ObamaCare

ObamaCare will overwhelm emergency rooms, cost $115 billion more than originally predicted
Posted: 16 May 2010 09:00 PM PDT
One of the points Democrats used over and over again in support of ObamaCare was that too many people go to the emergency room for simple health issues that primary care physicians should be handling because they don’t have health insurance. With ObamaCare, they said, people will stop flooding emergency rooms and instead see a family doctor. Not so fast. This rosy prediction, just like all the other rosy predictions the Democrats made about ObamaCare, is just not going to happen:

The new healthcare law will pack 32 million newly insured people into emergency rooms already crammed beyond capacity, according to experts on healthcare facilities.

A chief aim of the new healthcare law was to take the pressure off emergency rooms by mandating that people either have insurance coverage. The idea was that if people have insurance, they will go to a doctor rather than putting off care until they faced an emergency.

People who build hospitals, however, say newly insured people will still go to emergency rooms for primary care because they don’t have a doctor.

“Everybody expected that one of the initial impacts of reform would be less pressure on emergency departments; it’s going to be exactly the opposite over the next four to eight years,” said Rich Dallam, a healthcare partner at the architectural firm NBBJ, which designs healthcare facilities.

“We don’t have the primary care infrastructure in place in America to cover the need. Our clients are looking at and preparing for more emergency department volume, not less,” he said.

Some Democrats agree with this assessment.

Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) suspects the fallout that occurred in Massachusetts’ emergency rooms could happen nationwide after health reform kicks in.

Massachusetts in 2006 created near-universal coverage for residents, which was supposed to ease the traffic in hospital emergency rooms.

But a recent poll by the American College of Emergency Physicians found that nearly two-thirds of the state’s residents say emergency department wait times have either increased or remained the same.

I’m not surprised one bit. Conservatives and free market experts all predicted as much. Those of us who were against ObamaCare said many times that you can’t add 32 million people to an already congested health care system and expect to have increased access to health care and health care providers.

We also said that it isn’t ossible to add 32 million people to an already expensive and overly regulated health care system and expect to see costs go down. And we were right on that count, too. According to the CBO, ObamaCare will actually cost $115 billion more than originally predicted, sending the price tag for the first ten years to more than $1 trillion. So, once again Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of the Democrats who claimed ObamaCare would increase access and decrease costs have been proven to be liars.

Favorites!

Below was published in the LA Times, But my first question would be, how come in beginning the government politicians didn't react like this when it came to their banking & auto manufacturing friends? Could it have been the stock that many of them probably have in these companies? I'm not trying to defend the oil companies, but I do feel that what's good for the goose, should have also been good for the gander.



The Obama administration warned BP in a strongly worded letter Saturday that the federal government expects the oil giant -- and not taxpayers -- to pay all damages associated with the ongoing Gulf of Mexico oil leak, even if they exceed the $75-million liability cap under federal law.

Two Cabinet secretaries, Ken Salazar of Interior and Janet Napolitano of Homeland Security, wrote to BP chief executive Tony Hayward to reiterate the administration's position that "BP is accountable to the American public for the full clean up of this spill and all the economic loss caused by the spill and related events."

The secretaries noted that BP has promptly paid damages claims thus far, and that company officials have repeatedly said they'll pay all "legitimate claims" stemming from the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon rig and subsequent, ongoing leak of thousands of barrels a day.

In light of those statements, Salazar and Napolitano wrote, "we understand that BP will not in any way seek to rely on the potential $75 million statutory cap to refuse to provide compensation to any individuals or others harmed by the oil spill, even if more than $75 million is required to provide full compensation to all claimants, and BP will not seek reimbursement from the American taxpayers, the United States Government, or the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for any amount.

California Nuts

Well we all knew it was going to happen! I heard yesterday on the news that the environmentalist in California have already started screaming about passing a law permanently banning off shore oil drilling. Are these the same people that have help to bankrupt their State? Are these the same people that have turned their State over to Mexico? Yeah I'm going to jump right onto their band wagon. These are the same nuts that have caused America to have to buy oil from its enemies. Do you think someone that hates you is going to give you a good price on something it sells to you? When are these people going to start living in the real world with the rest of us!

Environmental Nuts

It's not the BP oil company fault that this explosion happened on one of their oil rigs. It is not their fault that oil is washing up on the shores of Louisiana. It happened because of the environmental nuts here in the USA forcing companys to have to drill for oil far out to sea instead of here on land. At least if it was on land they would have been able to shut it down quickly. The environmental nuts have forced all of this crap on us over their stupid ideas that if it's out of sight, it's out of mind! In other words if it is 100 miles out to sea and we can't see it, it'll be OK to drill. Just like their ideas of cleaning up the air here will keep it from blowing in from some other country whose economy is not crippled by a bunch of anti-delusion devices. Way to go tree hugger!

National Day of Prayer

By Linda Feldmann – Thu May 6, 8:34 am ETWashington – Thursday, May 6, is the National Day of Prayer, as proclaimed by President Obama. But this year, the annual ritual that began in 1952 is taking place amid controversy.Last month, a federal judge in Wisconsin ruled that the US law directing the president to proclaim such a day violates the First Amendment, which prohibits government establishment of religion. USDistrict Judge Barbara Crabb also said it was OK to proceed with the National Day of Prayer, pending appeals.On April 22, the Obama administration appealed Judge Crabb’s ruling to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.But, like last year, Mr. Obama himself will not hold any official prayer day observance at the White House. His predecessor, George W. Bush, had held an annual interfaith observance in the East Room of the White House.Last year, when Obama decided to limit the White House’s involvement to a proclamation, an urban legend was born: Obama had "canceled" the National Day of Prayer. Not so, the White House said. The myth-busting website Snopes.com has a page devoted to the topic. It’s not that the White House is opposed to prayer, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said last year. “Prayer is something that the president does every day,” he added, noting that it is private.The National Day of Prayer Task Force, a privately funded group with strong ties to the Evangelical Christian movement, is fighting back against the judge’s ruling and circulating a petition.“The National Day of Prayer provides an opportunity for all Americans to pray voluntarily according to their own faith – it does not violate theEstablishment Clause of the First Amendment,” task force chairwoman Shirley Dobson said in a statement.Groups around the country will hold observances on Thursday marking the National Day of Prayer, as in years past. Though the tradition was formalized in 1952, with a congressional resolution calling on the president to proclaim such a day, there were national days of prayer long before then.Opponents of the day of prayer argue that the proclamation makes them feel as if the government is telling them to engage in a religious activity. Atheists, in particular, object to a government prayer proclamation that assumes a universal belief in God.Obama’s proclamation designating May 6, 2010, as a National Day of Prayer acknowledges the religious diversity of the United States – within the universe of monotheism."I call upon the citizens of our Nation to pray, or otherwise give thanks, in accordance with their own faiths and consciences, for our many freedoms and blessings, and I invite all people of faith to join me in asking for God's continued guidance, grace, and protection as we meet the challenges before us," the proclamation states.Religion was a complicated issue in the Obama presidential campaign, and has remained so in his presidency. During the campaign, his long-time pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, seemed to threaten Obama’s chances at winning the Democratic nomination after videotapes emerged showing the pastor using incendiary language. Obama then delivered a memorable speech on faith that appeared to put the issue to rest.Obama grew up with no faith tradition but embraced Christianity as an adult. Now, as president, he regularly delivers sermon-like speeches, in addition to delivering euglogies, as he did for civil rights leader Dorothy Height last week. On Feb. 4, Obama spoke about the power of prayer to foster civility and bridge divisions, in an address to the National Prayer Breakfast. But Obama and his family have not been regular church-goers since moving to Washington.

Obama falters on immigration reform promises

Advocates for illegal immigrants fear the White House is doing the bare minimum to appease Latino voters before midterm elections as it focuses on other issues. This describes exactly what is going on in America. It's not about enforcing the law of the land, it's all about getting votes! The obama politicians could care less about what the american citizen wants because the illegal immigrates now probably outnumber the legal voters! So lets make em all happy!

What makes them better than us?

Entry Requirements

Proof of citizenship and photo identification are required for entry by all U.S. citizens. A passport and visa are not required for a tourist/transit stay of up to 180 days. A tourist card, issued by Mexican consulates and most airlines serving Mexico, is required. Minors require notarized consent from parent(s) if traveling alone, with one parent, or in someone else's custody. Mexican regulations limit the value of goods brought into Mexico by U.S. citizens arriving by air or sea to $300 per person and by land to $50 per person. Amounts exceeding the duty-free limit are subject to a 32.8 percent tax. Upon arrival in Mexico, business travelers must complete a form (FM-N 30 days) authorizing the conduct of business, but not employment, for a 30-day period. If the business traveler departs and re-enters, the 30-day period begins again. For further information concerning entry requirements, travelers may contact the Embassy of Mexico at 1911 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, telephone (202) 736-1000, or any of the Mexican consulates in major U.S. cities. In response to the increased interest in immigration matters in the U.S., Mexican authorities may scrutinize more closely the visa situation of U.S. citizens residing or working in Mexico. U.S. citizens planning on working or living in Mexico should apply for the appropriate Mexican visa (FM-2 or 3).

Visitors intending to participate in humanitarian aid missions, human rights advocacy groups or international observer delegations should contact the nearest Mexican Consulate or Embassy for guidance on how to obtain the appropriate visa before traveling to Mexico. This is particularly relevant in light of the tension and polarization in Chiapas and the international interest the situation there has attracted.

Returning to the United States – Caution! Make certain that you can return to the United States with the proof of citizenship that you take with you. Although some countries may allow you to enter with only a birth certificate, U.S. law requires that you document both your U.S. citizenship and identity when you reenter the United States.

The best document to prove your U.S. citizenship is a valid U.S. passport. Other documents that establish U.S. citizenship include an expired U.S. passport, a certified copy of your birth certificate, a Certificate of Naturalization, a Certificate of Citizenship, or a Report of Birth Abroad of a U.S. citizen. To prove your identity, either a valid driver’s license or a government identification card that includes a photo or physical description is acceptable.

Death Panels in ObamaCare

Peter Orszag confirms: death panels in ObamaCare
Posted: 27 Apr 2010 07:18 AM PDT
Orszag doesn’t use the term death panels, of course, but when Sarah Palin created the term, the Independent Payment Advisory Board was precisely what she had in mind: a group of unaccountable and unelected government bureaucrats who will determine who lives and who dies based upon what Medicare treatments will be covered.

Palin was roundly criticized for her characterization, but she was spot on. Peter Orszag confirms that the IPAB birthed by ObamaCare will have immense power to ration care for Medicare patients. And don’t fall into the trap of thinking young patients are forever exempt from its rationing tentacles. IPAB’s impact will not stop at Medicare’s doors. Since ObamaCare is designed to morph into a single payer system by putting insurance companies out of business, the IPAB eventually will have the power to ration everyone’s care.

When you watch the video you’ll see and hear that Orszag seems quite excited about the power the IPAB will have. Its decisions will not have to be approved by any body of government. Rather, they will simply become the law of the land unchallenged unless the Congress acts.

Unfortunately, getting rid of the IPAB will prove even more difficult because Harry Reid went out of his way to make sure this board stays in place in perpetuity by including in the law that a 67 vote supermajority is required to overturn it.

This is just one more reason why ObamaCare must be repealed.

Hat tip: Ed Morrissey at Hot Air