Mandating health Insurance - Obamacare

[Backstop]

Dear Barry O. and Co.,

Pound sand.

I refuse to buy into Obamacare.

Love,

Backstop

--------------------------------

I've been told my Tricare Prime counts, and because of it I won't be required to buy into Obamacare.

But if at some point it doesn't count, I ain't paying.

[American Patriot]

I won't "buy in" either.

My retirement date is set. 5 August 2012.

I won't have ANY insurance after that. NONE. Not car, not boat, not health, not fucking nothing.

I have always believed it to be wrong to force people to pay for such things.

I think it is even criminal to try to make me pay for something I neither want nor need.

Fuck this administration and Congress.

[vector7]

What Nancy Pelosi didn't want us to know until after the healthcare bill was passed. Remember she said, "pass it and then read it!!." Here it is!

Obama Care Highlighted by Page Number

THE CARE BILL HB 3200

THIS IS THE 2ND OFFICIAL WHO HAS OUTLINED THESE PARTS OF THE CARE BILL.


Judge Kithil of Marble Falls, TX - highlighted the most egregious pages of HB3200

Please read this........ especially the reference to pages 58 & 59


JUDGE KITHIL wrote:

** Page 50/section 152: The bill will provide insurance to all non-U.S. residents, even if they are here illegally.

** Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individual's bank account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts.

** Page 65/section 164: The plan will be subsidized (by the government) for all union members, union retirees and for community organizations (such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - ACORN).

** Page 203/line 14-15: The tax imposed under this section will not be treated as a tax. (How could anybody in their right mind come up with that?)

** Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.

** Page 272. section 1145: Cancer hospital will ration care according to the patient's age.

** Page 317 and 321: The government will impose a prohibition on hospital expansion; however, communities may petition for an exception.

** Page 425, line 4-12: The government mandates advance-care planning consultations. Those on Social Security will be required to attend an "end-of-life planning" seminar every five years. (Death counseling..)

** Page 429, line 13-25: The government will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.

HAD ENOUGH???? Judge Kithil then goes on to identify:

"Finally, it is specifically stated that this bill will not apply to members of Congress. Members of Congress are already exempt from the Social Security system, and have a well-funded private plan that covers their retirement needs. If they were on our Social Security plan, I believe they would find a very quick 'fix' to make the plan financially sound for their future."

- Honorable David Kithil of Marble Falls, Texas All of the above should give you the point blank ammo you need to support your opposition to Obamacare. Please send this information on to all of your email contacts.

[Backstop]

If this comes to fruition, I predict an exodus from the medical profession by many, many, docs.

And I hope the docs to it.

** Page 241 and 253: Doctors will all be paid the same regardless of specialty, and the government will set all doctors' fees.

I'm curious vector - have you gone through and verified these bullets?

[Backstop]

I'll bet you there's a section in Zero's bill that requires we allow the government to make automatic withdrawls from our finances to pay for this.

I found this quote by Judge Sutton disturbing:

Not every intrusive law is an unconstitutionally intrusive law.

This argument needs to go to the USSC RFN.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/30/us/30health.html?_r=1

Round 1 in Appeals of Health Care Overhaul Goes to Obama
By KEVIN SACK

Published: June 29, 2011

The Obama administration prevailed Wednesday in the first appellate review of the 2010 health care law as a three-judge panel from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held that it was constitutional for Congress to require that Americans buy health insurance.

The ruling by the Cincinnati court is the first of three opinions to be delivered by separate courts of appeal that heard arguments in the health care litigation in May and June. Opinions are expected soon from panels in the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Va., and the 11th Circuit in Atlanta.

Lawyers on both sides of the case widely expect the Supreme Court to take one or more of the cases, perhaps as soon as its coming term, which starts in October. The speed of the Sixth Circuit ruling could help ensure that timing.

The opinion was the first not to break down strictly along seemingly partisan lines. In the 2-to-1 ruling, a judge appointed by a Republican president joined one named by a Democrat to write the majority opinion.

In various cases at the lower District Court level, five judges have divided on the question, with three Democratic appointees backing the law and two Republican appointees rejecting it.

As they look ahead to the Supreme Court, the law’s defenders can take encouragement from the concurring opinion written by Judge Jeffrey S. Sutton, an appointee of President George W. Bush, a Republican. Judge Sutton is typically considered conservative on questions of constitutional reach.

After acknowledging the difficulty of pinpointing the limits on Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce, Judge Sutton wrote, “In my opinion, the government has the better of the arguments.” He added, “Not every intrusive law is an unconstitutionally intrusive law.”

Joining Judge Sutton was Judge Boyce F. Martin Jr., an appointee of President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat. Dissenting on the central issues was Judge James L. Graham, a District Court judge appointed by President Ronald Reagan who is on temporary assignment to the Sixth Circuit.

The appeal, which was heard by the panel on June 1, came in a challenge filed by the Thomas More Law Center, a conservative public interest firm in Ann Arbor, Mich. In its 69-page ruling, the panel upheld Judge George

C. Steeh of Federal District Court in Detroit, who concluded that choosing not to buy health insurance was a consequential commercial decision that could be regulated by Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

Starting in 2014, the Affordable Care Act will require most Americans to buy health insurance or pay an income tax penalty. The administration argues that without the insurance mandate it is not reasonable to require insurers to cover all applicants regardless of their health status.

The Sixth Circuit majority held that the mandate was “facially constitutional under the Commerce Clause” for two reasons.

“First, the provision regulates economic activity that Congress had a rational basis to believe has substantial effects on interstate commerce,” Judge Martin wrote. “In addition, Congress had a rational basis to believe that the provision was essential to its larger economic scheme reforming the interstate markets in health care and health insurance.”

The court directly addressed whether a choice to go without health insurance qualifies as an “activity” that substantially affects interstate commerce, which is the standard set in prior Supreme Court decisions on the breadth of the Commerce Clause.

“The activity of foregoing health insurance and attempting to cover the cost of health care needs by self-insuring is no less economic than the activity of purchasing an insurance plan,” the opinion stated.

The majority emphasized that the case should not hang on distinctions about whether the failure to buy insurance should be defined as activity or inactivity, a question the Supreme Court has never considered. “The constitutionality of the minimum coverage provision cannot be resolved with a myopic focus on a malleable label,” the judges said.

In his concurrence, Judge Sutton added, “Inaction is action, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse, when it comes to financial risk.” Whether an individual buys an insurance policy or not, the judge wrote, “each requires affirmative choices; one is no less active than the other; and both affect commerce.”

Judge Graham countered in his dissent that if the mandate was allowed, “it is difficult to see what the limits on Congress’s Commerce Clause authority would be.”

But the majority agreed with Neal K. Katyal, the acting United States solicitor general, who argued that individual choices not to buy insurance, when taken in aggregate, have clear commercial effects because they shift the cost of caring for the uninsured to other payers.

The judges adopted Mr. Katyal’s argument that because the need for health care is unpredictable, it is impossible for individuals to opt out of the market. And they agreed that cost-shifting was inevitable as long as the federal government required hospitals to treat those who show up with life-threatening conditions.

[American Patriot]

Yesterday set the tone for the coming insurrection.

[samizdat]

I cant vouch for the source- but has anyone else picked up on this expensive bbub?

Will the Mandatory Microchip in ObamaCare End Up Being the Mark of the Beast?

There's a pretty starling thing in the bill that 95% of Americans won't like.
ObamaCare has a microchip implant for you… The Obama Health care bill includes (under Class II, Paragraph 1, Section B) “(ii) a class II device that is implantable”. Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1, section B:

14 (B) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to
15 information respecting a device described in paragraph (1),
16 including claims data, patient survey data, standardized
17 analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of
18 data from disparate data environments, electronic health
19 records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the
20 Secretary

As approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.”

This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. With the reform of the private insurance companies, many people will switch their coverage to a more affordable insurance plan. This means the number of people who choose the public option will increase. This also means the number of people chipped will be plentiful as well. The adults who choose to have a chip implanted are the lucky (yes, lucky) ones in this case. Children who are "born in the United States who at the time of birth is not otherwise covered under acceptable coverage" will be qualified and placed into the CHIP or Children's Health Insurance Program (what a convenient name). With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child. Children conceived by parents who are already covered under the public option will more than likely be implanted with a chip by the consent of the parent.

[Backstop]

Best sell your house soon, Rick.

http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/oba...are-taxes-home

ObamaCare Flatlines: ObamaCare Taxes Home Sales - Clobbers Middle-Class Americans
Posted April 8, 2010

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes,”
President Obama, September 12, 2008

Beginning January 1, 2013, ObamaCare imposes a 3.8% Medicare tax on unearned income of “high-income” taxpayers which could apply to proceeds from the sale of single family homes, townhouses, co-ops, condominiums, and even rental income, depending on your individual circumstances and any capital gains tax exclusions. Importantly, the “high income” thresholds are not indexed for inflation so will reach increasing numbers of middle-class taxpayers over time.

In February 2010, 5.02 million homes were sold, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR). On any given day, the sale of a house, townhome, condominium, co-op, or income from a rental property could slam middle-income families with a new tax they can’t afford.

This new ObamaCare tax is the first time the government will apply a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income. This new tax on home sales and unearned income and other Medicare taxes raise taxes more than $210 billion to pay for ObamaCare. The National Association of Realtors called this new Medicare tax on unearned income “destructive” and “ill-advised” and warned it would hurt job creation.

[American Patriot]

Sons-of-Bitches.

[Backstop]

Even if Zero doesn't get re-elected, I fear his "legacy" will still push us over the financial edge.

[American Patriot]

Just in.

1th Circuit Court has UPHELD a lower court ruling that the "individual mandate" for health Care is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

They don't have all the details, but apparently only that portion of Obamacare was found to be unconstitutional. The rest "may stand".

[Backstop]

sami, I'd sure like to see a source or 2 for that microchip article.

Regardless, they can kiss my ass; no one is gonna stick a chip in me.

Ever.

[American Patriot]

I posted something on that this morning Backstop. I don't remember where.

Or maybe I read it. I don't know. I've been busy and trying to find good stuff today to post.

[American Patriot]

(No, I READ Sami's stuff, then I found some stuff about printed circuits on the skin, which I posted under the Tyranny section of the site)

[samizdat]

sami, I'd sure like to see a source or 2 for that microchip article.

The article came from tldm, I was too lazy to look further. Don't really give a shit.

Anyway- the chips are down for bama care in the appeals court.

WND has a decent article.

"While this is a very real potential repercussion, it is not, currently the case," said the analysis written by USJF staff attorney Chris Tucker.

Tucker explained that the legislation's reference to "devices" focuses on the medical device, not the person.

"The language of this section makes it very clear that the Secretary of Health and Human Services … is given broad power over the collection of data pertaining to medical devices," he wrote.

"No part of [the health care bill] explicitly calls for the mandatory implantation of medical recording or tracking devices into individuals," he said.

However, the door was opened, he concluded.



http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=140545

[vector7]

Futuristic tattoos can monitor health, link you to the web


John Rogers/Handout Photo

"Smart Skin" is electronics that sticks and stretches like a temporary tattoo.

Postmedia News Aug 11, 2011 – 6:27 PM ET | Last Updated: Aug 11, 2011 6:29 PM ET

By Beatrice Fantoni

You don’t have to look like a Star Trek Borg to wear skin-mounted electronics.

A team of scientists and engineers at the University of Illinois has developed a “smart skin” that can be used to connect wearers to the cyber-world as easily as sticking on a temporary tattoo.

The smart skin can monitor your heart rate or brain waves, for example, or detect the electric activity in muscle contractions and send the signals to a computer, without stick-on electrodes, bulky wires, conductive gels, tape or skin-penetrating pins.

Just a few centimetres wide and thinner than a human hair, the smart skin could make monitoring people’s physiological status more comfortable and more accurate than using electrodes because it stays stuck to the skin and doesn’t interfere with the wearer’s movement, the researchers say.

“Wires and patches are not the best way to do things,” said John Rogers, a professor of material science and engineering at the University of Illinois, who led the research.

Rogers and his team used tiny, flexible wires comparable to those in silicone circuits, and see-through silicone to make a fine mesh circuit that can stick on with water. It bends, wrinkles and stretches with the skin. It detects what’s happening underneath the surface and sends signals to a computer.

These “wearable electronics” are described in the Aug. 12 issue of the journal Science.

Imagine video gaming with just a temporary tattoo and your voice. By wearing the smart skin on your throat, Rogers said, the patch can read the electrical activity of the muscle contractions when you say “up,” “down,” “left,” or “right” and send the command to the game.

The uses for the product in the health field are more compelling. As with a video game, people could use the smart skin to send commands to a prosthetic device, Rogers said. It could help develop new and less cumbersome technology to help people who cannot speak.

Smart skin patches could make it easier to monitor newborn babies or people with sleep disorders because they are gentler than stick-on, point-contact electrodes and you can’t feel them, Rogers said.

There might also be a use for the smart skin in physical rehabilitation, Rogers added. “You can imagine . . . a device that laminates onto a portion of muscle that is atrophied or onto a wound site and can electrically stimulate muscle contraction,” he said.

While it’s still “early days,” Rogers said he and his colleagues are already working to fine-tune the smart skin for clinical use.

At the same time, they are developing the smart skin’s Wi-Fi capabilities so the patches can connect to a monitoring device without the need for ribbon cables.

[American Patriot]

Already posted that Vector.

[vector7]

Oops, I see it now.

Scientists develop tattoo-like monitoring device

Can I move it over there?

"Smart Skin" is electronics that sticks and stretches like a temporary tattoo.

A tattoo "mark" is something I've hear of before and the path it's rumored to be going down won't be good for freedoms either.

[American Patriot]

Oops, I see it now.

Scientists develop tattoo-like monitoring device

Can I move it over there?


A tattoo "mark" is something I've hear of before and the path it's rumored to be going down won't be good for freedoms either.

Naw, don't have to lol

Was just pointing out I'd posted it in relation to something else. LOL

[Ryan Ruck]

Health Overhaul Law Suffers First Major Casualty

October 15, 2011

The Obama administration's signature health overhaul law, under relentless assault by Republicans, has suffered its first major casualty - a long-term care insurance plan.

The program, expected to launch in 2012, had been dogged from the beginning by doubts over its financial solvency.

Proponents, including many groups that fought to pass the health care law, have vowed a vigorous effort to rescue the program, insisting that Congress gave the administration broad authority to make changes. Long-term care includes not only nursing homes, but such services as home health aides for disabled people.

"This is a victory for the American taxpayer and future generations," said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., spearheading opposition in the Senate. "The administration is finally admitting (the long-term care plan) is unsustainable and cannot be implemented."

Known as CLASS, the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports program was a long-standing priority of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

Although sponsored by the government, it was supposed to function as a self-sustaining voluntary insurance plan, open to working adults regardless of age or health. Workers would pay an affordable monthly premium during their careers and could collect a modest daily cash benefit of at least $50 if they became disabled later in life. The money could go for services at home or to help with nursing home bills.

But a central design flaw dogged CLASS. Unless large numbers of healthy people willingly sign up during their working years, soaring premiums driven by the needs of disabled beneficiaries would destabilize it, eventually requiring a taxpayer bailout.

After months insisting that could be fixed, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finally acknowledged Friday she doesn't see how.

"Despite our best analytical efforts, I do not see a viable path forward for CLASS implementation at this time," Sebelius said in a letter to congressional leaders.

The law required the administration to certify that CLASS would remain financially solvent for 75 years before it could be put into place.

But officials said they discovered they could not make CLASS both affordable and financially solvent while keeping it a voluntary program open to virtually all workers, as the law also required.

Monthly premiums would have ranged from $235 to $391, even as high as $3,000 under some scenarios, the administration said. At those prices, healthy people were unlikely to sign up. Suggested changes aimed at discouraging enrollment by people in poor health could have opened the program to court challenges, officials said.

"If healthy purchasers are not attracted ... then premiums will increase, which will make it even more unattractive to purchasers who could also obtain policies in the private market," Kathy Greenlee, the lead official on CLASS, said in a memo to Sebelius. That "would cause the program to quickly collapse."

That's the same conclusion a top government expert reached in 2009. Nearly a year before the health care law passed, Richard Foster, head of long-range economic forecasts for Medicare, warned administration and congressional officials that CLASS would be unworkable. His warnings were disregarded, as President Barack Obama declared his support for adding the long-term care plan to his health care bill.

The demise of CLASS immediately touched off speculation about its impact on the federal budget. Although no premiums are likely to be collected, the program still counts as reducing the federal deficit by about $80 billion over the next 10 years. That's because of a rule that would have required workers to pay in for at least five years before they could collect any benefits.

"The CLASS Act was a budget gimmick that might enhance the numbers on a Washington bureaucrat's spreadsheet but was destined to fail in the real world," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Administration officials said Obama's next budget would reflect the decision not to go forward. Even without CLASS premiums, they said the health care law will still reduce the deficit by more than $120 billion over 10 years.

Kennedy's original idea was to give families some financial breathing room. Most families cannot afford to hire a home health aide for a frail elder, let alone pay nursing home bills. Care is usually provided by family members, often a spouse who may also have health problems.

"We're disappointed that (Sebelius) has prematurely stated she does not see a path forward," AARP, the seniors lobby, said in a statement. "The need for long-term care will only continue to grow."

Sebelius said the administration wants to work with Congress and supporters of the program to find a solution. But in a polarized political climate, it appears unlikely that CLASS can be salvaged. Congressional Republicans remain committed to its repeal.