Search This Blog

Thursday, November 28, 2013

George Washington’s Thanksgiving Proclamation of 1789

By the President of the United States of America, a Proclamation.

Whereas it is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favor— and whereas both Houses of Congress have by their joint Committee requested me to recommend to the People of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be— That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks—for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation—for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war—for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed—for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted—for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us.

and also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech him to pardon our national and other transgressions— to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually—to render our national government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed—to protect and guide all Sovereigns and Nations (especially such as have shewn kindness unto us) and to bless them with good government, peace, and concord—To promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the encrease of science among them and us—and generally to grant unto all Mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as he alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand at the City of New York the third day of October in the year of our Lord 1789.

Death Panels Alive And Well In Canada And Coming Here


"Death Panel" - Obamacare Controversy - Time Mag Analyst: "Rationing" Board In Law

Death Panels Alive And Well In Canada And Coming Here

Canada's Supreme Court has ruled that under the "law of the land" in Ontario, a government board, not the family or doctors, has the ultimate power to pull the plug on a patient.
 Lost in the discussion of defunding ObamaCare and the failed effort in Congress is the fact that failure means the government's ability to defund your life through the ObamaCare's Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) remains. IPAB is regarded by many, starting with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, as a death panel whose decisions based on cost effectiveness would result in health care rationing.

A glimpse of this brave new world can be had by casting a glance at our neighbor to the north. There, Canada's Supreme Court ruled 5-2 that under Ontario's Health Care Consent Act, which has been on the books for nearly two decades, doctors cannot overrule a family's wishes for an incapacitated patient regarding life or death decisions, but an administrative tribunal can.

#ObamaCare: IPAB

A Walkthrough Of ObamaCare’s Most Powerful Bureaucracy


ObamaCare Created The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) “To Come Up With Ways To Cut Medicare Spending If It Grows Too Fast.” “That’s the job description for the 15 members of the Independent Payment Advisory Board — the new panel created by President Barack Obama’s health care law to come up with ways to cut Medicare spending if it grows too fast.” (David Nather, “Medicare Cost-Cutting Job Could Be Worst in D.C.,” Politico, 5/14/11)
  • “If Per Capita Costs Grow By More Than GDP Plus 0.5%, This Board Would Get More Power, Including An Automatic Budget Sequester To Enforce Its Rulings” To Cut Medicare Costs. “Fifteen members will serve on the Independent Payment Advisory Board, all appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. If per capita costs grow by more than GDP plus 0.5%, this board would get more power, including an automatic budget sequester to enforce its rulings. So 15 sages sitting in a room with the power of the purse will evidently find ways to control Medicare spending that no one has ever thought of before and that supposedly won’t harm seniors’ care, even as the largest cohort of the baby boom generation retires and starts to collect benefits.” (Editorial Board, “The Presidential Divider,” The Wall Street Journal, 4/14/2011)
The Wall Street Journal: IPAB Embraces The Thought That Health Care Decisions Are Best Made By Bureaucrats Rather Than Patients. “This turn is remarkable because the IPAB really does embody ObamaCare’s innermost values and beliefs—to wit, that health decisions are too important to leave to the people receiving the care (patients), the people providing the care (doctors and hospitals), the people paying for the care (taxpayers), or even the people who got the government involved in the first place (politicians).” (Editorial, “Independent Payment Advisory Revolt,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/9/12)
IPAB Threatens Patient Care
Obama’s HHS Secretary Admits That IPAB Threatens Seniors’ Access To Certain Procedures. “‘If Congress accepted the recommendations and made the decision that cuts in dialysis were appropriate,’ Sebelius replied, ‘I assume there could be some providers who would decide that would not be a service they would any longer deliver…’” (Kathleen Sebelius, “IPAB:  The Controversial Consequences For Medicare And Seniors,” House Energy And Commerce Committee’s Health Subcommittee, 7/13/11)

Witnesses At A Recent Congressional Hearing Argued That IPAB Would Reduce Access To Medical Care. “The Independent Payment Advisory Board, created under the health care law to help control Medicare costs, lacks flexibility to do much more than cut provider payments that would lead to a reduction in access to care, witnesses told a House Ways and Means panel March 6.” (Ralph Lindeman, “IPAB Would Reduce Access to Care, Witnesses Tell Ways and Means Panel,” Bloomberg, 3/7/12)

The Wall Street Journal: IPAB’s “End Game” Will Limit Patient Care.” “The only alternative, and the IPAB’s true end game, is harsher and more arbitrary price controls and eventually limits on the care patients are allowed to receive. The New England Journalists (of Medicine) deny this reality because ObamaCare has a clause that prohibits ‘rationing,’ even as the law leaves that term undefined. But reducing treatment options will be inevitable as government costs explode.” (Editorial, “Independent Payment Advisory Revolt,” The Wall Street Journal, 3/9/12)
  • The Wall Street Journal: IPAB Will Allow Bureaucrats To “Throw Granny Over The Cliff.”  “One place to start is by attacking the Democratic plan to cut Medicare via political rationing. Mr. Ryan’s budget had the virtue of embarrassing President Obama’s spend-more initial budget, and the White House responded by proposing to increase the power of the new Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) to decide what, and how much, Medicare will pay for. The ObamaCare bill goes to great lengths to shelter this 15-member, unelected board from Congressional review, with the goal of letting these bureaucrats throw granny over the cliff if Medicare isn’t reformed. Yet few Americans know anything about IPAB or its rationing intentions.” (Editorial, “The GOP’s New York Spanking,” The Wall Street Journal, 5/26/11)
Industry Groups Worry That IPAB’s Actions Will Result In “Rationing.” “While the board is not supposed to be able to cut benefits, industry groups fear that its actions would result in rationing care. The board … could cut payments to health care providers.” (Duff Wilson, “Industry Aims At Medicare Board,” The New York Times’ “Prescription,” 11/4/10)

Paul Howard And Douglas Holtz-Eakin: IPAB Is “Fatally Flawed,” Spurns Innovation, And Will “Threaten Seniors’ Access To Care.”  “IPAB is fatally flawed, structured to punish innovative health care providers and threaten seniors’ access to care       while leaving the largest sources of Medicare spending untouched.  It continues Washington’s obsession with price-fixing in Medicare’s separate ‘silos’ rather than changing the incentives that have led to rampant overspending, fraud and uneven care quality.” (Paul Howard & Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Op-Ed, “Repeal And Replace IPAB,” Politico, 7/12/11)

Membership To The IPAB Is Not Limited To Health Care Professionals.  “The Act requires the appointed membership of the IPAB to include individuals who enjoy ‘national recognition’ in several stated aspects of health policy, including health finance and economics, and further stipulates occupations which should be represented on the Board including physicians and ‘experts in pharmaco-economics.’ The Act specifies that the appointed IPAB members have broad geographic representation and that the Board be balanced between urban and rural representatives. In order to preclude conflicts of interest, the Act stipulates that a majority of the appointed members of the IPAB are not be persons ‘directly involved’ in the provision or management of the delivery of items and services covered by Medicare.” (Congressional Research Service, Memo To Senator Coburn, 3/18/11)

ObamaCare Gives Obama The Power To Appoint Members To IPAB During Recess.  “Because the President’s recess appointment authority is unqualified, it appears that he could fill member positions on the IPAB by recess appointment during any period when he could otherwise make such appointments. Under certain circumstances, such appointments might be subject to pay restrictions, but the analysis of such a possibility is beyond the scope of this memorandum.” (Congressional Research Service, Memo To Senator Coburn, 3/18/11)

The American Medical Association Opposes IPAB On The Ground That The Board Has Little “Accountability.” “The AMA has consistently expressed its opposition to the IPAB on several grounds.  The IPAB puts important health care payment and policy decisions in the hands of an independent body that has far too little accountability.” (James L. Madara, American Medical Association CEO, Letter To Representatives Joe Pitts, 2/27/12)

The American Medical Association Supports Repeal Of IPAB. “On behalf of the physician and medical student members of the American Medical Association (AMA), I am writing to express our strong support for H.R. 452, which was introduced by Representative Phil Roe, and would repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).  Accordingly, we strongly support the advancement of this important legislation through the Energy and Commerce Committee.” (James L. Madara, American Medical Association CEO, Letter To Representatives Joe Pitts, 2/27/12)
  • Nearly Every Segment Of The Health Care Industry Opposes IPAB.  “An independent panel authorized by President Barack Obama’s health care law to control excessive Medicare costs increases is drawing heavy fire from Republicans.  Nearly every health industry lobbying group is pushing for its repeal, as are some consumer advocates.  GOP lawmakers call it a rationing panel, and at least one has suggested seniors will die from its decisions.” (Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, “Accusations Fly Over Obscure Medicare Board,” The Associated Press, 7/18/11)
    • The IPAB Is So Unpopular That 270 Health Care Groups Support Repeal.  “All told, some 270 stakeholder groups signed a letter to members of Congress urging them to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is a panel of experts, appointed by the president, that will have the power to cut Medicare payments.” (Sam Baker, 270 Health Care Groups Back IPAB Repeal,” The Hill’s Health Watch,” 6/24/11)
The Tampa Tribune: “There Is Bipartisan Consensus … That IPAB Is A Mistake.” “There is bipartisan consensus on Capitol Hill that IPAB is a mistake. Physicians groups don’t like it, hospital lobbies don’t like it, and even the American Medical Association, whose support helped pass ObamaCare into law, has called for its repeal. Some Democrats, including U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor of Tampa, have signed on to Tennessee Republican U.S. Rep. Phil Roe’s repeal bill.” (Editorial, “Return Control To The Patient,” The Tampa Tribune, 10/15/11)
Twenty Democrats Have Co-Sponsored Legislation To Repeal IPAB. (H.R. 452, Introduced 1/26/11)
  • Both Democrats And Republicans Agree That IPAB “Could Arbitrarily Cut Services To Medicare Patients And Payments To Providers.” “But some Democrats, as well as most Republicans and health care providers argue the panel could arbitrarily cut services to Medicare patients and payments to providers with little congressional oversight.” (Jennifer Haberkorn, “Democrats Split On Independent Payment Advisory Board,” Politico, 7/10/11)
Both The House Ways And Means And The House Energy And Commerce Committees Passed IPAB Repeal Legislation With Unanimous Bipartisan Support. “A second House committee agreed by voice vote Thursday to repeal a key cost-cutting board in President Obama’s healthcare law. The Ways and Means Committee voted to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), a 15-member panel tasked with cutting Medicare payments. The Energy and Commerce Committee passed the same repeal bill earlier this week.” (Sam Baker, “Second House Panel Clears Bill To Repeal Medicare Board,” The Hill’s Health Watch,” 3/8/12)

Rep. Pete Stark, (D-CA): Setting Low Payment Rates “Could Endanger Patient Care.” “But, in its effort to limit the growth of Medicare spending, the board is likely to set inadequate payment rates for health care providers, which could endanger patient care.” (Robert Pear, “Obama Panel to Curb Medicare Finds Foes In Both Parties,” The New York Times, 5/19/11)
  • Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA): IPAB Is A “Mindless Rate Cutting Machine … That Will Endanger The Health Of America’s Seniors And People With Disabilities.” “I oppose the inclusion the Independent Payment Advisory Commission, called IPAB.  Some of my colleagues support this Commission because it shields them from having to take tough votes when it comes to cutting Medicare provider payments. It’s my experience that Congress always does what is needed to protect and strengthen the Medicare program.  IPAB is a dangerous provision.   By statute, this Commission would be required to hold Medicare spending to an arbitrary and unrealistic growth rate.  It is a mindless-rate cutting machine that sets the program up for unsustainable cuts. That will endanger the health of America’s seniors and people with disabilities.  It is an unprecedented abrogation of Congressional authority to an unelected, unaccountable body of so-called experts.  I intend to work tirelessly to mitigate the damage that will be caused by IPAB.” (“Statement of Congressman Pete Stark Supporting Health Care Reform,” Office of Rep. Pete Stark, 3/21/10)
Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-PA) Says IPAB “Could Lead To Arbitrary Cuts To Doctors, Hospitals And Other Providers.” “In fact, Schwartz will be one of the GOP’s star witnesses at the Energy and Commerce Committee hearing. She says IPAB puts Congress’s responsibility in the hands of an outside panel and could lead to arbitrary cuts to doctors, hospitals and other providers.” (Jennifer Haberkorn, “Democrats Split On Independent Payment Advisory Board,” Politico, 7/10/11)

Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) Says He Strongly Opposes IPAB And It Must Be Stopped. “I am very strongly opposed to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB, created under the Affordable Care Act. I’ve never supported it and I would certainly be in favor of abolishing it…It’s not the job of an independent commission to get involved in congressional matters, in this instance, healthcare policies for Medicare beneficiaries…It’s about a growing, imperialistic presidency…We have to stop it. We have to reverse it. We can’t be a part of an effort to let that continue.” (Committee On Energy And Commerce, U.S. House, Hearing, 7/13/11)

Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) “Favors Getting Rid” Of IPAB But Voted Against Repeal Due To No Alternatives Being Offered. “And Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.) said she favors getting rid of the board but wouldn’t because the repeal bill offered no alternative for controlling Medicare costs and wasn’t paid for.” (Julian Pecquet, “House Panel Repeals Health Law’s Cost-Cutting Board With Bipartisan Support,” The Hill’s “Health Watch,” 2/29/12)

Former Democrat House Majority Leader Dick Gephardt:  IPAB’s Cuts Will Cause “Devastating Consequences.” “It will propose cuts to Medicare that Congress can override only with supermajority votes, an unnecessarily high and unrealistic bar. Just as important, these cuts are likely to have devastating consequences for the seniors and disabled Americans who are Medicare’s beneficiaries because, while technically forbidden from rationing care, the Board will be able to set payment rates for some treatments so low that no doctor or hospital or other healthcare professional would provide them.” (Dick Gephardt, Op-Ed, “Medicare Must Remain A Responsibility Of Congress,” Huffington Post, 6/21/11)

The White House: “H.R. 5 would repeal and dismantle the IPAB even before it has a chance to work. … The Administration strongly opposes legislation that attempts to erode the important provisions of the Affordable Care Act. … If the President is presented with H.R. 5, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.” (Statement Of Administration Policy, H.R. 5 – Protecting Access To Health Care Act, Executive Office Of The President, 3/20/12)

Which Is Not Surprising Since Obama Has Recently Called For Strengthening IPAB
Obama Has Continually Pushed For Strengthening IPAB Through His Deficit Reduction Plan. “The plan calls for strengthening a controversial piece of the healthcare reform law, and it includes proposals state governments have strongly opposed. It also would require seniors to pay more for certain Medicare benefits, according to a summary of the proposal, which would cut $248 billion in Medicare funding and $73 billion to Medicaid and other health programs.” (Sam Baker, “Obama Health Cuts To Spark Fights With States, GOP, Industry Groups,” The Hill’s Health Watch,” 9/19/11)
  • IPAB Will “Kick In” Earlier According To Obama’s Deficit Reduction Plan. “The plan proposes strengthening the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) — a cost-cutting panel created by healthcare reform that Republicans have said will ‘ration’ care. Obama’s proposal would allow the IPAB to kick in earlier.” (Sam Baker, “Obama Health Cuts To Spark Fights With States, GOP, Industry Groups,” The Hill’s Health Watch,” 9/19/11)
Obama’s 2013 Budget: “Strengthen the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) to Reduce Long-Term Drivers of Medicare Cost Growth.” (OMB, 2/13/12)
  • Obama’s Budget Lowers The Threshold For IPAB To Make Payment Changes To Medicare And Provides IPAB With “Additional Tools” To Control Spending. “To further moderate the rate of Medicare growth, this pro­posal would lower the target rate from the GDP per capita growth rate plus 1 percent to plus 0.5 percent. Additionally, the proposal would give IPAB additional tools like the ability to consider value-based benefit design.” (OMB, 2/13/12)

Howard Dean: “The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body”

Howard Dean wrote in the Wall Street Journal that ObamaCare’s IPAB needs to be “removed.”  He explains why in terms that will be familiar to those of us who have opposed the ObamaCare Tax nightmare from the beginning:
One major problem is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.

There does have to be control of costs in our health-care system. However, rate setting—the essential mechanism of the IPAB—has a 40-year track record of failure.

What ends up happening in these schemes (which many states including my home state of Vermont have implemented with virtually no long-term effect on costs) is that patients and physicians get aggravated because bureaucrats in either the private or public sector are making medical decisions without knowing the patients. Most important, once again, these kinds of schemes do not control costs. The medical system simply becomes more bureaucratic.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has indicated that the IPAB, in its current form, won’t save a single dime before 2021. As everyone in Washington knows, but less frequently admits, CBO projections of any kind—past five years or so—are really just speculation. I believe the IPAB will never control costs based on the long record of previous attempts in many of the states, including my own state of Vermont.

If Medicare is to have a secure future, we have to move away from fee-for-service medicine, which is all about incentives to spend more, and has no incentives in the system to keep patients healthy. The IPAB has no possibility of helping to solve this major problem and will almost certainly make the system more bureaucratic and therefore drive up administrative costs.

To date, 22 Democrats have joined Republicans in the House and Senate in support of legislation to do away with the IPAB. Yet because of the extraordinary partisanship on Capitol Hill and Republican threats to defund the law through the appropriations process, it is unlikely that any change in the Affordable Care Act will take place soon.

The IPAB will cause frustration to providers and patients alike, and it will fail to control costs. When, and if, the atmosphere on Capitol Hill improves and leadership becomes interested again in addressing real problems instead of posturing, getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.
The IPAB is “essentially a health-care rationing body”?  You don’t say!  Back when Sarah Palin was warning about health-care rationing and death panels (what the IPAB essentially is because that’s what health-care rationing essentially is), Dean said such accusations were “made up” because, apparently, you can’t have a death panel without reference to “euthanasia” or something “like” it.  Now, suddenly, you can have health-care rationing without direct reference to rationing.  Or something.

He’s arguing that rate-setting itself is doomed to failure, and that’s quite an admission from a big bigger biggest government pol like Dean, though I don’t think we can expect him to admit that the same principle he outlines here actually applies in other areas, as well.  He’s certainly not suddenly becoming an advocate for the free market.

But he’s finally got it right: the IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body, and we should all be able to agree that there is nothing good — no improved health care, no decreased costs — that can come of it.
SOURCE: Legal Insurrection

Monday, November 18, 2013


An exerpt from the Brief filed last month by the DOJ in the lawsuit "PRIESTS FOR LIFE VS HHS"

"Even under the grandfathering provision, it is projected that....a majority of GROUP health plans will have lost their grandfather status by the end of 2013."

Court brief by DOJ in lawsuit - PRIESTS FOR LIFE VS HHS Filed October 2013.
(The date is now the end of 2014 due to Obama extending the employer mandate until end of 2014.)

 In 2010, Administration Predicted 'Majoriy' of Employer-Based Health Plans Would Disappear
The Obama administration has repeatedly said that the health-insurance-plan cancellations receiving so much attention in the news in recent days will affect only the 5 percent of Americans who purchase insurance on the individual market. The Department of Justice, however, in a brief filed in federal court last month, conceded that the number may be much higher. According to the administration’s numbers, nearly 80 million additional Americans, “a majority” of those on employer-sponsored health plans, may also be out of luck. 

“It is projected that more group health plans will transition to the requirements under the regulations as time goes on,” DOJ lawyers wrote in response to court challenge to the law’s requirement that insurance plans provide coverage of contraception. “Defendants have estimated that a majority of group health plans will have lost their grandfather status by the end 2013.”

The DOJ cites the June 17, 2010, edition of the Federal Register, which acknowledges that within the first year of Obamacare’s employer mandate, the insurance plans offered by many employers will be canceled because their policies will not be grandfathered under the administration’s regulations. ”The Departments’ mid-range estimate is that 66 percent of small-employer plans and 45 percent of large-employer plans will relinquish their grandfather status by the end of 2013,” the Register says. “The low-end estimates are for 49 percent and 34 percent of small and large-employer plans, respectively, to have relinquished grandfather status, and the high-end estimates are 80 percent and 64 percent, respectively.”

The DOJ’s admission suggests the president’s promise that if you like your plan, you can keep it may ring hollow for far more Americans than the administration has let on. 
Source: National Review Online

Saturday, November 16, 2013

Louie Gohmert Exposes Obamacare Secret Security Force

Representative Louie Gohmert (Republican – Texas – 1st District) dropped his bombshell last week on The Janet Mefferd Show.

Paul Joseph Watson reports: 

Referring to a section of the gargantuan Obamacare law which discusses "the president's own commissioned and non-commissioned officer corps," Gohmert drew attention to the notion that under the pretext of a "national emergency," such individuals could be used to impose some form of medical martial law.

Under the Affordable Care Act, the Ready Reserve Corps is directed to "assist full-time Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions."

"It says it is for international health crises, but then it doesn't include the word 'health' when it talks about national emergencies," said Gohmert.

"I've asked, what kind of training are they getting….I want to know are they using weapons to train, or are they being taught to use syringes and health care items?" asked the Congressman, adding that "no clear answers" had been forthcoming on the issue."

Combined with the continued DHS arms build up along with the federal agency's hiring of armed guards with "Top Secret" security clearances, Gohmert characterized the issue as "very disturbing".

I first reported on this in August after reading a sobering article in The Daily Mail. Why does Obamacare need its own police force? The IRS already has agents trained with a multitude of weapons including AR-15s. 

In the wake of Jeff Duncan's reporting of IRS agents being trained with AR-15s I think we should be at least somewhat concerned with a breaking news story about the new "ObamaCare" Police. It would seem that the IRS implementation will not be the only strong arm of ObamaCare but that Health and Human Services will have a substantial number of investigative storm troopers as well.

The Daily Mail reports:
More than 1,600 new employees hired by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Resources in the aftermath of Obamacare's passage include just two described as 'consumer safety' officers, but 86 tasked with 'criminal investigating' – indicating that the agency is building an army of detectives to sleuth out violations of a law that many in Congress who supported it still find confusing.

On the day President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law in 2010, HHS received authority from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to make as many as 1,814 new hires under an emergency 'Direct Hiring Authority' order.

We are going to need more hollow point bullets it would seem. Is anyone really shocked by the fact that we have a brand new enforcement branch of HHS? I doubt it. This seems to be the norm in Washington these days. Last week we featured the story of a retired Marine Colonel who claims that a domestic army is being built. And who could blame anyone for thinking that? It is happening right in front of us.

Folks I made the comment at the beginning of this article about being validated because sometimes I feel really beat up by the "tin foil hat haters." 

Do you think I wake up each day and want to write about things that will leave me labeled as a lunatic? No I do not. I really don't like people calling me crazy. That's not my goal in life. I try to report these things to you because they are the truth and very few others seem to want to report such stories.
RELATED DHS Target Maker Providing Pregnant Women and Children Targets to Law Enforcement

Friday, November 15, 2013

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

Ronald Reagan’s 1961 Coffeecup speech – full text

Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.

There are many ways in which our government has invaded the precincts of private citizens, the method of earning a living. Our government is in business to the extent over owning more than 19,000 businesses covering different lines of activity. This amounts to a fifth of the total industrial capacity of the United States.

But at the moment I’d like to talk about another way. Because this threat is with us and at the moment is more imminent.

One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.

Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.

So, with the American people on record as not wanting socialized medicine, Congressman Ferrand  introduced the Ferrand Bill. This was the idea that all  people of social security age should be brought under a program of compulsory health insurance. Now this would not only be our senior citizens, this would be the dependents and those who are disabled, this would be young people if they are dependents of someone eligible for Social Security.

Now, Congressman Ferrand brought the program out on that idea of just for that group of people. But Congressman Ferrand was subscribing to this foot in the door philosophy, because he said “if we can only break through and get our foot inside  the door, then we can expand the progam after that.”

Walter Ruther said “It’s no secret that the United Automobile Workers is  officially on record as backing a program of national health insurance.” And by national health insurance, he meant socialized medicine for every American. Well, let’s see what the socialists themselves  have to say about it.

They say: “Once the Ferrrand bill is passed, this nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicince. Capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population.’  Well, we can’t say we haven’t been warned.

Now, Congressman Ferrand is no longer a congressman of the United States government. He has been replaced, not in his particular assignment, but in his backing of such a bill, by Congressman King of  California. It is presented in the idea of a great emergency that millions of our senior citizens are unable to provide needed medical care. 

What is the Kerr-Mills Bill? It is a frank recognition of the medical need or problem of the senior citizens that I have mentioned. And it is provided from the federal government money to the states and the local communities that can be used at the discretion of the state to help those people who need it. Now what reason could the other people have for backing a bill which says “we insist on compulsory health insurance for senior citizens on the basis of age alone; regardless of whether they’re worth millions of dollars, whether they have an income, whether they’re protected by their own insurance, whether they have savings.”

I think we can be excused for believing that as ex-congressman Ferrand said, this was simply an excuse to bring about what they wanted all the time – socialized medicine.

James Madison in 1788, speaking to the Virginia Convention said: “Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden  usurpations. ”

They want to attach this bill to Social Security. And they say here is a great insurance program now instituted, now working.

Let’s take a look at social security itself. Again, very few of us disagree with the original premise that there should be some form of saving that would keep destitution from following unemployment by reason of death, disability or old age. And to this end Social Security was adopted. But it was never intended to supplant  private savings, private insurance, pension programs of unions and industries.

Now in our country under our free enterprise system, we have seen medicine reach the greatest heights that it has in any country in the world. Today, the relationship between patient and doctor in this country is something to be envied any place. The privacy, the care that is given to a person, the right to chose a doctor, the right to go from one doctor to the other.

But let’s also look from the other side, at the freedom the doctor loses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms; it’s like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors aren’t equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him you can’t live in that town, they already have enough doctors. 

You have to go someplace else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.

This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being.

I know how I’d feel, if you my fellow citizens decided that to be an actor, I had to become a government employee and work in a national theater. Take it into your own occupation or that of your husband, all of us can see what happens – once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a man’s working place and his working methods, determine his employment. From here it is a short step to all the rest of socialism, to determining his pay and pretty soon your son won’t decide when he’s in school, where he will go or what they will do for a living. He will wait for the government to tell them where he will go to work and what he will do.

In this country of ours, took place the greatest revolution that has ever taken place  in world’s history. The only true revolution. Every other revolution simply exchanged one set of rulers for another. But here for the first time in all the thousands of years of man’s relation to man, a little group of the men, the founding fathers - for the first time – established the idea that you and I had within ourselves the God given right and ability to determine our own destiny.

This freedom was built into our government with safeguards. We talk democracy today. And strangely we let democracy begin to assume the aspect of majority rule is all that is needed. Well, majority rule is a fine aspect of democracy, provided there are guarantees written in to our government concerning the rights of the individual and of the minorities.

What can we do about this? Well, you and I can do a great deal. We can write to our congressmen and our senators. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms. And at the moment, the key issue is, we do not want socialized medicine.

In Washington today, 40,000 letters, less than a hundred per congressman, are evidence of a trend in public thinking.  

Representative Halleck of Indiana has said, “When the American people want something from Congress, regardless of its political complexion, if they make their wants known, Congress does what the people want.”

So write, and if your this man writes back to you and tells you that he too is for free enterprise, that we have these great services and so forth, that must be performed by government, don’t let him get away with it. Show that you have not been convinced. Write a letter right back and tell him that you believe in government economy and fiscal responsibility; that you know governments don’t tax to get the money the need; governments will always find a need for the money they get and that you demand the continuation of our traditional free enterprise system. 

You and I can do this. The only way we can do it is by writing to our congressmen even we believe that he is on our side to begin with. Write to strengthen his hand. Give him the ability to stand before his colleagues in Congress and say “I have heard from my constituents and this is what they want.”

Write those letters now; call your friends and tell them to write them. If you don’t, this program I promise you will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country. Until, one day, as Normal Thomas said we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you don’t do this and if I don’t do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.”

Thursday, November 14, 2013

Benghazi attackers knew location of ambassador's safe room: congressman

UPDATE 11/15/13

Exclusive: Rep. Mike Rogers on Benghazi attack eyewitnesses

Rep. Mike  Rogers speaks out about recent questioning of CIA contractors on what took place in Benghazi, Libya-The Kelly FileScandal - Benghazi Eyewitnesses Speak to Congress Questions CIA Contractors - Kelly File


The terrorists who attacked the Benghazi consulate last year knew the location of the safe room where Ambassador Chris Stevens and his security team sought shelter, according to a congressman who spoke for 90 minutes with the diplomatic security agent severely injured in the assault.

"He confirmed this - that it was a very well orchestrated, and well organized, almost a military operation, using military weapons and using military signals," the late Florida Rep. Bill Young said after meeting diplomatic security agent David Ubben at Walter Reed Medical Center last summer, when both were patients there. 

After Young's death in mid-October, his widow, Beverly Young, gave Fox permission to use her husband’s comments about the Sep. 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the record.  The congressman had originally spoken to Fox on background last summer.

"He (Ubben) emphasized the fact that it was a very, very military type of operation they had knowledge of almost everything in the compound," Young explained. "They knew where the gasoline was, they knew where the generators were, they knew where the safe room was, they knew more than they should have about that compound."

Ubben was severely injured defending the CIA Annex when mortar fire rained down on the rooftop, killing former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty and severely injuring a third CIA contractor who was interviewed by the House Intelligence committee Thursday.   After multiple surgeries, a source close to the contractor confirmed he has not regained the full use of his arm.

Asked if Ubben believed the terrorists had inside information, or had done reconnaissance, Young told Fox,  "Yes he (Ubben) did...It was pretty well figured out, where everything was, where the doors were located, where the safe room was - the whole thing."

While Young debated whether to discuss his conversation with Ubben, he felt that, on balance, the country should know that the diplomatic security agent, who recovered the body of foreign service officer Sean Smith from the burning consulate, was heroic.

"He was pretty sure Sean was dead when he pulled him, but he felt like he had to recover him anyway and get him out.  He would have done the same for the ambassador but he wasn't really sure where the ambassador was," Young said.

Young added, "I think he is an awfully sincere young guy. And I think he is a real hero for what he did that night…He did something he didn't have to do, put his life in danger, and we know he was seriously injured.  He took major injuries (that) came from the mortar that landed on the roof that killed the other two,"

An August 16 classified cable, reviewed and reported on by Fox News last fall, showed there was an emergency meeting in Benghazi less than a month before the attack due to rapidly deteriorating security.  The cable warned the office of Secretary of State  Hillary Clinton, and other State Department leaders in Washington, that the consulate could not sustain a coordinated assault.

The cable also reflected a grave concern among officials on the ground that the Libyan militia charged with protecting the consulate had been compromised, perhaps even infiltrated by extremists.

Summarizing the meeting, the cable reported that "certain sectors of the 17 February Brigade were very hesitant to share information with the Americans, but as the largest brigade they acted as a buffer for the Mission against some of the more anti-American, Islamist militias in town." The brigade was charged with protecting the consulate.

According to Young, Ubben described how the guard force melted away as the consulate came under assault. "He said that when the attack started, the Libyan security folks who were supposed to secure the compound, they ran. So, they were at the mercy of their own capabilities."

Judge Napolitano: Obama Unconstitutional Obamacare Fix - Insurance Industry Group: Fix Could Destabilize Market

Obamacare Will Be Going Back To Supreme Court!
Obama Unconstitutional Obamacare Fix - Insuarance Industry Group Fix Could Destabilize Market Judge Napolitano

Professional Educator Gets Standing Ovation Standing Up Against Common Core

OH MY.....The MOMMIES are AWAKE!! Children affected negatively by Common Core style teaching are now being diagnosed with CC syndrome in the state of New York. Thank God for the parents and teachers in New York. 

Several hundred people packed an auditorium at Port Chester Middle School on Monday in a continuation of the wave of criticism and concern about the state’s new Common Core learning standards and the pace at which they’ve been implemented.The three-plus-hour event was the second stop of state Education Commissioner John King’s “listening tour,” which was scheduled after King was roundly criticized for abruptly canceling a series of forums planned by the New York State Parent Teacher Association after a raucous Oct. 10 forum in Poughkeepsie.

A week later, King announced 16 forums across the state, with Port Chester being the only local stop.Common Core is a state-led effort that seeks to provide consistent standards and appropriate benchmarks for all students, regardless of where they live, and prepare them for college and the workforce. It is a product of bipartisan effort by the National Governors and the Council of Chief State School Officers and was developed in collaboration with teachers, school administrators and experts. It has been adopted by 45 states and the District of Columbia.

Read More

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Rep. Trey Gowdy Questions Tech Advisors on Rollout

Gowdy Questions Tech Advisors on Rollout

November 13, 2013
Congressional hearings into's flawed rollout continues Wednesday before the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) chairs the committee while White House's Chief Technology Officer and others testify.

Saturday, November 9, 2013

The Jackass In The Room..Ben Howe Responds To Time Magazine's Cover Mocking Chris Christie's Weight

7 Nov
Here you go , I made your next cover for you.

Ben Howe responds to Time Magazine cover mocking Chris Christie with their version of  'The Elephant In The Room.'   

Time Magazine Cover Allegedly Mocks Chris Christie's Weight With "Elephant in the Room" Headline

The Nov. 18 issue of Time magazine is causing quite a controversy, as its cover features the silhouette of newly re-elected New Jersey Governor Chris Christie behind the headline: "The Elephant in the Room." Critics argue that it mocks the politician's self-admitted weight problems, while others believe it refers to his upcoming battle to win over the Republican Party before the 2016 presidential election.

Time writer Michael Scherer argues that the headline refers to Christie's larger-than-life persona. "It's not just about his physical size; it's about his whole political act," he tells CBS 2 New York.

Regardless of his intent, Scherer's piece isn't sitting well with Fox News' Greta Van Susteren. "TIME MAGAZINE EDITOR is SLIMY SNAKE!" she tweeted on Thursday, Nov. 7. "Elephant, really? you know there was chuckling in the newsroom."

New York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse also chimed in on Twitter, writing, "Whether or not one likes Christie, these cheap shots–like Time's new cover—about his weight are decidedly uncool."
Read More: HERE

Thursday, November 7, 2013

Children's Hospital Sues After Obamacare Cuts Children's Access

As millions lose their insurance nation wide and are forced into plans with significantly higher premiums, the reality of rationed care, initially denied by adamant supporters of the bill, has now hit the country’s most vulnerable, with doctors at Seattle Children’s Hospital speaking out.

Seattle Children’s Hospital filed suit against Washington State’s Office of the Insurance Commissioner this week, after Obamacare implementation caused the hospital to be cut from four of the six insurance plans offered by the new Washington Health Benefit Exchange.

“There becomes a point when if you start denying access to care, that you can hurt children and children’s health and that’s what we believe is at risk here,” said Dr. Sandy Melzer, the hospital’s chief strategy officer and senior vice president.

Although the hospital was originally included in many of the state’s commercial market health plans, Group Health Cooperative and Community Health Plan of Washington will now be the only providers including Seattle Children’s Hospital. According to the lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court, the legal obligation to provide access to “essential community providers” has been breached.

Struggling Washington families, especially those among the 49.7 million American’s in poverty, whose children currently receive care from the hospital, fear they will no longer be able to see their doctor once they are forced into one of the five insurance plans that excludes Seattle Children’s.

“The notion that a major insurance plan is going to exclude us from their network is truly precedent-setting and represents a new level of degradation in children’s access to care,” Melzer told the Seattle Times.

Local resident Anne Guadagno is afraid her two young granddaughters will lose their favorite doctor like many others already have, despite President Obama’s promise that everyone would be able to keep their doctors.

“I would want my grandchildren to have the doctor they’ve become accustomed to and are comfortable with. A child that’s been with a certain doctor and nurse and an office needs to stay there,” Guadagno told King 5 News.

The lawsuit also points to Molina Healthcare, one of the state’s new insurers. Although the group was originally denied by Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler, pointing to the “inadequacy of their provider networks,” the decision was later overturned. Insurance Commissioner spokeswoman Stephanie Marquis said the suit would be examined and resolved through the proper legal channels if necessary.

“We are reviewing Children’s petition to see what lies at the heart of their concerns and will see how it gets resolved through the legal process,” Marquis said.

With millions more set to lose their current insurance, “inevitable” healthcare rationing and an impending shortage of doctors, the future of the nation’s healthcare appears to be anything but affordable for millions of children and adults alike.

Navy SEAL Matthew McCabe: We Did Nothing Wrong

Honor and Betrayal: The Untold Story of the Navy SEALs Who Captured the "Butcher of Fallujah"--and the Shameful Ordeal They Later Endured


On a daring nighttime raid in September 2009, a team of Navy SEALs grabbed the notorious terrorist Ahmad Hashim Abd al-Isawi, the villainous “Butcher of Fallujah,” mastermind behind the 2004 murder and mutilation of four American contractors. Within hours of his capture, al-Isawi, with his lip bleeding, claimed he had been beaten in his holding cell. Three Navy SEALs—members of the same team that had just captured the notorious terrorist—were charged with prisoner abuse, dereliction of duty, and lying. On the word of a terrorist!

The three Navy SEALs were placed under house arrest and forbidden contact with their comrades. Despite enormous pressure from their commanders to sign confessions to “lesser charges,” the three resolute and fearless SEALs each demanded a court-martial. They were determined to prove their innocence.

When Fox News broke the story about the accusations, Americans were outraged. Over 300,000 people signed petitions demanding the SEALs be exonerated. Their SEAL teammates were furious; but nothing could stop the cold determination of the military’s top brass to hang these guys out to dry—not even U.S. congressmen who petitioned the Pentagon to drop the charges.

Honor and Betrayal is a no-holds-barred account by bestselling author Patrick Robinson. It reveals for the first time the entire story, from the night the SEALs stormed the al-Qaeda desert stronghold, the accusations and legal twists and turns that followed, to the cut-and-thrust drama in the courtroom where the fate of three American heroes hung in the balance.

Congressman Ted Poe:"Abed Needs To Be Executed For His Crimes Rather Than Our Government Paying Attention To His Whining About His Capture"

May 5, 2010

 Navy SEAL Matthew McCabe: We Did Nothing Wrong

Thursday, 07 Nov 2013
One of the Navy SEALs who was accused of prisoner abuse after capturing the notorious "Butcher of Fallujah" tells Newmax TV that he and the other two soldiers were shocked by the court martial because they had not done anything wrong.

"We couldn't understand why we were being charged or why we were being alleged to have done something that we never had done and following that, the immediate lack of trust that came with it," Matthew McCabe says in an exclusive interview with Newsmax TV.

"No one was going to believe us and anything we said, no one meaning the leadership that was directly ahead of us."

McCabe and two other Navy SEALs were court martialed for prisoner abuse of Ahmad Hashim Abed al-lsawi, who earned the name "Butcher of Fallujah" as the mastermind behind the brutal murder of four American contractors in 2004 in which he "burned the Americans alive and hanged them from the bridge over the Euphrates River," co-author Robinson explains.

McCabe helped capture Abd al-lsawi in September 2009 after their base in Iraq came under attack.

McCabe explains that the three accusations against him centered around a bloody lip with is a tactic straight out of the terrorist playbook.

Read More: NEWSMAX


Navy SEAL Matthew McCabe is a tough guy. He has to be, to belong to one of America's premiere fighting groups. That dogged determination to complete the mission, no matter what, served him well during his recent ordeal at the hands of Navy prosecutors and their stooge, Petty Officer Third Class Kevin DeMartino.

It took a seven member jury at Norfolk, Va. less than two hours to come back with a NOT GUILTY verdict in the specious case of PO/2 McCabe, a much-decorated sailor from Perrysburg, Ohio. The charges, that McCabe had "punched" a captured Iraqi terrorist suspect, said to be the "mastermind" of the grisly slaying of four American contractors in Fallujah back in 2004, fell apart after DeMartino's testimony was shown to lack credibility.

Navy JAGS, out to get another scalp, lost the case and refused to comment after the verdict came in. It was a "mugging" that failed, and deserved to.
What kind of message does it send to our men and women in uniform, as well as enemies out there who take comfort from the needless prosecution of heroes like McCabe, when testimony from scum Ahmed Hashim Abed is used to try and send a brave SEAL off to prison? Have we forgotten so soon the horrible death of four American contractors whose bodies were dragged through the streets, set afire, and strung up from a bridge as gleeful locals danced around the hideous scene?

The 24 year-old SEAL faced a year in jail and the end of his Navy career if prosecutors had been able to convince a jury McCabe "punched" the whining Abed and "kicked" the punk as he lay, handcuffed on the ground. We suspect many of our readers would get in line for a chance to administer such an attitude lesson.

Thank God he and two other SEALS, PO1 Julio Huertas and PO/2 Jonathan Keefe, were earlier found innocent of standing by while the alleged "assault" supposedly took place.

"I'm grateful all of us were found not guilty," McCabe told reporters of his fellow SEALS. "Justice has been served."

But it might well have turned out the other way. "Political correctness" and bending over backwards to prosecute our own in cases that never should have been brought to trial in the first place, are destructive of morale.

Source: Military Corruption

McCabe Maintains His Innocence
US Navy Seals Blog

Heathcare Insurance Expert To Megyn Kelly,"Do You Really Think Insurance Companies Would Want To Cancel 300,000 People On Its Own?"

Robert Laszewski on 'trickle of enrollment' in ObamaCare

“I have known no one with a better grasp of what’s going on in Washington than Bob Laszewski—and no one who is more fair, honest, and less partisan.”—C. Everett Koop, M.D.

“No one has a greater knowledge of the Washington health policy scene than Bob Laszewski—political, economic, social, and straight merit dimensions. Bob also has uncanny forecasting powers. And he calls the shots exactly as he sees them, unusual for Washington.”—John McLaughlin, The McLaughlin Group

Robert Laszewski is president of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, Inc. (HPSA), a policy and marketplace consulting firm specializing in assisting its clients through the significant health policy and market change afoot.

Before forming HPSA in 1992, Mr. Laszewski was chief operating officer of a health and group benefits insurer.

Mr. Laszewski also publishes Health Policy and Marketplace Review, a blog focused on health care policy and marketplace activities. (

Marketplace Activities
The majority of Mr. Laszewski’s time is spent being directly involved in the marketplace as it comes to grips with the health care cost and quality challenge.

His clients include health insurance companies, casualty insurance companies, HMOs, Blue Cross organizations, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, and physician groups.

HPSA has been involved in the development of organized delivery systems, joint ventures between insurance companies and providers, joint ventures between HMOs and insurance companies, the acquisition and divestiture of blocks of health insurance business, the creation of strategies for workers' compensation carriers to manage their costs in the changing health care delivery market, and the strategic planning of numerous clients as they come to grips with their response to policy and market driven change.

Mr. Laszewski is very active in the purchase and divestiture of health care and insurance businesses having been involved in a number of such transactions in recent years.

Policymaking Activities
Mr. Laszewski has participated extensively in the nation's health care debate, especially on health insurance reform and the impact it will have on existing health insurance programs, the insurance industry, and the evolving role between payers and providers.

Bob Laszewski has written and spoken widely on the subject of health care reform and market change. His media appearances include health care features on ABC, NBC, CNN, PBS, and NPR, as well as on The McLaughlin Group and McLaughlin’s “One on One.” Additionally, numerous articles about his ideas have appeared in the national and trade press and he has been regularly quoted in many newspapers including The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post.

He has also participated globally having chaired two international meetings recently in Washington, DC on the issue of international prescription drug pricing and the use of medical technology in Europe compared to the U.S.

While in the insurance industry, he participated on a number of Health Insurance Association task forces and committees including: serving as chairman of the Provider Relations Committee, serving on the Board Task Force on Cost Containment and on the working group on the ethics of genetic testing and insurance. He was a founding board member of the bipartisan Alliance for Health Reform as well as a member of the Board of Overseers of the C. Everett Koop Foundation at Dartmouth and the Dartmouth Medical School.

Major health care stakeholders seeking experts to address their meetings regularly seek his opinions. He has offered his perspective on health care reform in testimony before several committees of both the House and Senate of the U.S. Congress.

Mr. Laszewski can be contacted at Health Policy and Strategy Associates, Inc., 806 North Fairfax Street, 201, Alexandria, Virginia, 22314. (703) 727-9517


Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Health and Human Services quietly giving unions Obamacare fix Estimated To Be At Least A $600M Payoff

Obama Admin Proposing Tax Exemptions For Some Union Health Plan Obamacare - The Kelly File

Published on Nov 6, 2013
Megyn Kelly and Justin Wilson, Managing Director of the Center for Union Facts, expose the secret $600,000,000 Obamacare Union Bailout perpetrated by Kathleen Sebelius and this administration.
Wake The Hell Up America Your Republic & Freedom In Grave Danger!

Health and Human Services quietly giving unions Obamacare fix

The Obama administration has found a way to give unions relief from an Obamacare tax nearly three weeks after Republicans rejected a Democratic push to include the labor carve-out in the latest budget deal.

The Department of Health and Human Services quietly released a final rule last week that includes an intention to exempt some union insurance plans from a substantial new tax known as the reinsurance fee.

As part of Obamacare, the tax was supposed to be levied against all insurance plans to share the risk for insurers taking on the sickest patients next year.

But unions, which were among the strongest supporters of the Affordable Care Act when it passed in 2010, had pressed the administration for changes to the law, arguing that the measure is harmful to insurance plans accessed by more than 15 million union members and would raise costs.

Before last week, unions were upset that the Obama administration had failed to grant them a carve-out even after delaying a requirement that all businesses with 50 employees or more offer health insurance or pay steep fines to 2015.

In July, union leaders -- including Teamsters President James Hoffa -- wrote a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., warning of “nightmare scenarios” for millions of workers if the law is not changed to accommodate labor health plans.

“Congress wrote this law; we voted for you,” they wrote. “We have a problem; you need to fix it.”

The AFL-CIO adopted a resolution at its September convention that it would seek a union exemption from the reinsurance fee, along with ACA tax credits for low-income members.

Deep into a rule governing Obamacare issued last week, HHS included language that the administration will propose exempting “certain self-insured, self-administered plans” from the law's reinsurance fee in 2015 and 2016, Kaiser Health News first reported Wednesday.

The oblique reference applies to some union plans that act as their own insurance company and claims processor.

An HHS official said the exemption is only in the proposal stage.

“We intend to solicit comments from interested parties and the general public about whether to permit such a limited exemption when we issue the proposed rule,” the official said.

During last month's budget negotiations aimed at re-opening the government and avoiding a default on the nation's debt, Reid pushed a similar union fix in exchange for Republicans winning a provision that would require a minimum income level for receiving some Obamacare subsidies.

But many conservative Republicans considered the union fix an overreach on the part of Democrats and rejected it during final negotiations on the budget deal.

In mid-September, a group of 21 Republican senators led by Sens. Lamar Alexander, Tenn., and Orrin Hatch, Utah, urged the administration not to give unions an unfair Obamacare fix.

The senators sent a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Sylvia Burwell urging her “not to authorize the release of any regulations that will create a special carve-out that benefits union workers at taxpayers' expense.”

Read More: Here

(VIDEO) A Clear and Present Danger: The Threat of Religious Freedom in the Military

A Clear and Present Danger: The Threat of Religious Freedom in the Military

One Nation Under God

An introduction to the work of the Thomas More Law Center and our mission of preserving America as one nation under God.
Photo by Michele Austin taken at Mission of Nombre De Dios, St. Augustine, Fl.

Defending the Religious Freedom of Christians

The Christian values upon which this Nation was founded are under attack. The ACLU and like-minded organizations are using sympathetic courts to destroy the religious and moral foundations of our great nation. Using the metaphor, “a wall of separation between church and state,” which is found nowhere in our Constitution, they attack crosses, Ten Commandment monuments, Nativity displays, Christmas celebrations in public schools, the Pledge of Allegiance, our national motto, “In God We Trust” and prayers at public meetings. The main battleground in this culture war is the courtroom and that is where the Thomas More Law Center is defending the religious freedom of Christians.
Source: Thomas More Law Center 

Obama Administration Pushing End Of Life For Injured Veterans
Veterans quietly forced into mental hospitals
The Disturbing Pattern: Obama Rids Americas Military Of Yet Another Top General
Pentagon May Court Martial Soldiers Who Share Christian Faith
Air Force Chaplain Awarded Bronze Star for PowerPoint Teaching Proper Sensitivity for the Koran
Top Brass Crush Career Of Army Officer Who Warned Of Jihadists
Obama Threatens Veto To Defense Bill Unless Troops Pay More For Healthcare And Take Pay Cuts
Former Navy Seal Tells Of Forced Incarceration Under Obama Regime In 2009
Air Force Officer Told to Remove Bible from Desk
Sleeper cells embedded in Afghan Army prove deadly to Americans
Under Obama, U.S. Casualty Rate in Afghanistan Increased 5-Fold
Skyrocketing US Military Casualties Under Obama Administration 
Obama Denies Benefits To Victims Of Fort Hood Shooter's 'Workplace Violence' 
Airmen Punished for Objecting to Gay Marriage
DOD Penetrating Hearts and Minds of U.S. Military With Islamic Propaganda
Fort Hood Judge Bars Most Motive Evidence
VA Employees Get Bonuses Despite Massive Backlog, Inefficiency
Obama slashes proposed military pay raise almost in half
WWII veterans storm D.C. memorial closed by government shutdown
Obama admin. knew about WWII veterans’ request and rejected it 
WWII Memorial Now Completely Blockaded and Guarded By Park Officials
164 Democrats Vote Against Funding Veterans' Benefits HJ Res. 72
Obama Administration Decided to Block Access to Memorials
Rand Paul: Obama Sent More Security To WWII Memorial Than Benghazi 
Harry Reid blocks funding for veterans programs, national parks
Military chapel closed in Georgia: ‘Shutdown: No Catholic service till further notice’
Air Force Removes ‘God’ From Logo
Early Military Voting Under Fire from Obama
Pentagon orders soldier fired for challenging prez
Navy Seal Claims Top Brass Asked if They Will Disarm Americans [Video]
Blaze Sources: Obama Purging Military Commanders
Top generals: Obama is 'purging the military' 
Navy SEALs ordered to remove ‘don’t tread on me’ Navy Jack from uniforms
'Purge surge': Obama fires another commander


Latest News On The Assault Against Religious Freedoms By This Administration
State Department Purges Religous Freedom Section From Human Rights Reports
Catholic Bishops Issue Battle Cry For Religious Freedom
Pentagon May Court Martial Soldiers Who Share Christian Faith
Catholic organizations across the country file suit against contraception mandate
Delegates Oppose Adding God And Jerusalem To Platform
Constitution Expert: Obama Admin Argued Churches No Different than Bowling Clubs
Actual letter that intimidates pastors
New Jersey Police Charge Six Christians for Evangelizing in Public Park
Teachers who stomped American flag, Jesus are officially no longer teaching
Air Force Officer Told to Remove Bible from Desk
Nearly 60 Congressmen Demand Defense Secretary’s Meeting With Anti-Christian Extremist Be Explained 
College Shuts Down Dorm Room Bible Study
U.S. Bishops Prepare Catholics for Civil Disobedience: ‘We May Need to Witness to the Truth by Resisting the Law’
NYT: We Printed Anti-Catholic Ad And Not Anti-Muslim One To Protect The Troops
Obama Mocks & Attacks Jesus Christ And The Bible / Video / Obama Is Not A Christian (VIDEO)
Catholic organizations across the country file suit against contraception mandate
Religious Liberties At Risk
Constitution Expert: Obama Admin Argued Churches No Different than Bowling Clubs
Colorado Undersheriff Claims DHS, State Police are Targeting Christians
DHS Suggests Christians, Constitutionalists Should Get Extra Surveillance From LEOs
San Antonio Looks to Ban Christians From City Government 
Obama's Department of Defense Lists "Catholicism" and "Evangelical Christianity" Alongside Islamic Terror Groups In Terrorism Presentation
US Army defines Christian ministry as 'domestic hate group'
Obama Administration Shuts Down Catholic Services on US Navy Base; Locks Church Doors
DOD Refuses to Say If It Would Stop Priest from Giving Last Rites to Dying Serviceman—‘We Are Currently Litigating’ Matter