BEARWITNESS     MAIN     BEAR MINIMUM     EDUCATION     ACTION ALERTS     OF CURRENT INTEREST     BIRTH CERTIFICATE     SOCIALISM     ABOUT US     CONTACT US     LINKS AND PARTNERS      
Health Care

OBAMACARE'S KUBUKI END GAME

The Heritage Foundation

 

The doctors in lab coats surrounding President Barack Obama as he gave his latest health care speech yesterday were not there to give the President a physical; that happened Sunday. No, these doctors were props, dressed to impress for what the White House claims is their "final push" for the President's government take-over of the health care industry. The President again repeated the same old tired claims he has been making for months: "The proposal I’ve put forward gives Americans more control over their health care," "our proposal is paid for," and "my proposal would bring down the cost of health care for millions." We, and plenty of others, have refuted all these claims before, but this time they are particularly easy to expose as patently false. President Obama gave away the game when he said:

Our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current Senate bill, which reduces most people’s premiums and brings down our deficit by up to $1 trillion over the next two decades. And those aren’t my numbers – they are the savings determined by the CBO, which is the Washington acronym for the nonpartisan, independent referee of Congress.


But there is one huge difference between the Senate bill and what the President kept referring to as my/our proposal: the Senate bill actually exists. For all the talk in Washington about Democrats in the Senate using reconciliation to pass a final version of Obamacare, one key fact has been overlooked: no reconciliation bill exists. Not in the House. Not in the Senate. Nowhere. It simply has not yet been written, and there are plenty of reasons to believe it never will.

The White House is
telling the public they expect the House to pass the Senate bill, and then both the House and Senate would pass the yet-to-be-drafted reconciliation, all before Easter recess. But Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) simply does not have the votes to pass the Senate bill. If she did, it would already be law. To convince her fellow wayward Democrats to vote for the Senate bill, the yet-to-be-drafted reconciliation bill is expected to: 1) scale back the tax on high-end health insurance policies (decreases revenue); 2) close the Medicare D loophole (costs money); 3) boost insurance subsidies (costs money); and 4) increase Medicaid payments (costs a ton of money). Where exactly do House and Senate aides writing this new bill expect to come up with the money to pay for all these new goodies? And they have to find that cash because all reconciliation bills must be certified by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to reduce the deficit by $1 billion over five years. And that CBO score will take at least a week, or possibly two to complete.

So when will the public get to see this reconciliation bill?
The Wall Street Journal reports that "Democrats have started writing the formal reconciliation bill" and "intend to send it to the Congressional Budget Office for evaluation by the end of the week." But The Los Angeles Times reports that: "Senior Democrats on Capitol Hill will not finish writing the reconciliation package until next week at the earliest." Our advice: don't hold your breath.

In the meantime
Speaker Pelosi is bleeding the votes she needs to first pass the Senate bill, by an up or down vote, in the House. Just 220 members of the House voted for their version of Obamacare in November. Since that time, Reps. Robert Wexler (D-FL) and Neil Abercrombie (D-HI) have left the House; Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) has passed away; and Joseph Cao (R-LA) has said he will vote against the bill. That leaves Pelosi 216 votes, which would be exactly enough to pass the Senate bill. But then there is Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) who will not vote for the Senate bill since it uses taxpayer money to fund abortion. And Stupak says he has a dozen other members that will switch from yes to no with him. And Rep. Michael Acuri (D-NY) now says he is likely to switch his vote from yes to no. And Rep. Shelly Berkley (D-NV), who voted yes the first time, says she is "not inclined to support the Senate" bill. And Rep. Gerry Connolly says he could "absolutely" switch his vote from yes to no. And now Congressional Progressive Caucus Rep. Raúl Grijalva, (D-AZ) says he's less likely to vote for the final health care reform bill if the reconciliation bill contains the ideas President Obama outlined yesterday.

One House Democrat tells the
LA Times why the White House is facing such a tough sell: "It's a no-win situation for those of us in moderate districts. If you vote no, your base is upset. If you vote yes, everyone else is upset. You almost couldn't design a legislative vise more damaging to moderate Democrats -- or that puts our majority more at risk." But don't worry House Democrats, the Senate is going to do everything it can to convince you that you aren't going to walk the plank alone again. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) tells Politico that Senate Democrats are planning a gesture some time next week that will guarantee to House Democrats the Senate will act: "I don't know what the gesture will be but it will be a convincing gesture." Kabuki theater indeed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60 US Senators Vote for Government Take Over of Health Care

 

By Pubilius, BigGovernment

Abraham Lincoln called it a lullaby during his campaign against Douglas. What he meant was the political promises contrived to make people feel comfortable enough that they would sleep through the important debates (then it was slavery) and allow the back room deals to be made. In this case the democrats are allowing the lullaby to lure them into voting for healthcare legislation that will indenture every man, woman and child in this country with little or no demonstrable return to the people.

The democrats have allowed themselves to be convinced that they must pass this legislation now or be caught on the wrong side of history. What they really fear is depth-charging a President and a white house chief of staff who painted them all into a corner on healthcare legislation. What they really are doing is CYA for Pennsylvania Avenue and pretending they are doing great things. Yes, pretending, as in fiction.

If the democrats really had any backbone, they would choose this moment to stand athwart this Marxist freight train and push back. Push back the role and obscene cost of government until it resembles something other than a serpent swallowing its own tail; push back until we discover anew the ideal that we, as individuals, can take care of ourselves; push back until everyone realizes that the pervasive influence of government has never been benign and that it’s influence is now parasitic.

What do you suppose are the chances that those democrats will chose to fight for the real needs of the nation (defined as a return to at least one or two of our founding principles), or embarrassing a President who ignores those needs? Thought so.

At a time when the socialists in Europe and China are saying we ought to reconsider the path to socialism, our Democrats, having ruled us for 80% of the time since 1932, are ready to double down all those bad bets and listen to the lullaby.

Thanks

Here is a chart with the reality. Feel better off with all that government intervention? 

                                                                     1966      2008           2009
Government spending (Billion's)              $216      $5,297        $6,456
GDP                                                            $789      $14,441      $14,240
Government spending % of GDP             27.4%    36.7%        45.3%
Unemployment rate                                      3.9%       7.2%        10.2%
Poverty Rate                                               14.7%     13.2%        14.5%
Generational Obligation (Billions)           $717.0   $42,000.0    $61,000.0

Government Spending Definition  All Federal, State, and Local Spending

Generational ObligationThe deficit gap obligated to taxpayers for the trailing 80 years
Generational Obligation for 1966 is an estimate, as is the GDP for 2009. Generational obligations are estimates based on projections by the CBO. Other data is derived from the US census, From the CBO, and from the Executive office of the President of the United States, specifically the budget and its associated historical tables. The 2009 poverty rate is an estimate.