRS
June 12, 2013 | 70 comments
-
Can We Get It Back?
June 5, 2013 | 39 comments
-
The Ronald Reagan of Virginia
May 29, 2013 | 72 comments
-
Time to Go for the Kill
May 22, 2013 | 67 comments
The Right Prescription
Obamacare’s Dirty Tricks
The regulatory authoritarianism of its death panels is small potatoes compared to the rest.
Most commentators have focused on the revelation just before Christmas that Obamacare’s end of life death panel consultations rejected by Congress were resurrected by the Obama Administration by regulatory requirement. There is no truth to the rumor that President Obama has agreed, after his term of office ends, to head up a new organization called Democrats Against Democracy.
But while this regulatory authoritarianism is, indeed, yet another dirty trick of Obamacare, it is small potatoes compared to the real dirty tricks of Obamacare. A dirty trick is defined here as burying in vague language in the abusive, several thousand page Obamacare legislation socially repulsive policies that the public overwhelmingly opposed and that Congress denied it was adopting. Like the end of life death panel consultations.
Phasing Out Private Insurance
But as indicated above, the emerging abuses of Obamacare are much graver than that. Also just before Christmas, on December 21, HHS Commissar Kathleen Sebelius claimed authority buried deep within the Obamacare abomination to impose federal price controls on health insurance companies, which members of Congress again denied they were adopting when they passed Obamacare. In fact, she issued a 136 page “regulation” providing precisely for such federal rate regulation.
Most states have long regulated health insurance premiums. The state regulators know from long experience that in this regulation they have to make sure that the insurance company has the money to pay the promised benefits. If the regulators don’t allow sufficient premiums to pay benefits, in the states they know that it is the sickest people covered by the insurance company who lose out. Because then the insurance company goes out of business and the sick people it was covering don’t have the money to pay their medical bills.
State insurance regulation is consequently simply a matter of mathematics. The regulators analyze the cost data, and the actuarial probabilities, and they set premiums based on that data sufficient to allow the insurance company only a modest, reasonable, market rate of return on its operations. As a result, the hard numbers unquestionably show that health insurance companies only make modest if not below average profits at best. That is why in many states there are so few health insurance companies left, and so many of those that remain are actually non-profits.
The resulting bottom line is that health insurance company profits are not a significant factor in overall health costs. And those politicians who rant and rave about them, calculating that they can take political advantage of the clueless and gullible, are shameless demagogues who dishonor our democracy by their participation in it.
Under the new federal power that Sebelius has seized, the supposed smarter, wiser bureaucrats in Washington will review the state regulation, and Washington will decide if the state approved rate increases are “reasonable.” If the Washington wise guys decide the increases are not, they will deem the state regulation not “effective,” and substitute Washington’s rate regulation.
Sebelius has already decreed, not based on a review of the actual data, that increases over 10% are probably not reasonable, even though many increases across the country are coming in over 20%, based on the analysis described above, as predicted. Indeed, the Red Queen has intimated that even lesser premium increases may be deemed too much.
But there is socialist method behind the madness. Obamacare raises health insurance costs by mandating that health insurers provide expensive new benefits. That is why it was so obvious that Obamacare will raise health insurance costs. But now come the federal regulators who plan to dictate to the insurers that they cannot reflect those costs in higher premiums.
It will work just like the Democrats’ “affordable housing” policies worked in causing the financial crisis. First the regulators forced banks to lend mortgage money to so many who were not financially qualified under traditional lending standards. Bill Clinton bragged in 1995 that through this scheme he had found a way of spreading housing prosperity to so many “without costing the taxpayers a dime.”
But now we know how all that turned out. When so many proved unable or unwilling to pay the mortgages, as the displaced traditional lending standards suggested they might, the mortgage backed securities that had been spread so widely throughout the financial system began their downward spiral that froze credit markets, and the whole financial system began to unravel, costing taxpayers a fortune in bailouts and lost jobs.
Left-wing sophisticates know from experience that their grassroots troops can’t follow that logic. Your average grassroots Democrat supporter can’t understand that if the law forces health insurance costs up with required new benefits, but the insurance company can’t raise premiums to cover those higher costs, the company goes out of business.
But this is exactly what the Reds who now run today’s modern Democrat party want. They are planning precisely to use this new federal rate regulation power to drive private insurers out of business, so the only option left will be the outright socialized medicine public option that first the public and then the Congress rejected in the health care “debate” last year. Hence the foundation for the new organization, Democrats Against Democracy.
This plot against the people is already underway in the more Left states that the Democrats still control. On December 22, the Wall Street Journal editorialized regarding the ongoing “political thuggery” in Connecticut regarding former state insurance commissioner Tom Sullivan. The Journal explained, “In September, following a thorough actuarial analysis, Mr. Sullivan approved some rate increases reaching 20% for Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, the largest insurer in the state by membership.”
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (103) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Peter Ferrara
More Articles From The Right Prescription
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/01/05/obamacares-dirty-tricks
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Mole in Don Draper
- How Not To Buy a Fighter
- A Panoply of Beauties
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Booger | 1.5.11 @ 6:36AM
From the desk of United States Grand Duchess of Health and Medicine Kathleen Sebelius:
Dear Komrades and assorted peasantry,
Greetings from the great capital of the nation, from whence all your health needs will now be met in an expedient and timely manner, as determined by myself and the IRS. My crack staff of accountants on loan from Tim Geithner has determined that our current medical system is overburdened in large part due to the excessive demands placed upon the system by those of you out there with excessive girth. In other words, you fatties go to the doctor too much! Your cholesterol test is clogged with bacon grease, your gut hangs down to your knees and type II diabetes is the new common cold: everybody has it. Well, I just cannot let this go on any longer. If we are going to get things straightened out with this health care system, you fatties are going to have to toe the line (and be able to touch your toes while you're at it)!
Having reviewed the available data, we have discovered that the average amerikkkan out there in flyover country eats enough calories every week to support a family of seventy-three in Northern Sudan. This is clearly economic and social injustice on a genocidal scale. It just has to stop. Every time you insist on cleaning your plate, you need to stop and think about all those poor starving children in North Korea! Has it ever occurred to you that if you were willing to make do with less that they would have more?
So here's what we're going to do. From now on you will file a statement of your BMI (body mass index) with your tax return each year. Those of you who are heads of households will be required to make sure you file a BMI statement for each and every member of your household. These BMI screenings are mandatory, and will be conducted at the nearest approved health professional's office and will require a notarized signature. Should you or any member of your household be found to be obese, you will be fined $1,000.00 per offender on a first offense. Subsequent offenses will have an added $500.00 per offense. Failure to pay this fine will be a Class C federal felony, with penalties as appropriate.
Additionally, all school children will be measured for BMI by their public schools. From this point forward, a BMI indicating your child is obese will be considered prima facia evidence of child abuse, resulting in your child being removed from your home and placed with appropriate authorities, along with criminal prosecution and re-education for the parents. Please be aware that any attempt to interfere with school authorities who are conducting BMI testing is a Class B federal felony, with appropriate attending penalties.
Any family units found to have a number of individuals with excessive BMI will be required to attend mandatory re-education at designated facilities in each state. This re-education is mandatory, and failure to attend as scheduled is a Class C federal felony with attending penalties.
All amerikkkan citizens will be required to tune their televisions to channel 666 for the 6 a.m. exercise broadcast each morning and participate in the workout programs being performed. Failure to view and participate in each morning's workout will result in a fine of $100.00 for each workout missed. Once again, failure to comply with this fine will result in a Class D federal felony with attending penalties.
All amerikkkan citizens will be required to submit a notarized statement each month detailing their intake of vegetables, especially green leafy vegetables. Remember, as per President Obama's latest executive order, you are required to ingest no fewer than four servings of arugula per week. If arugula is not currently available in your area due to a shortage (of which the IRS must be properly notified) you may substitute broccoli or brussell sprouts. Failure to comply with this directive will be a Class D federal felony, with attending penalties.
Thank you for your compliance, and remember to go green and make sure your bowel movements are on time!
Sincerely,
United States Grand Duchess of Health and Medicine Kathleen Sebelius
http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/
Claire Solt| 1.5.11 @ 8:32AM
On election night I briefly saw resultss i n Kansas. Looked like they were not at all proud of Kathleen AND WERE VOTING 90% FOR BROWNBACK AND OTHER rEPUBLICANS.
dw| 1.5.11 @ 2:22PM
From the desk of President B. Obama,
Internal Memo to Kathleen Sebelius,
**For your eyes only**
Dear Kathleen,
As I fly over the midst of our New Union on my way back from my much needed hiatus from the demands of my executive functions on behalf of the pedestrian masses, I wanted to take a minute to respond to your open order to the people.
As we know our Health Care Mandate will ultimately and intentionally cause the extinction of private health insurance companies. By requiring added services and restricting their ability to raise premiums to cover those cost, they will inevitably be forced to resign from the industry thus leaving the government as the only option left for medical coverage.
Once this occurs you will be heading, by any measure, the most powerful federal entity within the realm of my administration, with the possible exception of the defence department. But as you know I am already doing all I can to cut defence off at the knees.
So,with control of the health industry we can then use the over arching rational that 'the welfare of the nation is dependent on the health of it's people' to regulate other industries into the umbrella of our government collective. As you are alluding to in your letter by regulating food consumption we can easily manipulate people further into our sphere of influence and through that premice we can ultimately nationalize the food industry.
You, of course, have been privy to our ultra private gatherings and know of the real agenda that we are putting into play. Through executive fiat you know I am going to do everything I can to install and reinforce government authority to regulate as many "private" industries throughout all federal departments under my control. It is happening and is on schedule just as we agreed upon in all those secret meetings we've had since even before my election, which if all goes right will be the last Presidential election ever.
The problem, Kathleen, is that in your open directive to the masses you started to implement some of the new word speak prematurely. The use of these new words and phrases, like amerikkan, komrade, peasentry and in particular your new title, Grand Duchess of Health and Medicine, were not supposed to be known to the public until I gave approval. It is important that we do not wake up the masses to our "take over" until it is too late for them to do anything about it. I am afraid that you may have possibly shaken a few of these zombies out of their stupors with the publication of your directive, so please, until authorized continue using existing phrases.
Just a little more patience and it will be too late for anyone to turn around our "program".
Thank you for your never ending support to the cause, Kathleen. We will prevail.
Your President (Commisar, Ha Ha)
B. Obama
COnservative Bob| 1.5.11 @ 7:25PM
I usually enjoy your satire unfortunately in this case I think that you have just scooped HHS on their March policy announcement. Too close to reality to be funny. While they may not yet openly propose such regulations I am convinced you have accurately captured their mindset.
Sheri| 1.7.11 @ 5:54PM
Priceless! I think we might have to move our family and make use of the survival skills that my husband learned in the army.
Brian Mc| 1.5.11 @ 7:14AM
A great way for the government to scale back overeating is simple. All you need do is install scales at the checkouts in the grocery stores. Your tax is dependant upon how much you weigh. Hey, if it worked for the smokers; taxing them out of their habit, it's time we go after the overeaters! Eureka! problem solved. Might even work at the gas pumps? Isn't this how the IRS operates? "Hey, you make too much...we'll fix that".
olainfree| 1.5.11 @ 7:18AM
booger: That Sebeilus plan sounds suspiciously like the ones that nanny-state Huckabee and Michelle ObaMao have in mind.
Well done, sir!
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 7:46AM
Anyone who spots a worthwhile fact in this torrent of bile let me know - there's a prize waiting: lunch with Paul Ryan. Second prize is two lunches with Paul Ryan.
RustyG| 1.5.11 @ 7:59AM
Here you go Jackie. Paragraph 9 ......
"But there is socialist method behind the madness"
Tell Ryan to pick a place where the dems don't eat so I don't have to eat with a bunch of Socialists.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 8:20AM
Nice try, but Obamacare is essentially the same as previous GOP reform, and is nothing like socialism. So no lunch and no socialist cigar for you.
RustyG| 1.5.11 @ 8:58AM
Interesting. I'm afraid you're going to have to help me on this one though Jack. I don't seem to recall the GOP attempt to control through regulatory fiat 1/6 of our economy. Had to be the Evil Bush.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 9:10AM
The GOP opposition plan to the Clinton reform plan in the 1990s was similar to Obamacare, and included an insurance mandate.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 10:55AM
And your point? The Stupid Party does something weaselly and stupid over a decade ago and we should do what? Applaud? I'm not getting the connection. Are you saying idiocy recedes over time? Sticking your face in a fan 15 years ago proves doing it now is better? Why do Liberal Aholes point to stupid Republican ideas as proof that stupid Democrat ideas are justified?
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 11:57AM
The point is it's not a socialist takeover of healthcare.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 12:09PM
The point is it's the first step. So that's bullshit. And you didn't answer the question. Why point to Republican stupidity to justify Democrat greatness?
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 12:15PM
If Medicare wasn't a first step then I wouldn't be too worried Eric.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 12:33PM
Who said it wasn't? And it's working so well and will never go broke! Never, ever. Liberal Aholes have been trying to socialize medicine for over a 100 years.
In the words of one Liberal Ahole, (Harkin) this is only the first step toward government run health care - the down payment. We are going to dismantle this piece of shit law bit by bit, so you may need to take advantage of whatever mental health provisions are left in the next two years.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 12:48PM
The CBO says repeal will cost us about $200bn. As for Medicare, don't you know the Tea Party says 'hand's off!'.
Cartman = an overweight, spoiled, foul-mouthed, mean-spirited, sociopathic, narcissistic, and ill-tempered fourth-grader
About sums up your approach I'd say.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 12:59PM
Same CBO that scored the current shitty law? Hmmph. Seems like they are wrong on both counts. And your Cartman comment really hurts! I'm so upset! *Sniff* It's like I have never heard that before when Liberal Aholes run out of other crap to say. *Sniff sniff*
Jack London = Social activist who supported Socialism/Communism and wrote a stupid book about a dog.
Sounds just like you.
solidground| 1.5.11 @ 7:16PM
Yes, and London, who discarded his own name in favor or something infused with a bit more, well, bravado, has been dead for 95 years. I guess that's why we're seeing such pus-ridden, as- dead-as-bones, as-weighty-as-dust, as predictable-as-death comments worth jack shit from the deceased Mr. London.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 2:11PM
And you forgot homophobe, racist, misanthrope, misogynist, and hater of whales:
http://www.youtube.co/watch?v=qST5eVLudrQ
Try to keep up, okay?
Sheri| 1.7.11 @ 6:04PM
I'm a pharmacist and I had a routine doctor appointment yesterday. The line at the check out counter was long and I couldn't help but overhear the conversation of the lady in front of me. She is a Medicare patient and the clerk told her that she has over $800 in medical bills that Medicare is refusing to pay. The death panels have already begun. FDA is withdrawing approval of expensive treatments for breast and prostate cancer. I predict that if we don't get rid of Obummercare soon there will be no drugs left on the market except the very cheapest generic drugs. I'm afraid a lot of people are going to suffer and die much earlier than they otherwise would. My 80 year old mother and my disabled child are definitely targeted by Obummercare.
Super Car| 3.2.12 @ 4:24AM
greatness Super Car
Motor Show
Natan| 1.5.11 @ 2:24PM
So what would you call it? A free-market driven reform?
Natan| 1.5.11 @ 2:32PM
Don't waste your energy, Eric. This "gentleman" is a brain-dead drone, and nothing will help him to see the reality. Unfortunately, he is not a lone exception. Rather, he is a perfect illustration in exposing the threat of statism to American way of life.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 2:43PM
Thanks for the advice, Natan. But I think you owe brain-dead drones an apology ;-) And I love getting under the Statist's skin.
Ausonius| 1.5.11 @ 8:08PM
You sir are either idiotic or a liar.
It is socialized medicine, or perhaps, if that is not strong enough for you, marxist medicine.
I don't know how you or your Machiavellian leaders live with yourselves knowing what you are robbing from the youth, as well as the elderly, the prize of the world in terms of healthcare.
Ausonius| 1.5.11 @ 8:10PM
Sorry, the above comment is directed at Jack.
TommyS| 1.9.11 @ 2:11PM
The heck it's not! ANY takeover of healthcare by the government is socialist irregardless of which party does it. Obamacare is another incremental power grab that has been going on for over 50 years.
Have you considered| 1.5.11 @ 7:52AM
Booger, you nailed it.
When the federal government decides it can dictate, it will dictate.
martin j smith| 1.5.11 @ 8:08AM
ObamaCare is only piece of legislation and one party of the Socialist Left effort to make a takev oer of our nation. I think it is time to go beyond the Health Care issue and show it and moves of the Socialist Left are contructed to destroy our economy and therefore our nation. I think it is time for the 2012 election for the Republican Party to define this election once again as a referendum for democracy or for Marxist Socialist
policies
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.11 @ 8:12AM
Peter,
Once again I must commend you.
Booger,
Once again, your efforts are appreciated. Nevermind that one Soros troll actually got out of his slacker rack this early. Never fear though. He has already scheduled his nap for the day.
Mimi| 1.5.11 @ 8:15AM
Thank-GOD ... we had an expert early on who diagnosed, framed, and defined our current struggle ! You know.... the FREEDOM vs CONTROL... the Conservative ( Freedom) vs Libs (control)....or known as..LIBERTY vs TYRANNY.
We've made our decision.... The majority agrees, try over and over the CONTROL crowd keeps it up....When will they wake-up? SOON it will be too late and they will be wandering in the DUST. 770 WABC ..6-9 pm .....HEAR the expert...Mark Levin!!!
Louis Jenkins| 1.5.11 @ 8:23AM
Unfortunately the amount of food you eat may not play into the health game. My spouse is a vegetarion and doesn't eat meat. I've noticed that she eats little (compared to me), yet her cholesterol is high. It boils down to genetics. She's part Cherokee, and her mother has high cholesterol. She is as healthy as the next person, but will always have that nagging fear that she will have an AMI, or CVD. Now, Sebelius, how on earth are you going to regulate that? Are you going to ship her off to a FEMA camp?
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 8:47AM
Ha ha ha - you can't even tell Booger's feeble attempt at satire from reality. That's part of the trouble - lies just get propagated round the net until you don't know whether you're own head is screwed on straight. So read some sensible sites.
Louis Jenkins| 1.5.11 @ 9:17AM
For satire to be funny there has to be a element of truth to it. And yes, there surely are some big lies, and liars, out there.
Bob Grant| 1.5.11 @ 10:16AM
London: "...So read some sensible sites..."
Which would be?
Do you mind sharing with us their take on the health care abomination; specifically, the Feds superseding the state regulators?
NavyBrat | 1.5.11 @ 10:49AM
You're one of the biggest purveyors of of lies on this site. Maybe if you get so upset by the opinions here (as you so obviously do), then YOU should be the one crawling back to the Flushington Post & the Daily Krap.
Tell us where in the Constitution it says that the government should provide healthcare to every citizen. And tell me where it says that the gov't. can force you to buy anything, under penalty of taxation no less. Then please explain how NOT buying something consitutes a situation that falls under the interstate commerce realm.
This oughtta be good.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 12:12PM
First let's get one thing clear: is it your view that it is better to stick to whatever you understand by the Constitution despite clear proof that it will severely damage the country.
Second, what do you understand by the references to 'General Welfare', one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause. (You may want to bear in mind that the Framers didn't know about things like MRI scanners back then.)
Third, have a read of this in the awfully left wing Forbes
http://blogs.forbes.com/rickun.....onditions/
'In any event, as you review the options available, hopefully you might now consider that the concept of mandated health insurance coverage was not an insidious government plot to violate the Constitution. It is one of only two workable solutions to providing health care coverage to those with pre-existing medical conditions and the only one that would leave insurance coverage in the hands of the private market. '
Bruce Berger| 1.5.11 @ 1:02PM
Jack,
Here is a link to some great letters to the WSJ editor today, http://online.wsj.com/public/page/letters.html. These letters quote James Madison and Thomas Jefferson about the general welfare clause and the concept of enumerated powers (how quaint). You should read the letters. You might learn something.
I am sure you are a renowned constitutional scholar, but I think I will take my lead on the meaning of the Constitution from the likes of Madison and Jefferson, rather than you.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 3:52PM
Forbes Magazine has been all over the map regarding Obamacare. Over the last year they have run articles by a variety of authors on all sides if the issue. Even your own guru, Rick Ungar, has been on both sides of the issue.
In any event, it is interesting that you think that a magazine article, or even a series of magazine articles somehow represents the definitive word on Obamacare.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 3:55PM
Above comment in response to the one who calls himself Jack London.
George S| 1.5.11 @ 12:14PM
Sorry Jack, but the only lie promulgated is that ObamaCare will give every person (according to his needs) the ability to pick whatever health care he wants and not have to pay for it. No more insurance premium headaches, denial of coverage, lifetime caps, etc., just free and clear medical care provided by caring Dr. Houses in state of the art hospitals -- all paid for by a handful of rich guys paying a modest increase in taxes. That is the lie; a lie that was sold to Britons and Canadians, and now is being peddled here. Some of us can see through it and it scares us. Those who have nothing to lose and everything to gain love it.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 12:20PM
That's odd - I could have sworn there was something about an insurance mandate in the reform. Must have been a dream.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 3:44PM
We have been over this ground before, Jack. Even your health care guru Rick Ungar acknowledges that the mandated loss ratios will most likely put private health insurance companies out of business. Just as the creators of Obamacare intended.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 4:34PM
No George, he's been pointing out that they need to change their business models given that they've been struggling in the individual market anyway and that 80% of premiums spent on care doesn't seem too much to ask. As he says, ditching the public option was a mistake.
There will be always be good markets for other sectors of healthcare insurance, just as there are in many European countries.
http://blogs.forbes.com/rickun.....ic-option/
George True| 1.5.11 @ 5:06PM
That's the exact opposite of what he said.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 5:25PM
I'm pretty good at comprehension - if he's saying something different than that the individual market may not be viable for insurers then do enlighten me.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 6:52PM
Now you've got it. Ungar said that with the mandated loss ratios and the requirement to accept pre-X there is no way the insurance companies can stay solvent without raising premiums massively for everyone. Which is exactly what some of us have been saying all along. If nobody can afford the product as a result, or if companies are forbidden from raising premiums enough to stay solvent, then they will be out of business, and we will have single payer, or in other words a government monopoly.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.11 @ 9:37AM
Peter,
Upon further reflection..... I don't like your title.
The article is first rate as always...but every time I go back to the homepage, it is jarring to me again.
"Dirty Tricks" are something a nasty little boy plays, with no lasting effects.
Here are some alternative titles:
"Despicable Lies"
"Soul-killing details"
"Wholesale Murder Plan"
"Ice-Floe Healthcare"
"Enslavement of Doctors"
I'm sure our other conversationalists can come up with many more.
squalis| 1.5.11 @ 10:17AM
Those physicians leaving private practice for salaried positions are not insulated from these cuts. As their employers go out of business, so will they. As an oncologist with a high percentage of medicare insured patients, it has been obvious to me for some time that the government solution to the cost problem is to just refuse to pay. The current direction of medicare cuts, eventually to be seen by most Americans (except if you belong to a union) is no surprise to me, or most of my colleagues. "Sicko" will ultimately become true.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.11 @ 10:43AM
Doctor,
(I can't bring myself to address you as squalis.)
Thank you for your hard work. Perhaps "house-calls for cash" might be the answer.
Hmmm think of that. black-market doctoring in America.
Heh, maybe get a vet's license to give you access to medicines.
Spoonman| 1.5.11 @ 12:12PM
Old Texican, doctoring forcash outside the system is practiced in Canada. My firends areound Toronto are in the public system but frequently pay cash to get expedited treatment.
Sheri| 1.7.11 @ 6:13PM
Yes there will definitely be a large black market in health care if we can't get rid of Obummercare. That is how we are going to get the health care our daughter needs. Doctors in our town have been setting up cash only practices since last summer.
buddy| 1.5.11 @ 6:23PM
one big bloc opposing obama-non-care is canadian medical patients who have what obama wants to give us... it doesn't work there and if we get it here, where will they go? come to think of it, where will we go? there will almost certainly arise a black market medical economy!
George S| 1.5.11 @ 10:47AM
By "seniors" we mean those who are old enough to appreciate freedom and self-determination but young enough to expect government to honor its obligation and pay for their old age subsistence -- the worst of both worlds to the statist. Death cleanses old political habits best and the young take what's around them as normal.
MikeD| 1.5.11 @ 11:03AM
One day in the distant future there will be a long and frightfully true book written about how the democrats; through thier willing lackies in the media and academia pulled off a brilliant coup in their destruction of the United States of America.
Obama and his masters will be gleefully surveying their huge domain that they had carefully and brilliantly turned into a feudal, pre-industrial society totally dependent on george soros, obama, and the rest of the cabal for all the necessities of life.
I just wonder if the book will be published by barry the muslim and his islamic descendents in the islamic republic of north america; or by the people who carefully recorded the terror in his eyes, and those of his partners in crime, when the last thing he saw was the beheading blade as it flashed in the sun on its descent toward his jugular vein.
We're right in the middle of the first chapter of a long book. Which ending will it be?
Bob Grant| 1.5.11 @ 11:13AM
I'd be careful with the metaphors. It only provides justification to further the net neutrality policies that will have this site yanked.
I'd prefer NOT to see an error 404 message when accessing Am Spec.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.11 @ 12:00PM
Bob,
As much as it would pain me to lose contact with many friends here because of that 404 message...
...it might be a blessed warning that America just ended.
Hey, dope! The only folks who like to behead people are the mohhamedons (sic).
Obama is either an apostate in their eyes...or a sneaky "Religious liar" for Islam.
...but we appreciate your concerrrrrrrrrn!
Bob Grant| 1.5.11 @ 12:47PM
I read the post so I understood the meaning...tex. I stand by my post.
...Other than it's entertainment value, your paranoid fantasy that Obama is a crypto muslim is weak.
I'd bet money that he's a far-left socialist atheist, or agnostic, with a strong affinity for Arab nations cultures. If people want to think he's a muslim, it's probably no sweat off his back.
Keep perpetuating the myth, tex, 'cause I need a good laugh every now and then.
VBMax| 1.5.11 @ 11:26AM
One dirty trick they play is to blame seniors for the mess that is social security and medicare.
This allows them to justify the "death panels".
They play the seniors against the younger generation, who are currently footing the bill, to create generational conflict. It takes attention off themselves, the real culprits, who created the mess in the first place.
Dixie Pixie| 1.5.11 @ 11:55AM
When did it become legal that the Federal Bureaucracy could act as a super-secret legislature allowed to rewrite laws without restriction.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.5.11 @ 12:12PM
Pixie,
It is called "lawfare-warfare".
We have some posters right here who still believe they can crush us with laws and regulations.
They somehow believe that they will beat us in a scrubbed bright courtroom...heh heh heh.
They still believe we will ultimately have a "war of words".....oops.
They still believe they can win with clean finger-nails...heh heh heh.
They simply cannot understand the reality.
Louis Jenkins| 1.5.11 @ 4:09PM
Dear Old Texican and Dixie Pixie:
Well, the people in DC have been doing just that for sometime. Voting for ObamaKare on a weekend, holding votes for immigration (knocked down) late in the evening, etc. The darkness loves liars for nothing done during that time is "truth." Truth loves the light of day.
Texican you are correct. A 404 message on my computer would tell me that the nation has come to its end. Time to get ready. War of words with clean hands? That will not happen!! Everyone's hands will be dirty. Reality will be hard for those people to understand, but they will understand. They will not crush us with laws, fiats, or regulations.
Bob Grant| 1.5.11 @ 9:34PM
Hmmmm
Dixie Pixie| 1.5.11 @ 9:35PM
Gentlemen, Perhaps I did not articulate my concerns accurately.
When a government cuts out the populace in the formation of governmental policies, then those policies will diverge from the norms of the populace over time.
Given a growing divergence in government and the populace, the populace will attempt to bring governmental policies back into alignment through lawful means.
This was done during the last election cycle.
However when a government intents to rule against the wishes of the populace and shuts out the populace and Congress from the governmental policy process then the consent of the governed as a basis of legality is forfeited.
The creation of rules not based in written Congressional Law is certain.
Then the question of legality of ObamaCare rules conjured out of thin air then becomes a problem.
Naturally as a result a person can be following the rules as written and latter can be found to be performing an illegal act because the rule itself was latter found to be illegal.
Most people do not have a professional legal staff on call so can not determine whether a act is legal or not.
The only way to mitigate such a legal risk is to do nothing.
Not the best way to get the economy moving again.
Thus my question.
Another question:::
Does the Obama minions understand the damage their actions are causing or is that the intention from the start.
Richard| 1.5.11 @ 12:23PM
Of course the irony is that some insurance companies supposedly agreed with Obamacare because the government would mandate that all buy insurance. There is a great lesson here for those who would presume to befriend a snake.
Al Adab| 1.5.11 @ 12:29PM
Repeal is the right path to take. If memory serves however, the Obamacare bill passed the House as a reconciliation vote with the Senate version. Cannot the House rescind that reconciliation without the need for Senate or executive action? There is no bill needed to repeal hence no Senate compliance needed and no veto possible through recision of the previous vote.
Clinton Lovell | 1.5.11 @ 2:03PM
This sort of crap will continue until there is a fiscally-responsible alternative to Obamacare put on the table. Truly affordable, universal health care is in fact possible, but can never happen using taxpayer dollars, nor with the participation of the government. Read about the plan that will not require a single dollar of taxpayer money, but provide a fiscally-responsible plan for covering all Americans (including those pesky illegals) and actually reduce our national debt. Download the white paper on this for FREE at:
http://www.rainmakermarketing......-Care.pdf.
Now you know.
Eric Cartman| 1.5.11 @ 2:36PM
Interesting stuff on your web site. The link you posted doesn't work, however. And I still don't want to cover the pesky illegals - out with 'em! They are here illegally. Catapult them back to Mexico and let 'em find their way to whatever screwed up third-world country they came from. FIX YOUR COUNTRY, SENOR!
NavyBrat | 1.5.11 @ 2:36PM
Jack London Writes:
"Second, what do you understand by the references to 'General Welfare', one occurring in the Preamble and the other in the Taxing and Spending Clause."
Well let's see, there's this little tidbit:
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."...James Madison
I think I'll take this man at his word, rather than your revisionist dreck.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 4:22PM
I didn't revise it - I just asked you what your understanding is.
OK - if I prove to you that it would be hugely damaging to the country to oppose universal healthcare, purely on constitutional grounds would you still be against say a mandate or would you be prepared to be flexible?
I'm assuming you think all of us should have decent healthcare, and if so we need to address pre-existing conditions in the private market if you don't want a government system (see the link I provided from the Forbes blog).
If you don't want all to have access to decent healthcare, then I'm not sure you're a very nice person. But I'm sure you are for now.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 5:23PM
1) So you admit that James Madison, one of the founders, said in so many words, that the general welfare clause does NOT give the government license to additional powers not specifically spelled out in the rest of the constitution.
2) How can you "prove" that it would be hugely damaging to oppose socialist health care? Such a thing cannot be "proven". Even if you could, that still does not make socialist medicine constitutional.
3) As I informed you of last week, the private sector had already begun to address the issue of pre-existing conditions with a dozen or more affordable plans ($200-$340 per month) that are guaranteed issue. As you were unaware of them, how much else regarding the health insurance industry might you not be aware of? (By the way, link to all the Forbes article you want. They have carried articles that were both pro and anti Obamacare. In any case, Forbes magazine articles are not the definitive word on the topic.)
4) There it is. The "If you oppose Obamacare, then you don't care about others" argument. Spare us the self-righteous crap. My position is that if you are in favor of Obamacare, then you evidently don't care about people and are not a nice person, because you obviously don't want to do what works BEST for the greatest number of people.
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 5:33PM
'the private sector had already begun to address the issue of pre-existing conditions with a dozen or more affordable plans ($200-$340 per month) that are guaranteed issue. '
So give a couple of links (you can put two links on a post here). Let's have a look as you're right - I'm not aware of low cost private plans that cover pre-existing conditions in the same way as state high-risk insurance pools.
And I didn't say 'Obamacare'. I said 'If you don't want all to have access to decent healthcare.' I think from your answer is that you don't want this as 'what works BEST for the greatest number of people' is while pretty meaningless implying that there are people who are not in the 'greatness number'.
Bob Grant| 1.5.11 @ 9:47PM
Interesting report quoted by Mark Levin this evening:
The number of individuals last year who reported to the government that they were prevented from buying insurance because of a pre-existing condition was....................................8,000
Yes, that's right...................8,000
The main argument for this multi-trillion dollar abomination was to give people with pre-existing conditions access to affordable health insurance.
Another massive lie by the Obama administration.
We could have simply put those 8,000 in some insurance pool and be done with it. Instead, Obama has wrecked health insurance for all of us.
Eight...thousand...people!!
Sheri| 1.7.11 @ 6:30PM
Yes I noticed that recently. We are going to destroy the greatest health care system in the world for a mere 8,000 people. What a completely stupid thing to do!
I've spent over 20 years working as a pharmacist in our health care system and it saddens me greatly to see it being destroyed. I feel bad that I will probably have to be the person who tells some patients that the government will not allow them to have a prescription drug that could save their lives. Too many experiences like that will probably cause me to either change careers or retire early. And I am expecting to see poor substandard care for my husband, daughter and mother in this new monster system that is being created.
Willy| 1.5.11 @ 5:43PM
Jack: The original Jack London would be embarassed by your comments and would probably point out that perhaps you are on the wrong website. Maybe something with a hammer and sickle?
Jack London| 1.5.11 @ 5:59PM
Eh? London was a great American socialist. He would have been right here, combating the evils of capitalism.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 6:55PM
The "evils of capitalism" eh? That pretty much tells me all I need to know.
Jack London| 1.6.11 @ 9:09AM
So George, you couldn't give us details of:
'the private sector had already begun to address the issue of pre-existing conditions with a dozen or more affordable plans ($200-$340 per month) that are guaranteed issue.'
Bob Grant| 1.5.11 @ 10:05PM
Great American Socialist?...
...the ultimate oxymoron. Ranks right up there with normal deviation, planned spontaneity, working hobby, awfully good, wireless cable, and Aunt Jemima Light.
Todd S| 1.5.11 @ 10:35PM
I like Jack London as an author but it is true he was a leftist lowlife so it is rather appropriate. Jack London was the precursor to the limosine liberal, living the highlife (or lowlife you could say) off the fruits of capitalism while furiously denouncing it. Suffice to say he died a miserable man.
IMKessel| 1.5.11 @ 3:01PM
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
"Who watches the watchmen?"
Juvenal
W.P.KOCH| 1.5.11 @ 4:44PM
WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN
Congress and the White House should stop wasting the people’s money, “cut as detailed herein” and use savings to improve quality of basic invested entitlements. Preserve the 2010 tax schedule with no inheritance taxes. Congress should improve basic Medicare. Vote opponents to this “out”. Citizens come first.
It is time the U.S. reduces its human rites and police activities for the World by lobbying the United Nations, NATO and Interpol to “take on more”. 800 bases in 63 countries across the world should be reduced. Examples are fewer forces in Bosnia, Philippines, Germany and Okinawa.
Starting with Iraq, only train for self reliance. After the surge in Afghanistan repeat above and diminish corruption by requiring for aid accounting practices, substituting minerals mining and food crops for drugs. Upon self reliance make all pay.
Cut bloated federal bureaucracy and phase in outsourcing. Combine CDC, EPA and FDA. Combine the FAA, NHTSA and Transportation Department. Combine GAO and CBO. Departments should eliminate “must spend all”. Return “unused” yearly budget to the treasury. Cut combined department budgets (other than entitlements) on an average of 10%.
Eliminate all 32 CZARS Mr. president. Reduce your 469 member staff which makes nearly 39 million per year! Halt first lady $180,000 air force one vacation trips. Stop “$200 million per day” presidential-family foreign trips. Cancel $ 20,000,000 executive order (HB 1388) to relocate key Hamas members to U.S.
Contribute to only one of: The World Bank or International Monetary Fund or U.S. Agency for International Development.
Reduce foreign aid bribery. For example, no aid to oil rich -Iraq. $37 billion and increasing with $8.7 billion of development funds not accounted for. Halt $150 million aid to Palestinians.
Charge bailed companies (TARP) for their huge executive bonuses at taxpayer expense. Government should sell shares to recoup for taxpayer. About $154 billion owed. Forget Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Congress should reduce “stimulus” and monetary expenditures by halting: over budget and vote bribery “earmarks”. Example: Stop “cow burp” study. $13 billion unspent in states. Congress should rescind their 2009 increase and do not pay student loans for their staff. Please- no renting of private or military aircraft. An example was Pelosi’s family of $2.1 million for over 2 years. Congress should set commercial travel cost standards and controls.
Reduce medical cost by: allowing purchasing anywhere in U.S., “tort reform”, and reducing “red tape”. Trace government aid to local medical groups for expediting billing cost speed, doctor/patient verification and fraud reduction.
Congress should enforce existing immigration laws. Complete the improved fence. Entitlements or benefits should be for only citizens. Deport criminal “illegals”. Only deportees and workers on Visa Programs qualify for needed medical benefits.
These actions will improve funding for:” Medicare”, “Medicaid, and “Veteran’s Affairs”. Corporations should be allowed tax reduction incentives for hiring with healthcare plan options.
Healthcare quality can be at least that for Congress or the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Additional benefits are: dental coverage, improved visual coverage, no drug “donut hole”, no pre-existing conditions, no deductibles and co-pays except for extended skilled level nursing.
Other benefits are aid for unemployment compensation and Social Security with reinstated cost of living increases.
Roland | 1.5.11 @ 5:45PM
When the House Republicans repeal Obamacare, in the same bill they should restore the money cut from Medicare. How many Democratic senators will have the nerve to vote against Medicare to save Obamacare? If they do, Republicans will lock up the retiree vote for 2012.
metaforehead| 1.5.11 @ 6:04PM
As an insurance salesman, I say let's have single payor. Put me out of business, please, for the good of the populace. The insurance companies are beholden ultimately only to their shareholders. We have 300 million who need health care, and a system of wonderful caregivers to provide it. Unfortunately, as an accident of post WWII growth, we have a profit-making industry in between them. Sad.
George True| 1.5.11 @ 7:06PM
I doubt that you are really an insurance agent. In 22 years in the business I never met another agent who was so ignorant about how the insurance industry works.
Of course insurance companies, like any other company in any other industry, is beholden to their shareholders. So what?! In any case, the most profitable health insurance companies make a 5-6% profit margin, well below the profit margin in many other industries. Many insurance companies, are operating at a 1-2% margin.
The insurance companies are not driving the cost of health care. They are just the ones stuck with paying the bill. Those "wonderful" caregivers you refer to are the ones charging five times or more what any given procedure or treatment is actually worth.
Get your facts straight.
metaforehead| 1.7.11 @ 11:53AM
So its the mean old doctors? I agree, the other bogeyman is fee-for -service, and the two are related. Another profit-making industry. And yes, I am an insurance man. For 30 years.
Brian Richard Allen | 1.6.11 @ 12:37AM
.... shameless demagogues dishonor our democracy by their participation in it ....
While other shameless demagogues dishonor our democracy by their invention of it.
For ours, Sir, is a Republic.
If you can keep it.
MattZ| 1.6.11 @ 5:30AM
Death panels? Really, hack?
"But while this regulatory authoritarianism is, indeed, yet another dirty trick of Obamacare, it is small potatoes compared to the real dirty tricks of Obamacare."
Yes, the death panels are indeed the less offensive aspect of offering affordable health care to millions! Obviously.
Peter Ferrera, you lying, disingenuous nonsense spewer, why don't you just go kill yourself and do the discourse a huge favour?!
MZ
LiveFreeOrDie| 1.6.11 @ 10:07PM
"...offering affordable health care to millions!"
What a noble idea. That's all there is to it? Really, euro-trash simpleton?
Sceptic3| 1.6.11 @ 6:47PM
The British National Health Service has been cited in these posts as a cautionary tale. Let me say this about it; it should have worked. If you accept that when it first started in 1948 it was running on credit; and would not be truly in the black until it had run for sufficient time for the the entire work force to have spent their entire working lives paying their national insurance premiums. Sadly that was not allowed to happen before Great Britain became host to tens of thousands of immigrants who were immediately entitled to free health care. Immigration has ballooned since those early days and the situation is now intolerable with the health service in crisis.
In the U.S you already have uncounted numbers of illegals who will avail themselves of your facilities; you won't be able to deny them; it will be an infringement of their human rights. The same will be true of the new waves who will swarm in from south of the border; you can't keep them out now; with free health care on the menu you have no chance whatever. It will mean the end of America as we know it; and that's what Obama wants.
Paul Revere II| 1.6.11 @ 8:28PM
Let's call a spade a spade: this power-grabbing "health care bill" is properly termed ObamaScare.
ironhorzmn| 1.6.11 @ 11:45PM
"Most Democrats and liberals have no idea what they have done."
Bullsh*t.
Tenn Slim| 1.22.11 @ 10:58AM
Buried regulations is the means to thier Leftist End.
EPA, FTC, etal have the same sets of Buried Regs. These are being imposed, silently, and with great effect. Virtually ignored by the MSM dailies.
The END result is a continuing GNP of < 1% growth per qtr, and a UN employment continuation of > 9 %. These two factors alone will ensure 2012 Need to Keep the OBAMA admin in place. Similar to wartime need to Keep the Horse we have.
A sorry state of affairs.
Semper Fi
Christian Louboutin | 6.23.11 @ 5:40AM
But while this regulatory authoritarianism is, indeed, yet another dirty trick of Obamacare, it is small potatoes compared to the real dirty tricks of Obamacare.
Adidas | 8.11.11 @ 6:03AM
is good
العاب بنات | 4.10.12 @ 12:30PM
If Medicare wasn't a first step then I wouldn't be too worried Eric.