We can now add the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) to the growing list of people lining up to challenge the constitutionality of the healthcare reform bill. The AAPS has now filed suit against Kathleen Sebelius and Social Security Administration Commissioner Michael Astrue on the grounds that the healthcare reform law violates Article 1 of the constitution as well as the 5th and 10th amendments.
Here is a list of what the AAPS hopes to accomplish:
— overturn the mandate for everyone to purchase health insurance “as outside the authority of Congress to enact and the federal government to enforce”;
— to declare the federal government’s imposition of standards for qualifying plans as impermissible;
— to declare the bill “unenforceable in its entirety” because it “cannot because funded without the insurance mandates”;
— and to order that Sebelius and Astrue “submit an accounting on the solvency of Medicare and Social Security,”
While others have filed lawsuits challenging the healthcare reform bill based on Article 1 of the constitution and on the 10th amendment, this is the first lawsuit brought forth on the 5th amendment. The 5th amendment states “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
The theory in challenging the 5th amendment is stated here:
AAPS legal counsel Lawrence J. Joseph, who submitted the complaint, explained that when the Secretary of Health and Human Services sets criteria that private insurers must meet, she is “spreading costs to private parties” by driving up the cost of premiums. The additional money that customers must pay, Joseph says, “represents a regulatory taking, without just compensation, in violation of the Fifth Amendment.”
An interesting argument, but not one that I am sure will hold water in the Supreme Court. None the less, the attempt must be made as this is our last chace to stop the healthcare reform legislation. We may not be able to stop all of it now, but whatever can be stopped must be stopped.
The fight to stop the legislation may be over but the fight in the courts is just beginning. The left may be dismissing these lawsuits as trivial but the Supreme Court just may have something to say about that before all is said and done.
Today Barack Obama announced his plan to begin oil exploration off of the East coast of the United States. It is not all that often that I agree with a position that the president has taken, but this in one of those rare times that I do agree with him– if he is serious about it. I am not sure that he is really serious about it, but I hope that he is.
Under Barack Obama’s plan– which is similar to the plan that President Bush put forward– oil exploration would be allowed on the East coast, parts of Florida, and in the Gulf of Mexico near the shores of Florida. As a candidate for president, Barack Obama assured Florida residents that he would keep the moratorium in place that banned the exploration for oil off of Florida’s coast.
In June 2008, then-Sen. Obama told reporters in Jacksonville, Florida, “when I’m president, I intend to keep in place the moratorium here in Florida and around the country that prevents oil companies from drilling off Florida’s coasts. That’s how we can protect our coastline and still make the investments that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil and bring down gas prices for good.”
This new proposal is a direct opposite position than the one that he had taken during the campaign and it is one campaign promise that I hope he breaks. However I have two questions. The first question that I have is, what is motivating him to break this promise?
There are three possibilities that I can think of for this change of heart, if indeed he plans to move forward with this proposal.
Reason number one: He really believes that this is part of a solution to move towards energy independence from the Middle East.
Reason number two: He understands the damage that he has done in regards to bipartisanship and civility in the underhanded way he and the Democrat leadership passed healthcare reform and he is trying to heal the wounds of this legislation by throwing a bone to the right in an effort to bring the country back together.
Reason Number three (the reason I believe is the most likely): He is offering to drill off of the coast as a compromise when he decides to push his cap and trade proposal through congress.
Taking these three possibilities in order. I do not believe that Barack Obama feels that this is a legitimate way for the United States to achieve energy independence from the Middle East. I believe that he honestly thinks that moving forward on alternative energy is the way to go on this issue. Everything that Barack Obama campaigned on when it came to this issue leads me to believe that he does not believe this is a viable option.
I also do not believe that this is an effort to heal the wounds that he has inflicted on the country over the healthcare reform bill. I believe that Barack Obama thinks that he knows what is best for the American people and that the American people will realize he was right on healthcare reform some day. He believes that the American people will eventually forget the underhanded way congress passed this legislation once they see the good he hopes this bill will produce.
The last reason is the reason I feel is most likely. He intends to push cap and trade legislation that will further damage the United States economy and he hopes that by adopting a position that is similar to President Bush’s position he will be able to win over enough votes to pass the cap and trade legislation.
Let me state for the record here that I also believe that alternative energy is part of the solution to end– or at least diminish– our dependency on foreign oil. But it is only part of the solution, increased domestic oil production should also be part of the solution. Cap and trade is not part of the solution. Cap and trade has nothing to do with energy independence and it never did. It wasn’t until people became skeptical of the notion of cap and trade that the environmentalists tried to spin cap and trade into an issue of energy independence and predictably from there into an issue of national defense. Cap and trade was always about and will always be about global warming– an issue whose very legitimacy is in doubt with the disclosure of Climategate.
We will soon find out if Barack Obama is serious about this issue. If he takes this issue as seriously as he did the healthcare reform issue he will let nothing stop him from passing it. He can simply dictate to congress what he demands and tell them that they WILL pass this bill, as he did with healthcare reform. He will tell congress that it doesn’t matter what people think about this because it isn’t about politics. Just as he did with healthcare reform. He forced healthcare reform upon the American people through dictate, and he can do the same thing here if he truly believes it is what is best. I am not condoning this action, I am merely stating that it can be used as a barometer to gauge how serious he is about drilling off of the United States coast.
This leads me to the second question I have about Barack Obama’s offshore drilling proposal. How many Democrats that opposed this idea when it was proposed by President Bush will flip on the idea now that it has been proposed by a Democrat president. If ANY do, it will be an indictment upon them and a clear acknowledgement that they did not oppose the position just the person who proposed it.
In the end, I believe that this proposal is going nowhere. In fact I believe that Barack Obama only proposed it because he knows that it is going nowhere. This is just a chance for Barack Obama to appear as though he is reaching out to the right while knowing that it will never come to light. In my opinion I think that this is a great political move for the president but I am not expecting anything to come from it. We have heard this story before and the ending is always the same.
I hope that something happens here– but not at the expense of passing cap and trade– but I am very doubtful we will see any progress on this issue.
Prudential has announced that it will take a $100 million charge in the first quarter because of the new healthcare reform law. I have to plead ignorance as to what that term actually means but it seems as if this means they are “cashing in” some of their stocks in an effort to counter-balance some of the effects of the new legislation. Somebody please enlighten me if I am wrong, but that is how I understand this.
Prudential is claiming that they must do this because they used to receive a tax deduction for healthcare benefits that they provided to retired employees, that tax exemption no longer exists now that Barack Obama has signed the healthcare reform bill into law.
Prudential is joining what seems to be an ever growing list of companies that have also taken charges to offset the effects of the new healthcare reform law. This list includes; AK Steel Corp., 3M Co., Caterpillar Inc., Deere & Co. and Valero Energy. The healthcare reform law in effect raises the expenses of these companies who provide healthcare insurance to people who no longer work for the companies due to retirement. This new expenditure has to be made up somewhere– when the cost of business goes up the cost of the product goes up– and as usual it will be mainstream Americans that have to make up the difference.
Apparently, these companies were given this tax break so that they could keep their retired employees on their healthcare plans and in doing so this would keep these former employees off of Medicare. The tax break was being used to save the government Medicare costs.
With this cut in profits, these companies are looking for ways to offset the losses that the healthcare reform law inflicts on them. According to this article about the $1 billion charge that AT&T is taking, AT&T will start looking at other ways to make up for some of this money. This includes cutting benefits to retirees, including the drug benefit they now receive.
And all of this is coming from some of the bigger companies in America; how will the new law affect some of the smaller companies? If these large companies are already looking to minimize the effects of the healthcare law, how many benefits will smaller companies with much smaller profits be forced to cut in order to compete?
The president has repeatedly said that if you like your insurance, you will be able to keep it, but if this is any indication of what is to come in the future than it seems as if this simply is not true. Just ask the AT&T retirees who might lose their drug benefit if they think it is true.
Again, I am no expert on this– I am just trying to figure out what it all means– but it seems to me that the ramifications of the healthcare reform bill– while they still may not be felt by the majority of the American people for some time– are beginning already.
An unintended consequence, or is this what the administration intended all along?
Senate to prepare a new climate change bill
The Senate will prepare a new climate change bill and according to this article, it will be “softened up” in order to gain the support of Republicans in an attempt to get the 60 votes needed to pass it.
some Democrats say the passage of healthcare reform has opened the door for climate change legislation, while acknowledging tradeoffs will be needed to secure 60 Senate votes. “They know that to pass a comprehensive bill they will have to ease concerns of some special interests and mid-western senators whose states have manufacturing-oriented economies,” said Daniel J. Weiss, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, a liberal think-tank.
My question is, why bother? When I ask that question I am not asking “why bother” attempting to pass a new climate change bill, I am asking “why bother” pretending that a 60 vote majority is needed to pass the bill. When the Democrats invoked what they once called the “nuclear option” to pass healthcare reform they showed the American people that they are just going to do whatever the hell they want to, the American people be damned. Why now pretend that they need or care about acquiring a 60 vote majority when they are perfectly capable of– and entirely willing to– bending the rules and passing it with a simple majority?
It seems to me that this is just an attempt to smooth over the hurt that they have caused to the majority of Americans who oppose them, but in the end if they need to use reconciliation to pass this bill that is precisely what they will do. Perhaps they are leery of using reconciliation a second time to screw over the American people, but with the arm twisting of the president coupled with the sweetheart deals that are sure to follow they will do whatever it takes to pass a climate change bill and it doesn’t matter whether the American people want it or not.
It looks as if it will be an interesting and challenging time when congress returns from its recess as Barack Obama is planning an all out agenda offensive before the November election.
According to this article, Barack Obama is feeling emboldened with his “victory” on healthcare reform and now plans to take a more active role on a variety of issues when the recess is over. I am not sure that I agree with the assessment that Barack Obama is emboldened because of this healthcare victory; he may just fear the repercussions that could come in November following his healthcare “victory” and may want to move forward aggressively while he still holds large majorities in both the House and Senate.
But the reason why he will move forward aggressively is not what is most important here. What is most important here is the fact that he will aggressively push his agenda and we must do whatever we can to delay as much of Barack Obama’s radical agenda as is possible before the November election, when hopefully we will win back majorities and be able to drag this president kicking and screaming back to the center.
We may have lost the healthcare reform battle– and while that was a major battle– the war is not over. We must continue to fight against this president and his agenda. The administration is not listening to the people anymore– if they ever were in the first place– and Barack Obama will pay a price for it in the midterm elections. His plan is to implement as much as he can before than because he could be a lame duck after the election.
The healthcare reform debacle has shown the American people that Barack Obama will stop at nothing in order to pass his agenda, even if that means having the congress bend the rules a little bit. His mantra appears to be, the end justifies the means so this will prove to be a challenging time leading into the November election. Barack Obama and the liberal leadership in congress will stop at nothing to pass his agenda. We can not possible stop all of it in time, but we must fight to stop as much as we can. It will not be easy, but it is a battle that we must fight until the bitter end. With cap and trade and amnesty likely to be pursued in the months ahead, America as we know it hangs in the balance.
Below is a video that I found at Conservative Hideout; it is a spoof on the mainstream media’s coverage of the Tea Party movement. I found it pretty entertaining and I think that you will find it entertaining also. I have decided not to let myself get worked up at the way we are being portrayed in the media because I expected it and this video adds a little levity to the situation. They can make fun of us now, but they won’t be after November.
Giddy Democrats– caught in the euphoria of passing healthcare reform against the will of the people– are finding it hard to control themselves in the aftermath of their huge “victory” for over the American people. The are so giddy that they are finally beginning to admit the truth about their agenda. They just cannot help themselves.
First we had John Dingell admit that part of the goal of healthcare reform is to “control the people,” and now another Democrat has opened his mouth and admitted the underlying goal of healthcare reform.
Below is a video of Max Baucus admitting that one of the purposes of healthcare reform is wealth redistribution.
He plainly admits that this bill is an “income shift– a leveling.” He claims that there is a mal-distribution of wealth in America and that the wealthy have become “too wealthy.” He claims that this bill will address this “mal-distribution of wealth in America.”
First of all, what right does the government have in deciding who is too wealthy and who decides what an appropriate income level should be? Since when is it a crime for a person in America to achieve success at his or her chosen profession?
Second, how is it the government’s responsibility to distribute wealth in the first place?
We are finally learing of the ulterior motive– which many of us suspected in the first place– of the healthcare reform bill. It is not about providing affordable healthcare to all Americans. If it were, they would have passed a bill that would have actually achieved that goal. Instead they passed a bill that mandates Americans must buy healthcare insurance, they are not extending healthcare benefits to the uninsured as they are touting, they are forcing Americans to buy it. There is a major difference between providing Americans healthcare insurance and mandating that Americans buy healthcare insurance or face a penalty. Sure there are subsidies available to help lower income families buy healthcare insurance at the expense of the American taxpayer, but that falls into the category of wealth redistribution.
There is the much quoted bible verse: from whom much is given, much is required that Democrats like to quote when they are about to stick it to the rich, but honestly isn’t it up to the individual to decide when, where, and how to give back to the community and not the government?
The Democrats could be making a fatal flaw here; in their exuberance over passing the healthcare reform bill they are letting their true feelings show, but the American people do not want this type of socialism.
Sure, Barack Obama told the world his exact economic socialist policy when he made the infamous statement to Joe the plumber about “spreading the wealth around” but for the most part the American people didn’t listen to what Barack Obama actually said, while those that spoke out against his comment were called fringe, paranoid, racist, haters who were taking his words out of context to paint him as a radical. But now we are seeing Democrats actually admitting that what we were saying about Barack Obama during the campaign was true. Al Sharpton recently admitted as mush when he said, “we have to say the American public overwhelmingly voted for socialism when they elected President Obama.”
The American people– driven by Republican scandals and a hatred of George Bush– did not actually listen to what Barack Obama said during the campaign but they are hearing it now. It is a little late, but late is better than never. The Democrats have over-reached on healthcare reform and the American people are upset, but there is always the chance that by the time November rolls around that Americans would forget how upset they are right now. But if the Democrats keep opening up their mouths and continue to let their true feelings known, the American people will not forget. We will be energized when November rolls around and we will correct the error that was made in November of 2008.
Joe Sestak– who is running against Arlen Specter in the Democrat primary in Pennsylvania– has claimed on more than one occasion that he was offered a high ranking position (possibly the Secretary of the Navy) in the Obama administration if he would agree not to run against Arlen Specter in a primary election this fall. If Sestak’s claim is true, the Obama administration has committed a federal crime “for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate.”
Meanwhile Arlen Specter is denying that he was promised by the White House that he would have no Democrat primary opponent if he agreed to switch parties. But at the same time he is admitting that if the White House did in fact offer Joe Sestak a job for his promise not to run against him a federal crime was committed.
Arlen Specter has demanded that Joe Sestak name names if indeed he has proof that something like this took place. I agree with Arlen Specter here, if Joe Sestak has proof he should tell people who it was that offered him this deal, if he does not than he should shut up.
I am of the belief that someone in the Obama administration did contact Joe Sestak on this possibility and I am equally sure that this type of thing happens all the time by both parties. I am also sure that most people are not stupid enough to make these types of accusations without proof– although it appears as if Joe Sestak is the exception to the rule. There is no doubt in my mind that Joe Sestak is telling the truth because I can’t think of any reason that he would lie about this, there is nothing for him to gain by lying about this. But I also believe that he has no proof because nobody would be stupid enough to offer him a job on the record.
Having stated all of this, these are serious accusations that have been levied by Joe Sestak and they need to be investigated. Darrell Issa has sent a letter to the president’s attourney asking him if he was going to investigate Joe Sestak’s claims. Apparently he did not get an adequate response because he is now ready to call for a special investigation into the White House on the matter if the White House does not address the claims on their own.
Rep. Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Oversight committee, told CBS News Wednesday that he will call for a special prosecutor to investigate the White House if it does not address Rep. Joe Sestak’s claim that he was offered a federal job in exchange for dropping out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary.
“If the public doesn’t receive a satisfactory answer, the next step would be to call for a special prosecutor, which is well within the statute,”
Darrell Issa is exactly right about this, there has to be an investigation into this issue, whether it is an internal investigation or whether a special prosecutor needs to be assigned. The American people deserve to know what happened in this instance.
There are only three possible truths that I can think of as options to what happened here: either the administration committed a federal crime and Joe Sestak has proof, Joe Sestak is lying, or a federal crime was committed but Joe Sestak has no proof. I honestly believe that the latter option is the real truth. The first option would be an indictment on the Obama administration, while the last two would be an indictment on Joe Sestak. But the fact remains that we need to know exactly what happened here.
Somebody is not telling the truth and the administration’s silence on this issue tells me that Joe Sestak is telling the truth, but can he prove it? That should be up to a special prosecutor to decide.
In what should be a scary thought to most Americans, the IRS is about to gain even more power because they will be in charge of enforcing the new healthcare reform law. With that added responsibility comes added costs– $10 billion worth to be exact. And just to make the matter worse, that is $10 billion every year.
But in a maneuver to hide the true costs of this disastrous piece of legislation, the $10 billion a year in additional IRS funds– as estimated by the CBO for the funding of the 16,500 new IRS agents— that will be needed for the IRS to enforce the new healthcare mandates was not included in the bill.
In order to carry out its new monitoring and enforcement duties, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the IRS will need $10 billion in additional funds, funds which were not made available under the health reform bill.
This money is going to have to come from somewhere yet in order to keep the price tag lower it was not included in the healthcare legislation. Any guess where that money is going to come from?
John Dingell had some interesting comments on the healthcare reform bill:
He claims that it takes a long time to institute legislation that will control the people. He went on to claim that the Republicans have not done anything to help the Democrats to achieve this. And for that I say thank you to the Republicans. To put this answer in context, he was answering a question about why the “benefits” wouldn’t go into effect until 2014, but his answer is very revealing. He is admitting that this legislation is designed to “control the people,” and that is an argument that many of us on the right have been making all along so a thank you must also be given to John Dingell for finally admitting to the American people what many of us had known all along. Democrats want control, there can no longer be any doubt about it.
I heard on the radio today that John Dingell is claiming that he misspoke because he was tired and I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He did misspeak, but his misspeak was in actually admitting the long guarded secret of the goal of the healthcare reform bill. I believe he actually told the truth about the Democrats goal, he was just too tired to stop himself from telling the truth. He meant what he said, he just didn’t mean to say it. He has echoed what I am sure has been talked about in upper positions in the administration, and what many people on the right have believed all along.
This should serve to wake up all but the most ardent leftists in the country.
America's Watchtower 