HR 3962 Has Passed the House.

Its dishonest to equate health care reform with welfare. Especially when you consider that this bill is premium driven and designed to assure access to all americans.....

In this analysis, a health reform scenario is modeled that would expand Medicaid to an estimated 17.0 million uninsured individuals with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL), would provide subsidies to 16.3 million uninsured individuals with incomes between 133 and 399 percent of the FPL, and would require an additional 4.3 million uninsured individuals to obtain coverage through an individual mandate, though they would not be eligible for Medicaid or subsidies. The first brief contains an overview of the entire nonelderly uninsured population, and the three remaining briefs address children, parents and childless adults, respectively.

linked

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB2000...055918380.html

(This is from Nov 7 before the bill passed)

What the Pelosi Health-Care Bill Really Says



The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.
What the government will require you to do:
• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.
• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.
On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.. . . . . ."

. . . .• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement."

Edited to add the above . . . .

"In the construction of a law, even in judiciary cases of meum et tuum, where the opposite parties have a right and counterright in the very words of the law, the Judge considers the intention of the lawgiver as his true guide, and gives to all the parts and expressions of the law, that meaning which will effect, instead of defeating, its intention. But in laws merely executive, where no private right stands in the way, and the public object is the interest of all, a much freer scope of construction, in favor of the intention of the law, ought to be taken, and ingenuity ever should be exercised in devising constructions which may save to the public the benefit of the law. Its intention is the important thing: the means of attaining it quite subordinate." --Thomas Jefferson to William H. Cabell, 1807. ME 11:318

Sorry y'all . . I have a cherished day off and am catching up on all my reading. . . . . .


http://www.bostonherald.com/business...icleid=1209839

"Jack Welch, the former CEO of General Electric, blasted the Obama administration and Congressman Barney Frank this morning telling a banking audience that the Democrats’ actions to restructure the entire economy are “insane.”. . . . . .

. . . . . ."“I desperately want more thought so we don’t throw out some of the great things we have in this country,” Welch said to more than 1,000 bankers who watched the 73-year-old via video hookup. “Right now, Barney Frank has the floor. He can send us down paths that might be bad for us. That’s frightening. I hope the elections in those two states will slow the speed at which we are attacking climate change, financial regulations and health care. We can’t just pile up deficits and restructure the entire economy in 12-18 months. It’s not doable. It’s insane.”

Debunked here

Told ya so . . . . . . .

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ll-be-stripped

A House Democratic leader said Monday she's “confident” controversial language on abortion will be stripped from a final healthcare bill.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), the Democrats’ chief deputy whip in the House, said that she and other pro-abortion rights lawmakers would work to strip the amendment included in the House health bill that bars federal funding from subsidizing abortions.

“I am confident that when it comes back from the conference committee that that language won't be there,” Wasserman Schultz said during an appearance on MSNBC. “And I think we're all going to be working very hard, particularly the pro-choice members, to make sure that's the case.”

The amendment, offered by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), won the support of Republicans and dozens of centrist Democrats in the House, but revealed a deep divide in the Democratic caucus over abortion.. . . . "

So the qualified , i.e., "blessed" plan will be identified in 18 months. But after 2013 if one fails to get insurance, THEN you go to jail? Can we clarify that, please?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...159447566.html

The Lords of Entitlement

Every medical insurance decision will be subject to rationing by politics.



. . . . ."The bill is instead a breathtaking display of illiberal ambition, intended to make the middle class more dependent on government through the umbilical cord of "universal health care." It creates a vast new entitlement, financed by European levels of taxation on business and individuals. The 20% corner of Medicare open to private competition is slashed, while fiscally strapped states are saddled with new Medicaid burdens. The insurance industry will have to vet every policy with Washington, which will regulate who it must cover, what it can offer, and how much it can charge.. . . .."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...235765894.html

The typical argument for ObamaCare is that it will offer better medical care for everyone and cost less to do it, but occasionally a supporter lets the mask slip and reveals the real political motivation. So let's give credit to John Cassidy, part of the left-wing stable at the New Yorker, who wrote last week on its Web site that "it's important to be clear about what the reform amounts to."
Mr. Cassidy is more honest than the politicians whose dishonesty he supports. "The U.S. government is making a costly and open-ended commitment," he writes. "Let's not pretend that it isn't a big deal, or that it will be self-financing, or that it will work out exactly as planned. It won't. What is really unfolding, I suspect, is the scenario that many conservatives feared. The Obama Administration . . . is creating a new entitlement program, which, once established, will be virtually impossible to rescind."
Why are they doing it? Because, according to Mr. Cassidy, ObamaCare serves the twin goals of "making the United States a more equitable country" and furthering the Democrats' "political calculus." In other words, the purpose is to further redistribute income by putting health care further under government control, and in the process making the middle class more dependent on government. As the party of government, Democrats will benefit over the long run.
This explains why Nancy Pelosi is willing to risk the seats of so many Blue Dog Democrats by forcing such an unpopular bill through Congress on a narrow, partisan vote: You have to break a few eggs to make a permanent welfare state. As Mr. Cassidy concludes, "Putting on my amateur historian's cap, I might even claim that some subterfuge is historically necessary to get great reforms enacted."
No wonder many Americans are upset. They know they are being lied to about ObamaCare, and they know they are going to be stuck with the bill.







Duh.