What the AMM aren’t covering: “Sebelius shakes down companies she regulates for cash to implement ObamaCare”

Sibelius LeftistFrom the Cato Institute:

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius’ latest abuse of power has strengthened the case for her removal from office. Before discussing her latest misconduct, let’s review some of Sebelius’ past abuses of power.

  • In 2010, Sebelius described anonymous political speech as “dangerous.” Ironically, Sebelius’ lashing out at her political opponents’ free-speech rights is dangerous because it is the sort of rhetoric that might encourage agencies like the IRS to target groups that “criticize how the country is being run.” That’s exactly what the IRS has admitted doing – which in turn is a good argument for protecting anonymous political speech.
  • So too is Sebelius’ 2010 threat to put health insurance companies out of business. Shortly after ObamaCare became law, insurers began telling their customers how much it was going to increase their premiums. In a September 2010 letter to insurers, Sebelius shot back that premiums would rise no more than 2 percent, even as her department predicted increases as high as 7 percent. Insurers that didn’t toe the party line “may be excluded from health insurance Exchanges in 2014.” That was no idle threat, I wrote at the time. Since “Medicare’s chief actuary predicts that in the future, ‘essentially all‘ Americans will get their health insurance through those exchanges,” Sebelius was essentially threatening to put insurers out of business if they disagreed with her.
  • In 2011, Sebelius approved her department issuing hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies to private health insurance companies under the rubric of ObamaCare that the statute expressly forbids HHS to issue.
  • In 2012, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel concluded that Sebelius violated the Hatch Act by campaigning for President Obama and other political candidates while traveling on official business, an offense for which other federal workers are fired.
  • In a July 2012 letter to the nation’s governors, Sebelius arbitrarily rewrote and narrowed the Supreme Court’s ruling in NFIB v. Sebelius to allow HHS to continue coercing states into implementing parts of ObamaCare’s Medicaid expansion.
  • When it became apparent that two-thirds of states would not implement one of ObamaCare’s health insurance “exchanges,” Sebelius dismissed the idea that a lack of congressionally authorized funding for federal Exchanges would stop her department from implementing them. “We are going to get it done,” she said. Now we learn she substituted her own judgment for Congress’ by raiding ObamaCare’s Prevention and Public Health Fund to the tune of $454 million to fund federal Exchanges. But even that wasn’t enough.

But wait; here is the crux of the biscuit:

Now we learn, from the Washington Post’s Sarah Kliff, “Sebelius has, over the past three months, made multiple phone calls to health industry executives, community organizations and church groups and directly asked that they contribute to non-profits that are working to enroll uninsured Americans and increase awareness of the law.”

Once again, Leftist government steamrolling over citizens and organizations in order to ram down a political agenda at the behest of Barack Milhous Obama.

Seen in the media?  Discussed by the American Media Maggots?

Of course not.

And one teeny-tiny thing one might want to consider: this is illegal.

BZ

 

 

Obamacare: Taxpayers Must Report Personal Health ID Info to IRS

Govt Big EnuffEverything you were told about ObakaKare, that wouldn’t happen — like being able to retain your own doctor, no death panels, less expensive — is happening.

From Americans For Tax Reform:

So why will the Obama IRS require your personal identifying health information? 

Simply put, there is no way for the IRS to enforce Obamacare’s individual mandate without such an invasive reporting scheme.  Every January, health insurance companies across America will send out tax documents to each insured individual.  This tax document—a copy of which will be furnished to the IRS—must contain sufficient information for taxpayers to prove that they purchased qualifying health insurance under Obamacare.

This new tax information document must, at a minimum, contain: the name and health insurance identification number of the taxpayer; the name and tax identification number of the health insurance company; the number of months the taxpayer was covered by this insurance plan; and whether or not the plan was purchased in one of Obamacare’s “exchanges.”

This will involve millions of new tax documents landing in mailboxes across America every January, along with the usual raft of W-2s, 1099s, and 1098s.  At tax time, the 140 million families who file a tax return will have to get acquainted with a brand new tax filing form.  Six million of these families will end up paying Obamacare’s individual mandate non-compliance tax penalty.

Those 14,000 new IRS agents?  Yes, they’re there in order to review your taxes with a fine-toothed comb.  Your federal colonoscopy, at one time only guaranteed by the TSA, is now guaranteed by the TSA and the IRS.

If you’re at least a bit Libertarian, like me, then you value your privacy.

With ObakaKare, you can kiss your privacy absolutely good-bye.

BZ

 

 

Questions about the “Affordable Care Act”

Doctors Guns IIFirst, a misnomer: the “Affordable Care Act” ISN’T, particularly for the American Taxpayers who are FUNDING it.

[An aside: you know, honest to God, I really do conjure that the bulk of what Rush Limbaugh terms “Low Information Voters” believe that the government is the source, the fount, of all income — and not the Mark I, Model I American Taxpayer.  America has, sadly, become Brain-Glazingly Ignorant within the past few generations.  Too many alleged Americans believe that their governmental Free Cheese grows on trees.]

I ruminate because of Old NFO‘s recent blogpost involving “My Medical Appointment.”

Please read it before continuing.

With that in mind, in re doctors now apparently asking patients about their firearms during a medical consultation that has and should have nothing to do with firearms, I posit a few questions for my ever-intelligent readers:

1. Are you or have you been posed any questions about firearms during a recent medical visit?
2. What was your answer?
3. Are these questions lawful?
4. Are you legally required to answer them?
5. What statutes are involved?  Provide citations.

Because, up to this point, much has been written that I suspect is hearsay, unsupported and/or otherwise anecdotal from other sites.

Please, I ask, if you have answers to the above questions, kindly provide situations and citations and statutes.

BZ

P.S.
Excellent Forbes.com article about the issue, here.

Doctors Guns I

 

CBO: ObamaKare to remove SEVEN MILLION Americans from their job-based health insurance

Obama Care LineThis is, of course, according to my Leftist Trolls and hackers, a completely inaccurate portrayal of ObakaKare except that — ahem — it’s not; here is the CBO report.

Even NBCNews reports:

The new health care reform law is not going to provide health insurance for as many people, at least not as quickly, as the Obama administration had hoped, according to the latest look at the economy from the Congressional Budget Office.

That’s mostly because of the deal Congress made last month to keep the country from going over the fiscal cliff, the CBO says. About 8 million people who would have been insured by their employers will probably lose their coverage because of tax changes, the CBO projects.

It takes away some of the tax breaks that employers get for providing health insurance to workers and their families. The change “will lead to a greater reduction in such coverage and higher enrollment in insurance exchanges than previously estimated by CBO,” the report reads.

Please let me appropriately remind everyone of the words issued from the lips of Barack Hussein Obama in 2009:

It was a lie then and it’s a lie now.  Not simply a “falsehood” or a “misunderstanding” or a “fabrication” — make no mistake — it was a purposeful LIE.  For those of you who may have just tuned in: A LIE.

If you wish to see what a good bulk of major urban blacks think about Mr Obama and his ObamaKare, then click here.  I would have embedded the video but YouTube has DISABLED embedding.  Why?  Because the video makes blacks and the woman featured appear as idiots.  I say: YouTube need not worry; the public display of parasitism by deep urban blacks speaks for itself.  You need not look further than the city of Chicago, home of Mr Obama.  Murder Capital, per capita, of the United States.  By blacks.  On blacks.  Despite some of the most onerous gun laws in the entire nation.  Oh my God.  Did I just write the truth?  I should be horse-whipped.

That said, NBC reluctantly reports:

But overall, instead of 32 million to 34 million new people getting health insurance by 2017, probably only about 27 million people will be covered by then, the CBO projects.

Additionally, Kaiser Permanente reports:

Feb 06, 2013

About 7 million people, nearly double the earlier estimates, will no longer get health insurance from their employers because of changes to the tax code made by the health law, according to CBO projections.

The Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire: Why CBO Figures More Employers Will Drop Health Coverage
The Congressional Budget Office says the year-end fiscal cliff deal that preserved lower tax rates for most households produced a little-noticed side-effect: Fewer people will get health insurance from their employer over the next decade. That nugget of economic thinking pops up in the nonpartisan office’s annual update of its budget and economic forecast (Radnofsky, 2/5).

The Fiscal Times: 7 Million Will Lose Employee Coverage Under Obamacare
A new report from the Congressional Budget Office estimates that nearly 7 million people will lose their employer-based health insurance coverage under President Obama’s signature health care law, nearly twice the previous estimate. Changes to the tax code under Obamacare, said the CBO, have altered the incentives for the business sector, which will likely prefer to pay the penalty rather than the cost of workers’ health insurance. Overall, 27 million people are expected to gain coverage by 2017, roughly 5 million less than originally projected (Ehley, 2/5).

The Hill also writes about the true cost of ObakaKare:

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated Tuesday that President Obama’s signature healthcare law will cost about $1.3 trillion over the next 10 years.

The figure represents a slight increase since August, when the nonpartisan budget office estimated that the law would cost about $1.17 trillion before 2022.

Right.  That’s only a “slight increase” of $130 BILLION DOLLARSAs of this calculation.  Today.  What do you suspect next month might bring, pray tell?

But fear not, ladies and gentlemen, because if you happen to lose your employer-based health coverage, you can pick up the lowest level government family plan for around $20 THOUSAND DOLLARS a YEAR, according to the IRS.  See the issued IRS regulation here.

A grand bargain at twice the price, yes?

So at a time when you’re worried about the cost of your healthcare — if you work — you’re about to be confronted with this paradigm: when you are removed from your employer’s healthcare roll.  And then, according to the IRS, your family begins paying $1,666 a month for the most basic of care.

That Mr Obama, what a great president!

BZ

ObamaKare 1

 

 

OBAMA LIED — AGAIN: “Tax penalty to hit nearly 6M uninsured people”

From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly 6 million Americans — significantly more than first estimated— will face a tax penalty under President Barack Obama’s health overhaul for not getting insurance, congressional analysts said Wednesday. Most would be in the middle class.

The new estimate amounts to an inconvenient fact for the administration, a reminder of what critics see as broken promises.

“An inconvenient fact.”  Translated: LIE.

The numbers from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office are 50 percent higher than a previous projection by the same office in 2010, shortly after the law passed. The earlier estimate found 4 million people would be affected in 2016, when the penalty is fully in effect.

That’s still only a sliver of the population, given that more than 150 million people currently are covered by employer plans. Nonetheless, in his first campaign for the White House, Obama pledged not to raise taxes on individuals making less than $200,000 a year and couples making less than $250,000.

And the budget office analysis found that nearly 80 percent of those who’ll face the penalty would be making up to or less than five times the federal poverty level. Currently that would work out to $55,850 or less for an individual and $115,250 or less for a family of four.

Average penalty: about $1,200 in 2016.

So, Joe Middle Class GOWP: how’s that Obama vote working out for you?

BZ