The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment
And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).
The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....
T'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???
by Sarah Palin on Monday, June 25, 2012 at 11:11am – on Facebook
As we wait for the impending Supreme Court decision on Obamacare, I reiterate what I wrote in my first post on this topic nearly three years ago. I stand by everything I wrote in that warning to my fellow Americans because what was true then is true now, and it will remain true as we hear what the Supreme Court has to say.
It was a pretty long post, but a lot of people seem to have only read two words of it: “death panel.” Though I was called a liar for calling it like it is, many of these accusers finally saw that Obamacare did in fact create a panel of faceless bureaucrats who have the power to make life and death decisions about health care funding. It’s called the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), and its purpose all along has been to “keep costs down” by actually denying care via price controls and typically inefficient bureaucracy. This subjective rationing of care is what I was writing about in that first post:
The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.
Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion.
Rep. Michele Bachmann highlighted the Orwellian thinking of the president’s health care advisor, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of the White House chief of staff, in a floor speech to the House of Representatives. I commend her for being a voice for the most precious members of our society, our children and our seniors.
We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, “Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late.
If the Supreme Court doesn’t strike down Obamacare entirely, then Congress must act to repeal IPAB and Obamacare before it is indeed “too late.” All of Obamacare must go one way or another.
Friday March 23rd, 2012 is 2nd-year anniversary of the signing of the Affordable Care Act, ObamaCare, into law, Monday March 26th is the day the states take their case against the ObamaCare individual mandate (as well as the full law itself) to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). It could end up being the day that saved America, or the day the Supreme Court helped America sink further into debt and further down the road toward Socialism.
If SCOTUS strikes down the individual mandate, ObamaCare will implode and die, giving America another chance at both surviving and re-addressing healthcare and Medicare. If SCOTUS does not strike down the mandate, we will get a second chance to overturn the bill that will be the final nail in the coffin of American freedom in November 2012. After that the only thing that will save us from ourselves is a total financial collapse.
Government-controlled/run healthcare is the jewel socialism and the most Progressive president and congress America has ever had crammed this bill down the throats of the American people without most of them ever realizing what happened. They even managed to force both the House and Senate to vote on this program, several times each, without reading the bills. Think about it.
There was a small group of people, the Tea Party and other patriots, who were engaged and did read those bills (at least one version), reviewed and shared their findings, spoke out and traveled to Washington D.C. to stand up. I was one of those people… but nobody in Washington and not enough people in America listened.
Nancy Pelosi said, We have to pass the bill (without reading it… because there was not time) to find out what was in it?”. They did… and now we, the American people, are beginning to find out what is in it… in dribs and drabs… one bad provision at a time. ObamaCare is fraught with broken promises and misrepresentations: Obamacare’s Top 5 Broken Promises
Well, we now have a group of doctors who have come together to get out the truth, the whole truth on how Obamacare will impact the health and welfare of your loved ones at: www.AmericanDoctors4Truth.org. It is information absolutely vital for every American, especially if the SCOTUS does not over the full law or at least the individual mandate.
Remember the Democrat ad showing Paul Ryan throwing grandma off a cliff?
Well here is the response to that ad by www.AmericanDoctors4Truth.org based on the information of what really is in ObamaCare, now coming out. Please watch:
My question is why nobody in Washington has read the full ObamaCare Bill in the meantime after it was passed and then spoken out… yelling from the rooftops? Why?
Recently several important provisions have come to light. Below are back-up articles and information for those who did not read the bill or at least the reviews of those who did:
IPAB Spells Gloom And Doom For Medicare - Just yesterday (03.22.12) the House of Representatives voted to repeal key 'Obamacare' provision” IPAB (the CLASS ACT has also been nullified)
Was told by a friend whose husband who works for one of our major hospitals here that the HR department posts upcoming news on a weekly basis on their bulletin boards throughout the hospital.
Late last week a posting went up stating: PER THE US FED GOVT, AS OF APRIL 24, 2013 THERE WILL BE NO CHEMO/RADIATION/MEDICATIONS/FOR ALL PERSONS DIAGNOSED WITH CANCER AT AGE 76. SURGICAL PROCEDURES WILL BE DONE ONLY IF THE SURGEONS CAN GET IT ALL.
Obamacare includes such a variety and volume of negative policies that it’s hard to keep track of them all. Here is a list of 10 terrible provisions that every American should be aware of:
It increases taxes on families earning over $250,000. In 2013, the employee portion of the Medicare payroll tax will increase from 1.45 percent to 2.35 percent for families earning $250,000 or more and individuals earning $200,000 or more. The income threshold is not indexed for inflation, so more and more middle-income families will be hit by the tax hike as time goes on.
It adds a new tax to investment income. The increased payroll tax rate is also applied to high-earners’ investment income for the first time beginning in 2013. It will hit capital gains, dividends, rents, and royalties, discouraging investment and harming economic growth.
It puts new limitations on those with HSAs and FSAs. Starting in 2012, Obamacare restricts the products that consumers may purchase with a Health Savings Account (HSA) or Flexible Savings Account (FSA)—such as over-the-counter medications—and increases the penalty for such non-qualified uses of HSAs. It also limits the amount taxpayers may deposit into an FSA to $2,500 a year in 2013.
It adds a new tax on those who purchase medical devices. In 2013, a 2.3 percent excise tax will be applied to medical devices, causing a $28.5 billion tax hike on medical device manufacturers. The industry will pay for this tax by reducing jobs and passing additional costs on to consumers.
It penalizes marriage. Obamacare creates new taxpayer-funded subsidies for the low and middle classes to purchase health coverage, but the structure of the subsidies allows two individuals to claim more in subsidies alone than if married. This discriminates against married couples and discourages marriage at almost all age and income levels.
It violates religious liberty. The Department of Health and Human Services included the full range of contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs, among the women-specific preventive services that Obamacare requires insurers to include with no cost-sharing. This mandate violates Americans’ conscience rights and religious liberty. Its narrow exemption for religious employers will force many who find these products morally objectionable—including religious charities, hospitals, and schools—to pay for them.
It puts Medicare decisions in the hands of an unelected board. The Independent Payment Advisory Board, a board of 15 unelected officials, will have the power to cut Medicare spending without congressional approval. These unaccountable government appointees will be able to restrict seniors’ access to providers, treatments, and services.
It puts a premium tax on health insurers. Obamacare adds a premium tax on health insurers that offer full coverage beginning in 2014. On average, the tax is expected to increase premiums by 1.9 percent to 2.3 percent in 2014 and between 2.8 percent and 3.7 percent by 2023. Combined with the other provisions in Obamacare, this tax will have a huge impact on the cost of premiums.
It creates a new unsustainable entitlement program. On top of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, Obamacare created a new long-term care entitlement called the CLASS program. It is actuarially unsound, unworkable, and unsustainable. As a result, the Administration has already put its implementation “on hold.”
It puts over half of all Americans on a government program. Because of Obamacare’s huge expansion of Medicaid and creation of taxpayer-funded subsidies to purchase health coverage, more than half of all Americans will be dependent on a government health care program (Medicare, Medicaid, or the government exchanges) by the end of this decade.
Again, we only have a few chances of getting rid of ObamaCare, 4 if you consider a total financial collapse:
Having the Supreme Court overturn it after the court hearing on March 23rd.
Voting in anyone (anyone but Obama… ABO) in November and then having them overturn and repeal as much of the entire bill as possible, on day one of their presidency, and start over, which all the GOP candidates have vowed to do.
Experiencing a total financial collapse of the United States after which there will be no money for any programs, especially ObamaCare.
If none of the first three above is done, the government will gain control of an additional 6 to 10% of the U.S. economy through ObamaCare and the tentacles will go so deep and wide that it can never be unwound after 4-more years of Obama and his radical team. Government controlled healthcare is always the crown jewel and center of socialism, especially with what is written into the Affordable Care Act or ObamaCare. And if you realize what is in this bill and what has been done, it is also obvious that Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and President must be ousted or shamed into quitting!!
Realizing how unpopular ObamaCare is the President and the White House have been very quiet about the 2-year anniversary, but Nancy Pelosi held a celebration in Washington on Thursday.
The SCOTUS decision is going to be a nail-bitter. Many feel that the individual mandate will be struck down in a 5 to 4 decision; the 4-conservatives on the bench plus Judge Kennedy against the 4-liberals on the bench, which include Sotomayor and Kagen appointed by Obama just for this fight. We shall see. And unwinding this monster will be a mess no matter what SCOTUS decides or which method with use.
Think the contraception decision was bad? Wait until bureaucrats start telling your insurer which cancer screenings to cover.
Offended by President Obama's decision to force health insurers to pay for contraception and surgical sterilization or my religious institutions mandated to go against their core beliefs? It gets worse: In the future, thanks to ObamaCare, the government will issue such health edicts on a routine basis—and largely insulated from public view. This goes beyond contraception to cancer screenings, the use of common drugs like aspirin, and much more.
Under ObamaCare, a single committee—the United States Preventative Services Task Force—is empowered to evaluate preventive health services and decide which will be covered by health-insurance plans.
The task force already rates services with letter grades of "A" through "D" (or "I," if it has "insufficient evidence" to make a rating). But under ObamaCare, services rated "A" or "B"—such as colon cancer screening for adults aged 50-75—must be covered by health plans in full, without any co-pays. Many services that get "Cs" and "Ds"—such as screening for ovarian or testicular cancer—could get nixed from coverage entirely.
That's because mandating coverage for all the "A" and "B" services will be very costly. In 2000, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the marginal cost of similar state insurance mandates was 5%-10% of total claims. Other estimates put the cost of mandates as high as 20% of premiums.
Health plans will inevitably choose to drop coverage for many services that don't get a passing grade from the task force and therefore aren't mandated. Insurance companies will need to conserve their premium money, which the government regulates, in order to spend it subsidizing those services that the task force requires them to cover in full.
David Klein
Americans first became familiar with the task force in November 2009, when it made the controversial decision to recommend that women ages 40-49 shouldn't get routine mammograms. More recently, it rebuffed routine prostate-cancer screening and the use of tests that detect the viruses that can cause cervical cancer.
The task force relishes setting a very high bar. Like the Food and Drug Administration in approving new drugs, it usually requires a randomized, prospective trial to "prove" that a diagnostic test or other intervention improves clinical outcomes and therefore deserves a high grade of "A" or "B."
This means its advice is often out of sync with conventional medical practice. For example, it recommended against wider screening for HIV long after such screening was accepted practice. As a result, many of its verdicts are widely ignored by practicing doctors.
The task force is a part-time board of volunteer advisers that works slowly and is often late to incorporate new science into its recommendations. Only in 2009 did it finally recommend aspirin for the prevention of stroke and heart attack among those at risk—decades after this practice was demonstrated to save lives and had become part of standard medical practice.
The task force is also the only federal health agency to have the explicit legal authority to consider cost as one criterion in recommending whether patients should use a medical test or treatment.
Over time, the task force will surely recommend against many services that patients now take for granted, while mandating full insurance coverage for things that they'd be just as happy paying for. Among the interventions that it plans to consider in 2012 are screening for hepatitis C in adults, for osteoporosis in men and for depression in children; counseling for obesity in adults and for alcohol use in adolescents; and daily aspirin for heart-attack and stroke prevention in people over 80.
The task force's problems are compounded by the fact that it is deliberately exempted from the rules that govern other government advisory boards and regulatory agencies. Thus it has no obligation to hold its meetings in public, announce decisions in draft form or even consider public comments. Consumers have no way to directly appeal its decisions. And health providers or product developers affected by its decisions can't sue it for recourse.
To begin addressing these problems, Congress should make the task force subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which would at least require it to hold its deliberations in public. Congress could also make it a full-fledged part of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which already convenes its meetings. That would make the task force subject to the Administrative Procedures Act and all the rules that bind other regulatory bodies, including the legal requirement to consider public comments and provide avenues for appeal.
Better still, Congress could let private health plans—and their members—decide on their own how preventive tests and treatments should be covered. If not, Americans will soon be surprised by all the important tests and treatments that become more costly, and all the less relevant stuff that's suddenly free.
It's all a reminder that President Obama's decision on contraception isn't a one-off political intervention but the initial exploit of an elaborate new system.
by Dr. Gottlieb, a physician and resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has served as deputy commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration and senior policy adviser to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. He consults with and invests in health-care companies. - WSJ
As time goes on… if people don’t start reading the ObamaCare Bill and make sure it is repealed in its entirety, either by the Supreme Court or a New President and a primarily new Congress in November 2012, Americans will soon find out that former Alaska Governor and GOP VP candidate in 2008, Sarah Palin plus others who were paying attention, was 100% right about rationing, death panels or whatever you want to call it in ObamaCare and a lot more that we all won’t like… especially seniors, the disabled and special needs children and adults! Wake-up America… before it is too late.
If you are not familiar with Saul Alinsky and his book that is a Bible to our present administration, Rules for Radicals, its time… The Obama White House and election committee will use Alinsky Methods, Cloward and Piven’s blueprint, Cass Sunstein’s Nudging and if necessary the tactics of their friends, like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn of the Weather Underground to promote their globalism, their Progressive goals and to steal the 2012 election if America does not wake up!!
It is ObamaCare that will through the Grandma over the cliff and in front of the death panel through rationing, but one of the Rules for Radicals is to turn the focus from yourself and from what you plan to do onto your adversary or opponent.
AARP is in the bag for the administration, but they are using their power and database to scare seniors into voting the opposite of what will save them and their healthcare… Medicaid and Medicare. ObamaCare is big money for AARP!
How moral is it to create an anti-GOP political ad showing "Grandma thrown off a cliff" asks Neil Cavuto,today, interviewing progressive advocate and creator of that ad, Erica Payne, Agenda Project Founder, "when you know that the plan being discussed exempts those 55 and older?" Cavuto's outrage was enough to make him resurrect the "Death Panels". Read Rest of Article Here
There is no question that our health care system needs reform. Unfortunately, President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and Harry Reid have had no intention of working with Republicans towards health care reform we all can agree on. However, mycolleagues and I have put forth a proposal that we believe will effectively reform health care for all Americans. The reform measure that I think is best has been introduced by Congressmen Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Devin Nunes (R-CA) called the Patient's Choice Act. It is directionally opposite of the plan proposed by President Obama and his cohorts. Instead of putting government in charge of the system, this plan largely removes the failed portions of government involvement, and puts each individual in charge of their own health care plan and decisions. Here are some bullet points on this plan:
The plan eliminates the employer deduction for health insurance and the system of direct payment of health costs under Medicare and Medicaid, and replaces them with a $2,300 refundable tax credit per individual which must be used for health care costs. Therefore, everyone, whether they are young, senior citizens, or indigent, will be covered under a private plan of their own choosing. And you no longer have to get the plan from your employer, but will have a number of options to keep the same plan as you move from job to job. Senior plans would be further subsidized by the Medicare system but still allowed to choose their own plan.
Currently as a Californian, you can only buy a health insurance plan approved by the state of California. Under the Patient's Choice Act, you would be free to pick from any of the over 1,300 medical insurance plans offered around the country. State based insurance exchanges will make sure that you cannot be cancelled for illness, and that pre-existing conditions will not interfere with our choices, in the same way that fire insurance is available to those who live in high fire risk areas today.
Basically this legislation will allow unlimited contributions to a health savings account so that Americans can save for their own health care costs on a pre-tax basis.
Litigation costs are a huge driver of medical costs. This bill would replace the court system with state based dispute resolution mechanisms for most claims, thereby saving a great deal of money in the system.
Creates transparency through a public/private partnership to disclose cost, quality, and outcomes of various plans and providers.
It also instills accountability into existing federal wellness and prevention programs to encourage more disease prevention activities and thereby lower costs.
This bill will cost a grand total of $0 and will increase taxes by $0. It is revenue and cost neutral to the current system.
The proposals we have seen from President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and Harry Reid on healthcare reform represent some of the worst public policy I have seen in my entire public career. Socialized health care that raises taxes, rations care and increases costs isn't what most Americans have in mind. I stand in firm opposition to the current government-run healthcare proposal and will work diligently to ensure that Americans are not saddled with a system that will ultimately reduce the quality of your healthcare, raises taxes, and hamper the relationship between doctors and their patients.
On the whole, we will have government-only medicine with the compassion of the IRS and the efficiency of the DMV. Below I have included a graph which doesn't need any explanation, except for that this socialized health care plan will be a mess.
Here is a quick run-down of some of the most frightening provisions:
It makes it illegal to purchase your own private health insurance after the bill is enacted and will in effect, transition virtually everyone to government care within 5 years. See Section 102, on Page 16 of H.R. 3200
The bill raises taxes on "the rich" but also creates new taxes on small businesses and individuals who do not have health insurance. After the tax increase, the top tax rate for a resident of California will be over 57%, which makes it the highest income tax rate in the industrialized world (Sweden is 56%).
It will increase the overall cost of health care in the country by trillions of dollars. Even the Democrat appointed head of the Congressional Budget Office had to admit that there is no evidence that the plan will lower the cost of health care as the President has asserted.
Current estimates project that there will be nearly 5 million additional jobs that will disappear nationwide, as a result of the plan.
As many as 114 million Americans could lose their current coverage under the bill, according to non-partisan actuaries at the Lewin Group.
Doctors, hospitals, and other medical providers will be paid even less than they are currently being paid by Medicare or Medicaid, which will bankrupt many.
A government bureaucracy will determine whether you are allowed to receive treatments or medicines, and sometimes, as happens in other socialized countries, whether you are allowed to live or die.
It does not deal with the bankruptcy of the Medicare system or Social Security so those problems continue, but the taxes said to balance them will have been spent on this.
And, it will not even cover everybody with insurance, so it won't even fix what it is supposed to fix.
Rep John Campbell
Additional Facts:
We are being told over and over again by the administration that the GOP and moderate democrats have no alternative plans or input. If you watched the president’s joint session speech, at least half of the Republicans and Blue Dogs were holding up copies of alternate healthcare plans or at least needed amendments to HR 3200 that Nancy Pelosi and her liberal cronies are trying to push down our throats.
Before the recess Obama said that he would glad to sit with anyone/group (Rep or Senator) who wanted to and go over the bills or portions of the bills being proposed, line by line. He said again during the joint session speech that his door was open to anyone with viable alternative suggestions and input to the plans being shoved down our throats. UNTRUE!!! He has not met with or invited a single Republican to the White House since last April and refuses to return their calls. (Congressmen Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Devin Nunes (R-CA & former physician) authors of the Patient's Choice Act have called and written the White House several times for a meeting (as well as many other Re;publicans) and the WH has not even acknowledged their request to meet with the president let alone set an appointment.)
Universal Health = less docs - A new Investor’s Business Daily Poll revealed that if the healthcare bill passes, 45% of doctors will quit. Wow, what overwhelming support from the medical community. It's probably just because those greedy, evil doctors know the gig is up on their amputations for cash scheme. Another poll by Fox News/Health shows that 65% of all doctors oppose ObamaCare and another 15% are on the fence against or just not talking.
Journalist and author T.R. Reid set out on a global tour of hospitals and doctors' offices, all in the hopes of understanding how other industrialized nations provide affordable, effective universal health care. The result: his book The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care. Reid is a foreign correspondent for The Washington Post — in whose pages he recently addressed five major myths about other countries' health-care systems — and the former chief of the paper's London and Tokyo bureaus. He was the lead correspondent for Frontline’s Sick Around the World.
Germany offer’s healthcare to everyone for half our cost (approximately $770 per month and employers pay half), using “private insurance companies” of their choice that are heavily regulated… but no government-run healthcare, public option or co-ops. Their Healthcare is portable and they can change carriers at any time.
Insurance companies in the U.S. charge more for services for less than in any other country in the world. 20% compared to an average of 5 to 5.5%, as low as 4% in some countries.
In Switzerland, if you insurance company does not pay our bills within 5-days, your next month’s premium is free.
The Baucus Bill is the same old same old…
A government-run Co-op which is just another name for a Public Option
Half a trillion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Baby-boomers (born between 1946 to 1964) are retiring in record numbers. The need is going up; it won’t drop. No major provisions for clean up of fraud and waste within those systems. Medicaid costs will be pushed onto the states. And the results cannot end up any other way than rationing care for seniors.
The 8 trillion dollar cost (average estimate) is a fantasy. Huge amounts of the cost estimates are just that: estimates of possible savings over the next 10-yrs. Again, estimates without a plan and a track record of just the opposite, while Medicaid costs will be transferred to broke states and Also, many of the programs in the Baucus bill and others won’t start until 2013. If they did the cost would be 1.5 Trillion+, and you know that everything the government runs costs twice their estimates.
Everyone (people who can’t afford healthcare now) will be forced to purchase healthcare of pay the government a penalty of $3,800 to $4,000. Right now the average estimates of the monthly healthcare costs will be $1,300 (rent payment for many in the U.S.).
Many employers will drop their employees’ HC, forcing them into the government-run co-op which will ultimately equal a strong public option and ultimately total government-run “sub-standard” healthcare (just look at Veteran’s Benefits, the Reservation System, the Financial state of Medicare and Medicaid… and everything else the government runs (Social Security, the Post Office, Fanny and Freddie, etc etc Employers will be fined if they do not offer their employees HC, but the fine will still be less than the cost or providing the coverage. Especially in an economic climate like we have today no good businessman or small business owner will be able to choose covering their employees for long.
And the list goes on…
CBO – Doug Holz-Eaken (former CBO Director) says that the Baucus Bill was written (engineered) in a way that is favorable to the parameters or method used to score bills. Also… does anyone wonder why after the White House invited the present CBO Director for a small group visit or chat that they have received favorable scorings after the original thumbs down on HR 3200.
If there is not “serious” focus and specifics in the bill addressing “Tort Reform”, and there isn’t, this is not a legitimate offer… Charles Krauthammer.
There are many hidden taxes in the bill which will be used to payoff insurance companies.
WE REALLY MUST BEGIN TO BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES BY LOOKING AT THE FACTS: THE GOAL OF OBAMACARE (ALL BILLS PRESENTLY BEING CONSIDERED) IS PUSHING THIS COUNTRY INTO A SYSTEM OF GOVERNMNT-RUN HEALTHCARE (SOCIALIZED MEDICINE) AND A POWER GRAB ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT AND THE PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS WHO ARE REALLY PULLING OBAMA’S STRINGS!!!!!
These fears (or realities) are starting to be voiced from all directions: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Doctors themselves,
Senator Orin Hatch said today... the only way we can pay for the Baucus Bill or HR 3200 is with huge tax increases!
Please keep up the pressure on Congress!!
Call, Write, Email and Fax your Congressman & Senators and all the lefties and teeterers….!!!! Consistently.
Just about the time the Center for Immigration Studies was holding a press briefing at the National Press Club about the immigration and health reform connection, proponents from President Obama on down were denying that illegal aliens would receive taxpayer-funded health care under pending legislation.
I’m here to tell you, as I told the Press Club crowd, the legislation on the table does, honest to goodness, effectively extend coverage to illegal aliens.
Take the premium subsidy in the House bill, H.R. 3200. This lies in the part of the legislation (Division A, Title II) that creates a Health Choices Administration, adds the infamous “public option,” sets up and runs the “exchange” clearinghouse for getting insurance, and controls a graduated premium subsidy program through allocation of “individual affordability credits.”
The subsidy, found in Section 242, will give a voucher to people earning between 133 percent of the official poverty level and 400 percent of that income level (or, up to about $88,000 a year for a family of four).
Legal immigrants certainly qualify under H.R. 3200 for this subsidy. Section 242(a)(1) makes eligible "an individual who is lawfully present in a State in the United States (other than as a nonimmigrant described in a subparagraph (excluding subparagraphs (K), (T), (U), and (V)) of section 101(a)(15) of the Immigration and Nationality Act)."
A political fig leaf purports to keep illegal aliens from receiving the subsidy. Section 246 says, "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
However, reading the legislation as a whole, its glaring omission is any requirement to verify someone’s immigration or citizenship status. For instance, H.R. 3200 makes no reference to the verification system in current law that’s used for nearly all government welfare and other public programs. If lawmakers wanted enrolling agents, including bureaucrats at the new Health Choices Administration, to use the Systematic Alienage Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system, the bill should include a reference and authorize SAVE’s application to this government program.
In other words, the silence of H.R. 3200 regarding SAVE and mandatory verification makes Section 246 just empty words. In fact, the Ways and Means Committee outright voted down an amendment by Rep. Dean Heller to require eligibility verification before qualifying someone to receive a taxpayer subsidy. Also, "lawfully present" covers a lot of ground. Does it include someone here under Temporary Protected Status, for instance? Again, the absence of eligibility verification requirements leaves open a lot of room for waste, fraud, and abuse.
A similar situation of setting up blinders occurs in H.R. 3200’s Medicaid provisions. Division B’s Title VII, Section 1701 expands Medicaid eligibility to those with incomes a third above the federal poverty level. This provision dictates that "the State shall accept without further determination the enrollment under this title of an individual determined by the Commissioner to be a non-traditional Medicaid eligible individual." In other words, the bill prohibits asking any further questions about new Medicaid enrollees.
Rather, the bill section promotes "presumptive eligibility" concerning Medicaid expansion. Read it for yourself, right from Section 1702(a):
(ii) PRESUMPTIVE ELIGIBILITY OPTION- Pursuant to such memorandum, insofar as the memorandum has selected the option described in section 205(e)(3)(B) of the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, the State shall provide for making medical assistance available during the presumptive eligibility period and shall, upon application of the individual for medical assistance under this title, promptly make a determination (and subsequent redeterminations) of eligibility in the same manner as if the individual had applied directly to the State for such assistance except that the State shall use the income-related information used by the Commissioner and provided to the State under the memorandum in making the presumptive eligibility determination to the maximum extent feasible. (emphasis added)
And, once again, the lack of any provision mentioning or requiring verification, mandatory use of the SAVE system under this part of the bill, or any other accountability requirement opens the process up to signing up illegal aliens for Medicaid.
In the Energy and Commerce Committee, a mandatory verification amendment was voted down when Rep. Nathan Deal offered it. A political fig leaf amendment was added by voice vote, but the loopholes and potential for waste, fraud, and abuse remain wide open in the Medicaid provisions.
Whatever you think of health reform, a combination of things makes it certain that illegal aliens will receive government health coverage. The most obvious is the omission — heck, the outright rejection of corrective amendments — of eligibility verification requirements. The other factor is the designed ease of enrolling people in Medicaid, for "affordability credits," and the like.
Bottom line, the health legislation Congress is considering establishes an "enroll now, don’t ask questions later" regime. That’s a recipe for covering more people, but many of whom may not actually qualify. A huge number are almost guaranteed to be illegal aliens or legal immigrants still in their first five years in the country who are supposed to turn to their visa sponsor for financial support. And having more people in a public program translates pretty quickly into higher costs. In this case, we’re talking on the order of tens and hundreds of billions of dollars.
For anyone who still doesn’t believe that ObamaCare intends to cover illegal aliens while rationing elderly Americans and Legal Aliens… check this out: free translation services of non-English Speaking patients?!?
Health Care Reform legislation now pending in Congress would require doctors and hospitals to provide interpreters and translation services free of charge to non-English speaking patients.
That will add $billions to the cost of health care and give immigrants even less incentive to learn English.
The "America's Affordable Health Choices Act," H.R. 3200, Section 1221 (b) says Medicare health care providers that fail to "substantially provide language services to limited English proficient beneficiaries" face severe fines and penalties.
This is outrageous. Medicare is already bankrupt. Now medical providers also will have to provide free translation services.
Send a free email message to your congressional representatives and demand that they remove entitlements to language translation services from health care reform legislation!
Please "Take Action" now!
And please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to ProEnglish. We receive no government support and depend entirely on voluntary contributions from people like you. Clickhere to make a secure donation online. Thank you!
I have been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching all of this national debate on healthcare. It is time for me to bring some clarity to the table by explaining many of the problems from the perspective of a doctor.
First off, the government has involved very few of us physicians in the healthcare debate. While the American Medical Association has come out in favor of the plan, it is vital to remember that the AMA only represents 17% of the American physician workforce.
I have taken care of Medicaid patients for 35 years while representing the only pediatric ophthalmology group left in Atlanta, Georgia that accepts Medicaid. For example, in the past 6 months I have cared for three young children on Medicaid who had corneal ulcers. This is a potentially blinding situation because if the cornea perforates from the infection, almost surely blindness will occur. In all three cases the antibiotic needed for the eradication of the infection was not on the approved Medicaid list.
Each time I was told to fax Medicaid for the approval forms, which I did. Within 48 hours the form came back to me which was sent in immediately via fax, and I was told that I would have my answer in 10 days. Of course by then each child would have been blind in the eye.
Each time the request came back denied. All three times I personally provided the antibiotic for each patient which was not on the Medicaid approved list. Get the point -- rationing of care.
Over the past 35 years I have cared for over 1000 children born with congenital cataracts. In older children and in adults the vision is rehabilitated with an intraocular lens. In newborns we use contact lenses which are very expensive. It takes Medicaid over one year to approve a contact lens post cataract surgery. By that time a successful anatomical operation is wasted as the child will be close to blind from a lack of focusing for so long a period of time.
Again, extreme rationing. Solution: I have a foundation here in Atlanta supported 100% by private funds which supplies all of these contact lenses for my Medicaid and illegal immigrants children for free. Again, waiting for the government would be disastrous.
Last week I had a lady bring her child to me. They are Americans but live in Sweden, as the father has a job with a big corporation. The child had the onset of double vision 3 months ago and has been unable to function normally because of this. They are people of means but are waiting 8 months to see the ophthalmologist in Sweden. Then if the child needed surgery they would be put on a 6 month waiting list. She called me and I saw her that day. It turned out that the child had accommodative esotropia (crossing of the eyes treated with glasses that correct for farsightedness) and responded to glasses within 4 days, so no surgery was needed. Again, rationing of care.
Last month I operated on a 70 year old lady with double vision present for 3 years. She responded quite nicely to her surgery and now is symptom free. I also operated on a 69 year old judge with vertical double vision. His surgery went very well and now he is happy as a lark. I have been told -- but of course there is no healthcare bill that has been passed yet -- that these 2 people because of their age would have been denied surgery and just told to wear a patch over one eye to alleviate the symptoms of double vision. Obviously cheaper than surgery.
I spent two years in the US Navy during the Viet Nam war and was well treated by the military. There was tremendous rationing of care and we were told specifically what things the military personnel and their dependents could have and which things they could not have. While I was in Viet Nam, my wife Nancy got sick and got essentially no care at the Naval Hospital in Oakland, California. She went home and went to her family's private internist in Beverly Hills. While it was expensive, she received an immediate work up. Again rationing of care.
For those of you who are over 65, this bill in its present form might be lethal for you. People in Britain face rationing of care in that there is an eight month wait for cataract surgery, 11 for hernia and the same for disc and total hip The government wants to mimic the British plan. For those of you younger, it will still mean restriction of the care that you and your children receive.
While 99% of physicians went into medicine because of the love of medicine and the challenge of helping our fellow man, economics are still important. My rent goes up 2% each year and the salaries of my employees go up 2% each year. Twenty years ago, ophthalmologists were paid $1800 for a cataract surgery and today $500. This is a 73% decrease in our fees. I do not know of many jobs in America that have seen this sort of lowering of fees.
But there is more to the story than just the lower fees. When I came to Atlanta, there was a well known ophthalmologist that charged $2500 for a cataract surgery as he felt the was the best. He had a terrific reputation and in fact I had my mother's bilateral cataracts operated on by him with a wonderful result. She is now 94 and has 20/20 vision in both eyes. People would pay his $2500 fee.
However, then the government came in and said that any doctor that does Medicare work cannot accept more than the going rate ( now $500) or he or she would be severely fined. This put an end to his charging $2500. The government said it was illegal to accept more than the government-allowed rate. What I am driving at is that those of you well off will not be able to go to the head of the line under this new healthcare plan, just because you have money, as no physician will be willing to go against the law to treat you.
I am a pediatric ophthalmologist and trained for 10 years post-college to become a pediatric ophthalmologist (add two years of my service in the Navy and that comes to 12 years). A neurosurgeon spends 14 years post-college, and if he or she has to do the military that would be 16 years. I am not entitled to make what a neurosurgeon makes, but the new plan calls for all physicians to make the same amount of payment. I assure you that medical students will not go into neurosurgery and we will have a tremendous shortage of neurosurgeons. Already, the top neurosurgeon at my hospital who is in good health and only 52 years old has just quit because he can't stand working with the government anymore. Forty-nine percent of children under the age of 16 in the state of Georgia are on Medicaid, so he felt he just could not stand working with the bureaucracy anymore.
We are being lied to about the uninsured. They are getting care. I operate at least 2 illegal immigrants each month who pay me nothing, and the children's hospital at which I operate charges them nothing also. This is true not only on Atlanta, but of every community in America.
The bottom line is that I urge all of you to contact your congresswomen and congressmen and senators to defeat this bill. I promise you that you will not like rationing of your own health.
Furthermore, how can you trust a physician that works under these conditions knowing that he is controlled by the state. I certainly could not trust any doctor that would work under these draconian conditions.
One last thing: with this new healthcare plan there will be a tremendous shortage of physicians. It has been estimated that approximately 5% of the current physician work force will quit under this new system. Also it is estimated that another 5% shortage will occur because of the decreased number of men and women wanting to go into medicine. At the present time the US government has mandated gender equity in admissions to medical schools .That means that for the past 15 years that somewhere between 49 and 51% of each entering class are females. This is true of private schools also, because all private schools receive federal funding.
The average career of a woman in medicine now is only 8-10 years and the average work week for a female in medicine is only 3-4 days. I have now trained 35 fellows in pediatric ophthalmology. Hands down the best was a female that I trained 4 years ago -- she was head and heels above all others I have trained. She now practices only 3 days a week.
(Now there will also be mandated racial equity in admissions… rather than admissions based on ability).
Background: Dr. Zane F. Pollard I did my undergraduate work at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. I graduated Tulane University medical School Alpha Omega Alpha ( medical school's top 10% of graduating class). Internship at the Univ. of Southern California in Los Angeles, one year of General surgery residency at the U. of California in San Francisco. Two years in the US Navy. Residency in Ophthalmology at the U.of S. California in Los Angeles, fellowship in pediatric Ophthalmology at the Wills Eye Hospital in Philadelphia. In practice with Eye Consultants of Atlanta for the past 35 years. Published 90 papers in peer reviewed Scientific Ophthalmology Journals. Member of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus, American Academy of Ophthalmology and the American Ophthalmological Society. Board certified in Ophthalmology.
-----------------
Barbara Wagner wanted to live, but Oregon Government-Run Healthcare would not pay for her cancer treatments. What they would do, was give her the meds for assisted suicide.
Washington is all atwitter about "death panels": President Obama derides the idea that his health-care reform calls for them; the Senate is stripping "end of life" counseling language from its bill -- and last Friday the voice of the liberal establishment, The New York Times, ran a Page One story "rebutting" the rumor that ObamaCare would create such boards to decide when to pull the plug on elderly patients.
But all those protests miss the fundamental truth of the "death panel" charge.
Even without a federal board voting on whom to kill, ObamaCare will ration care extensively, leading to the same result. This follows inevitably from central features of the president's plan. Specifically, his decisions to (1) pay for reform with vast cuts in the Medicare budget and (2) grant insurance coverage to 50 million new people, vastly boosting demand without increasing the supply of doctors, nurses or other care providers.
Whether or not he admits it even to himself, Obama's talk of cutting "inefficiencies" and reducing costs translates to less care, of lower quality, for the elderly. Every existing national health system finds ways to deny state-of-the-art medications and necessary surgical procedures to countless patients, and ObamaCare has the nascent mechanisms to do the same. With the limited options that Obama's vision would leave them, many will find that "end of life counseling" necessary and even welcome.
"Reform" would cut care to the elderly in several ways: * Slash hundreds of billions from Medicare spending, largely by lowering reimbursement rates to doctors and hospitals for patient care.
If a hospital gets less money for each MRI, it will do fewer of them. If a surgeon gets paid less for a heart bypass on a Medicare patient, he'll perform them more rarely. These facts of the marketplace are not only inevitable consequences of Obama's cuts but are also its intended consequence. Without them, his savings will prove illusory. * Expanding the patient load by extending full coverage to 50 million Americans (including such "Americans" as illegal immigrants) without boosting the supply of care will force rationing decisions on harried and overworked doctors and hospitals.
People with insurance use a lot more health-care resources -- so today's facilities and personnel will have to cope with the increased workload. Busy surgeons will have to decide who would benefit most from their treatment -- de facto rationing. The elderly will, inevitably, be the losers.
* The Federal Health Board, established by this legislation, will be charged with collecting data on various forms of treatment for different conditions to assess which are the most effective and efficient. While the bills don't force providers to obey the board's "guidance," its recommendations will still wind up setting the standards and protocols for care system-wide.
We've already seen Medicare and Medicaid lead a similar race to the bottom with their formularies and other regulations. With Washington dictating what every policy must cover and regulating all rates, insurers and providers will all have to follow the FHB's advice on limiting care to the elderly -- a de facto rationing system. * In assessing whether to allow certain treatments to a given patient, medical professionals will be encouraged to apply the Quality-Adjusted Remaining Years system. Under QARY, decision-makers seek to "amortize" the cost of treatment over the remaining "quality years of life" likely for that patient. Imagine a hip replacement costing $100,000 and the 75-year-old who needs it, a diabetic with a heart condition deemed to have just three "quality" years left. That works out to $33,333 a year -- too steep! Surgery disallowed! (Unless of course, the patient has political connections . . . )
Younger, healthier patients would still get the surgery, of course. The QARY system simply aims to deny health care to the oldest and most infirm, "scientifically" condemning them to infirmity, pain and earlier death than would otherwise be their fate.
In short, ObamaCare doesn't need to set up "death panels" to make retail decisions about ending the lives of individual patients. The whole "reform" scheme is one giant death panel in its own right.
The new president of the Canadian Medical Association, Dr. Anne Doig, has made comments that indicate that Canada's public run healthcare system is running on empty.
We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize...We know that there must be change...We're all running flat out, we're all just trying to stay ahead of the immediate day-to-day demands.
These comments come as the outgoing CMA President Dr. Robert Ouellet, is expected to report that Canada's government-run system needs to become more patient-centered.
And the list goes on… The more time we have to study ObamaCare and other government run healthcare systems, the more negative and scary information keeps surfacing.
Amid all the controversies over medical care, no one seems to be asking a very basic question: Why does it take more than 1,000 pages of legislation to insure people who lack medical insurance?
Despite incessant repetition of the fact that millions of Americans do not have medical insurance, hardy souls who have actually read the mammoth medical care legislation being rushed through Congress have discovered all sorts of things there that have nothing whatever to do with insuring the uninsured-- and everything to do with taking medical decisions out of the hands of doctors and their patients, and transferring those decisions to Washington bureaucrats.
That's called "bait and switch" when an unscrupulous business advertises one thing and tries to sell you something else. When politicians do it, it is far more dangerous to far more people.
Deception is not an incidental aspect of this medical care legislation, but is at the very heart of it.
That such a massive change of the entire medical care system, from top to bottom, was attempted to be rushed through Congress before the August recess-- before anybody in or out of Congress had time to read it all-- should have told us from the outset that we were being played for fools.
Despite President Obama's statements that he is not advocating a "single payer" system for medical care-- which is to say, a government monopoly of power over life and death decisions-- just a few years ago, he was telling a union audience that he was in favor of a "single payer" system. At that time, he pointed out that it was unlikely that such a system could be put in place all at once, that it might take a number of years to advance, step by step, to that goal.
In other words, Barack Obama fully understood the "entering wedge" political strategy that has allowed so many government programs to start off small, and apparently innocuous-- and then grow to gigantic size and scope over the years.
If telling us that he is not for a single payer system will soothe us into going along, then it is perfectly understandable why he said it. But that is no reason for us to believe him.
As for those uninsured Americans who are supposedly the reason for all this sound and fury, there is remarkably little interest in why they are uninsured, despite the incessant repetition of the fact that they are.
The endless repetition serves a political purpose but digging into the underlying facts might undermine that purpose. Many find it sufficient to say that the uninsured cannot "afford" medical insurance. But what you can afford depends not only on how much money you have but also on what your priorities are.
Many people who are uninsured have incomes from which medical insurance premiums could readily be paid without any undue strain. But they choose to spend their money on other things. Many young people, especially, don't buy medical insurance and elderly people already have Medicare. The poor have Medicaid available, even though many do not bother to sign up for it, until they are already in the hospital-- which they can do then.
Throwing numbers around about how many people are uninsured may create the impression that the uninsured cannot get medical treatment, when it fact they can get medical treatment at any hospital emergency room.
Is this ideal? Of course not. But nothing is going to be ideal, whether the current medical care legislation passes or not. The relevant question is: Are the problems created by the current situation worse than the problems that will be created by the pending legislation? That question never seems to get asked, much less answered.
No small part of our current medical care problems have been created by politicians who drive up the cost of medical insurance by mandating that insurance cover things that many people are unwilling to pay for.
Many of us are willing to pay for treatment of a sprained ankle ourselves, if we can get less expensive insurance to cover us just for catastrophic illnesses. But that is one of many decisions that politicians have taken out of our hands. There will be many more decisions taken out of our hands if Obamacare passes.
(Part IV)
The serious, and sometimes chilling, provisions of the medical care legislation that President Obama has been trying to rush through Congress are important enough for all of us to stop and think, even though his political strategy from the outset has been to prevent us from having time to stop and think about it.
What we also should stop to think about is the mindset behind this legislation, which is very consistent with the mindset behind other policies of this administration, whether the particular issue is bailing out General Motors, telling banks who to lend to or appointing "czars" to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they can and cannot do.
The idea that government officials can play God from Washington is not a new idea, but it is an idea that is being pushed with new audacity.
What they are trying to do is to create an America very unlike the America that has existed for centuries-- the America that people have been attracted to by the millions from every part of the world, the America that many generations of Americans have fought and died for.
This is the America for which Michelle Obama expressed her resentment before it became politically expedient to keep quiet.
It is the America that Reverend Jeremiah Wright denounced in his sermons during the 20 years when Barack Obama was a parishioner, before political expediency required Obama to withdraw and distance himself.
The thing most associated with America-- freedom-- is precisely what must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally different country to suit Obama's vision of the country and of himself. But do not expect a savvy politician like Barack Obama to express what he is doing in terms of limiting our freedom.
He may not even think of it in those terms. He may think of it in terms of promoting "social justice" or making better decisions than ordinary people are capable of making for themselves, whether about medical care or housing or many other things. Throughout history, egalitarians have been among the most arrogant people.
Obama has surrounded himself with people who also think it is their job to make other people's decisions for them. Not just Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, his health care advisor who complains of Americans' "over-utilization" of medical care, but also Professor Cass Sunstein, who has written a whole book on how third parties should use government power to "nudge" people into making better decisions in general.
Then there are a whole array of Obama administration officials who take it as their job to pick winners and losers in the economy and tell companies how much they can and cannot pay their executives.
Just as magicians know that the secret of some of their tricks is to distract the audience, so politicians know that the secret of many political tricks is to distract the public with scapegoats.
No one is more of a political magician than Barack Obama. At the beginning of 2008, no one expected a shrewd and experienced politician like Hillary Clinton to be beaten for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States by someone completely new to the national political scene. But Obama worked his political magic, with the help of the media, which he still has.
Barack Obama's escapes from his own past words, deeds and associations have been escapes worthy of Houdini.
Like other magicians, Obama has chosen his distractions well. The insurance industry is currently his favorite distraction as scapegoats, after he has tried to demonize doctors without much success.
Saints are no more common in the insurance industry than in politics or even among paragons of virtue like economists. So there will always be horror stories, even if these are less numerous or less horrible than what is likely to happen if Obamacare gets passed into law.
Obama even gets away with saying things like having a system to "keep insurance companies honest"-- and many people may not see the painful irony in politicians trying to keep other people honest. Certainly most of the media are unlikely to point out this irony.
by Thomas Sowell - One of the clearest thinkers of our generation is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute & Author of The Housing Boom and Bust
And let us not forget: Co-Op = Public Option = Single Payer
Catastrophe – Book the Dick Morris that deals with Healthcare Reform subject in great detail
*Judge Andrew Napolitano, Jay Seculo: Attorney for the American Center of Law and Justice and Tim Lynch from The Cato Institute stated earlier today that the act of government taking over health care is “unconstitutional” The powers granted to the federal government are enumerated in the Constitution. Speak up America and keep up the pressure.
“It is only when the Congress feels the heat that they see the light!”. Nancy Pelosi said earlier today that Healthcare Reform without a Public Option was unacceptable. It was going to be all or nothing, and you can be sure that she/they will try to ram this bill through without the Republican’s input and against the wishes of the people.
thecommunists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists, I did not protest; I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, I did not protest; I was a Protestant.
Then they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.
Election 2014 - What Is Really At Stake
Help Stop Voter Fraud!! Stand for the Constitution and God
Time to remember that: "We Surround Them", not the other way!
Stand Up Against Voter Fraud... Demand Re-Counts and Verification Until It is Right!! A Little Ink Goes a Long Way Toward Honesty... 1 Person 1 Vote... No More Mickey Mouse or Dead People Voting
"The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about IT! --Albert Einstein
Call Congress Today and Tell Them To Vote Against Cap and Trade
The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who in a period of moral crisis, maintain their neutrality -- Dante Alighieri / Often Quoted by Mark Twain
Thanks for calling the Congressional switchboard. Keep up the pressure: "NO on Cap and Trade"!!! "NO Vote on Obamacare", NO on another Stimulus Bill, NO to the never ending parade of "Power Grab Bills", and ABSOLUTELY NO on the Climate Change Treaty in Copenhagen!!
"No" on Cap and Trade and "No" on Government Controlled Healthcare!!! And Keep up the good fight! Keep up the Pressure on both the House and Senate! These are 2-fights the American People cannot afford to lose!!!
If you choose not to go this route… call and fax your Senator and as many of them on the list yourself, but don’t sit idly by!!
United States Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121
We apologize in advance for any Videos or links that are not functioning in these or other older posts. Internet information... like 'true' history in our student's textbooks are under constant attack by the Progressive Movement and even more so under the present administration. Try to save what you can to your own computer.
"...there comes a time, ladies and gentlemen, when ideology can cause death. I am so tired, so tired, of zealots, primarily on the left, putting their insane personal agendas above the safety of fellow Americans. Do you think the brave soldiers and Marines operating in dangerous areas right now want [unreleased photos of alleged abuse of prisoners] all over al-Jazeera and the terror websites? So let's look out for the military, OK? Nancy Pelosi has an obligation to get the loons in her party under control. If the Speaker can't do that, she doesn't deserve her position." ... Bill O'Reilly
Updated:If you'd like to contact Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, here's the contact information that you'll need.
colleagues and I have put forth a proposal that we believe will effectively reform health care for all Americans. The reform measure that I think is best has been introduced by Congressmen Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Devin Nunes (R-CA) called the Patient's Choice Act. It is directionally opposite of the plan proposed by President Obama and his cohorts. Instead of putting government in charge of the system, this plan largely removes the failed portions of government involvement, and puts each individual in charge of their own health care plan and decisions. Here are some bullet points on this plan:
.png)
