Obama Care, How Will Be Judged On Thursday?

The Top Ten Worst Things in Obamacare


By Grace-Marie Turner

June 28, 2012 5:17 P.M.




“We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

— Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 2010

Now, all the rest of us are going to find out a lot more about what’s in the 2,700-page health overhaul law.

The president now must spend the next four months defending a law that the majority of Americans dislike, and the more they learn about it, the more they dislike it. Worse, the part of the law that is the least popular — the individual mandate — has now been declared a tax.

That’s double jeopardy for the president: The unpopular mandate stands, and it is called a tax. (And this is only one of the 20 new and higher taxes in the law.) Either the president admits it’s a tax as a way of keeping the law on the books, or he says that the Supreme Court is wrong, that it’s not a tax, in which case his law would be invalid.

It’s important to note that the Court did not “uphold Obamacare.” Two specific provisions were being challenged before the Court — the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. If either had been struck, then the Court could have decided whether or not to take down the whole law.

Instead, it reached a very narrow decision. The individual mandate is valid as a tax, says the Court. Now, otherwise free citizens will be required to spend our own personal, after-tax money to purchase an expensive private product — $20,000 a year for an average family — or pay a tax. And the Court said the federal government can tell states to dramatically expand their Medicaid programs but that they can’t be coerced with the threat of losing all of their federal Medicaid money if they refuse.

So let’s get ready for the debate. About seven in ten Americans had told pollsters they wanted the Supreme Court to strike down all or part of the health overhaul law. Since it didn’t do that, we all must be armed with the facts as the battles continue at least into November so the voters can issue the final verdict.

Here’s a quick checklist of the ten worst things in the law — in addition to the individual and Medicaid mandates:

1. Employer mandate. Most companies will have to provide and pay for expensive government-determined health insurance for their employees or face federal fines.

2. Anti-conscience mandate. Religious organizations will be required to provide free sterilization, contraceptives, and abortion-inducing drugs to their employees, even if it violates their religious beliefs.

3. New and higher taxes.The law contains at least 20 new taxes totaling $500 billion that will hit medical innovators, health insurance, and even the sale of your home.

4. The Independent Payment Advisory Board. IPAB will still stand, with its rationing power over Medicare.

5. State exchanges. States will be compelled to set up vast new bureaucracies to check into our finances and families so they can hand out generous taxpayer subsidies for health insurance to families earning up to $90,000 a year.

6. Medicare payment cuts. $575 billion in payment reductions to Medicare providers and Medicare Advantage plans will cause more and more physicians to stop seeing Medicare patients, exacerbating access problems.

7. Higher health-care costs. The Kaiser Family Foundation says the average price of a family policy has risen by $2,200 during the Obama administration. The president promised premiums would be $2,500 lower by this year. Hospitals, doctors, businesses, and consumers all expect their taxes and health costs to rise under Obamacare.

8. Government control over doctor decisions.Value-based payments, quality reporting requirements, and government comparative-effectiveness boards will dictate how doctors practice medicine. Nearly half of all physicians are seriously considering leaving practice, leading to a severe doctor shortage.

9. Huge deficits. The CBO has raised its cost estimate for the law to $1.76 trillion over ten years, but that is only the opening bid as more and more people lose their job-based coverage and flood into taxpayer-subsidized insurance. At this rate, the cost will be $2 trillion, not the less than $1 trillion the president promised.

10. 159 new boards, agencies, and programs: The Obama administration will work quickly to set up as many of the law’s new bureaucracies as fast as it can so they can take root before the election.
 
The Top Ten Worst Things in Obamacare


By Grace-Marie Turner

June 28, 2012 5:17 P.M.




“We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

— Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 2010

Now, all the rest of us are going to find out a lot more about what’s in the 2,700-page health overhaul law.

The president now must spend the next four months defending a law that the majority of Americans dislike, and the more they learn about it, the more they dislike it. Worse, the part of the law that is the least popular — the individual mandate — has now been declared a tax.

That’s double jeopardy for the president: The unpopular mandate stands, and it is called a tax. (And this is only one of the 20 new and higher taxes in the law.) Either the president admits it’s a tax as a way of keeping the law on the books, or he says that the Supreme Court is wrong, that it’s not a tax, in which case his law would be invalid.

It’s important to note that the Court did not “uphold Obamacare.” Two specific provisions were being challenged before the Court — the individual mandate and the Medicaid expansion. If either had been struck, then the Court could have decided whether or not to take down the whole law.

Instead, it reached a very narrow decision. The individual mandate is valid as a tax, says the Court. Now, otherwise free citizens will be required to spend our own personal, after-tax money to purchase an expensive private product — $20,000 a year for an average family — or pay a tax. And the Court said the federal government can tell states to dramatically expand their Medicaid programs but that they can’t be coerced with the threat of losing all of their federal Medicaid money if they refuse.

So let’s get ready for the debate. About seven in ten Americans had told pollsters they wanted the Supreme Court to strike down all or part of the health overhaul law. Since it didn’t do that, we all must be armed with the facts as the battles continue at least into November so the voters can issue the final verdict.

Here’s a quick checklist of the ten worst things in the law — in addition to the individual and Medicaid mandates:

1. Employer mandate. Most companies will have to provide and pay for expensive government-determined health insurance for their employees or face federal fines.

2. Anti-conscience mandate. Religious organizations will be required to provide free sterilization, contraceptives, and abortion-inducing drugs to their employees, even if it violates their religious beliefs.

3. New and higher taxes.The law contains at least 20 new taxes totaling $500 billion that will hit medical innovators, health insurance, and even the sale of your home.

4. The Independent Payment Advisory Board. IPAB will still stand, with its rationing power over Medicare.

5. State exchanges. States will be compelled to set up vast new bureaucracies to check into our finances and families so they can hand out generous taxpayer subsidies for health insurance to families earning up to $90,000 a year.

6. Medicare payment cuts. $575 billion in payment reductions to Medicare providers and Medicare Advantage plans will cause more and more physicians to stop seeing Medicare patients, exacerbating access problems.

7. Higher health-care costs. The Kaiser Family Foundation says the average price of a family policy has risen by $2,200 during the Obama administration. The president promised premiums would be $2,500 lower by this year. Hospitals, doctors, businesses, and consumers all expect their taxes and health costs to rise under Obamacare.

8. Government control over doctor decisions.Value-based payments, quality reporting requirements, and government comparative-effectiveness boards will dictate how doctors practice medicine. Nearly half of all physicians are seriously considering leaving practice, leading to a severe doctor shortage.

9. Huge deficits. The CBO has raised its cost estimate for the law to $1.76 trillion over ten years, but that is only the opening bid as more and more people lose their job-based coverage and flood into taxpayer-subsidized insurance. At this rate, the cost will be $2 trillion, not the less than $1 trillion the president promised.

10. 159 new boards, agencies, and programs: The Obama administration will work quickly to set up as many of the law’s new bureaucracies as fast as it can so they can take root before the election.

:cool:
 
$95??? Are you fucking joking, here?

That's nothing. Where on earth did you get that ridiculously small number?

But... it doesn't matter. Even in your warped universe, yes. If you refuse to pay $95 that you owe the IRS, you will begin a process which, within a few years, will end with you in prison.

The IRS will not dance with you. They do not fuck around.

Once again, it's time for RobDownSouth to show the world just how stewpid Byron in Exile is!

Obamacare ain't no ordinary legislation, Stewpid Byron.

I refer you to page 336 in the legislation. (LINK to scribd document)

(3) LIMITATIONS ON LIENS AND LEVIES
.—The Secretary (or,if applicable, the Attorney General of the United States) shall not
(A) file notice of lien with respect to any property of a person by reason of any failure to pay the penalty imposed by this subsection; or
(B) levy on any such property with respect to such failure.

Ask our buddy Colonel Hogan about the legal ramifications of the wording "shall not" if you are still confused.

I'd ask for an apology from you, but we both know that as a homeskooled "only child" you are incapable of owning up to your mistakes.

...now tell everyone once again how much smarter you are than everyone else.
 
Actually many firms are (and have been) moving away from 1099 contractors and just hiring them as "temporary employees" due to government scrutiny to ensure that the contractors are not being taken advantage of. It also makes absolutely no sense as "temporary employees" don't get benefits, vacation days, etc. But firms are now far more concerned about the best legal status than before.

Temps may be the way to go.
 
Why does the GOP/Tea Party/Conservatives HATE children? Through out the ACA and so many children will be without coverage. For shame!!!!!!
 
Old And Busted: Obama Campaign Says Health Care Law Need To Help Uninsured — New And Hot: Obama Campaign Blasts Uninsured As “Free Riders”…




Under the bus you go.


“We shouldn’t have free riders, people driving up premiums, getting free care.”
 
ObamaCare Will Inflict Vast Array of Tax Increases


Despite the absurd ruling by turncoat Justice John Roberts of the Supreme Junta, the individual mandate is a power grab, not a tax — not that there is any shortage of taxes in ObamaCare, as Americans for Tax Reform documents:

1. Excise tax on charitable hospitals ($50,000 per hospital hike).
2. Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” ($4.5 billion tax hike).
3. “Black liquor” tax hike ($23.6 billion hike).
4. Tax on innovator drug companies ($2.3 billion).
5. Blue Cross/Blue Shield tax hike ($400 million).
6. Tax on indoor tanning services ($2.7 billion).
7. Medicine cabinet tax ($5 billion).
8. HSA withdrawal tax hike ($1.4 billion).
9. Employer reporting of insurance on W2.
10. Surtax on investment income ($123 billion).
11. Hike in Medicare payroll tax ($86.8 billion).
12. Tax on medical device manufacturers ($20 billion).
13. Raise haircut for medical itemized deduction ($15.2 billion).
14. Special needs kids tax ($13 billion).
15. Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage.
16. Annual executive compensation limit for health insurance executives ($600 million).
17. Individual mandate excise “tax”.
18. Employer mandate tax.
19. Tax on health insurers ($60.1 billion).
20. Excise tax on comprehensive health insurance plans ($32 billion).

In return for all the $billions upon $billions being looted from us, we get to watch vast armies of petty tyrant bureaucrats cut us off from our healthcare system.

Ramming ObamaCare down the country’s throat despite mass public resistance is the Manchurian Moonbat’s only achievement of any significance whatsoever. He ran on the incessantly repeated promise that he would not raise taxes “one dime” on 98% of Americans. That is, he ran on a brazen lie. Yet there are people who would vote for him again.
 
FACT: The number of home foreclosures is at an alltime high, with huge additional numbers paying underwater mortgages for homes they can barely afford now... inflicting a health care tax pushes this ahead of what these people need more (food/clothing/shelter), and while forcing them to buy what they don't need, forces them to go homeless to pay for it. What a great idea!
 
FACT: The number of home foreclosures is at an alltime high, with huge additional numbers paying underwater mortgages for homes they can barely afford now... inflicting a health care tax pushes this ahead of what these people need more (food/clothing/shelter), and while forcing them to buy what they don't need, forces them to go homeless to pay for it. What a great idea!
Nah, people don't need health insurance. They just need a good religion with a benevolent god to pray to.
 
Looks like Barack is having a problem with the word TAX in ObamaCare. Maybe Roberts hung a bell from the cats neck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Former CBO Director: SCOTUS Ruling Could Increase Cost of Obamacare By $500 Billion Over 10 Years…




Via WaPo:


Did the Supreme Court just make the Affordable Care Act much less affordable?

The calculations are complex, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said it will need some time to review the situation. But an early back-of-the-envelope analysis by a former CBO director suggests that Thursday’s ruling could sharply raise the cost of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin now serves as president of the conservative American Action Forum, which filed several amicus briefs in support of overturning the health-care law. Holtz-Eakin, who advised 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain before he lost to Obama, is no friend of the administration.

Still, he asks a relevant question: Given the terms of the ruling, what’s the worst-case scenario for the federal budget? His answer: around $50 billion a year.

“There’s real money at stake here,” Holtz-Eakin said.

How does it work? The Affordable Care Act seeks to cover the uninsured in two ways: It requires states to expand Medicaid to cover those earning less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level, with the federal government initially picking up the full tab (though federal funding would later fall to cover just 90 percent of the cost of expansion). It also creates new subsidies to help people at slightly higher income levels afford private insurance on new insurance exchanges.
 
It requires states to expand Medicaid to cover those earning less than 133 percent of the federal poverty level, with the federal government initially picking up the full tab (though federal funding would later fall to cover just 90 percent of the cost of expansion).

That was ruled unconstitutional, the Federal government cannot compel the state governments to expand Medicaid coverage. States can choose not to. The Feds had said if the states didn't do this, the Feds would withhold ALL funding reimbursements, and they were overruled in the decision, they cannot interfere in State business to that degree.
 
No, actually, most Americans do feel like I do.

And that's how this ruling could turn around and bite your hero Obama in the ass.

Actually, most Americans feel like *I* do!

A snap poll from Gallup shows Americans are evenly split on the Supreme Court’s ruling on President Obama’s signature legislative accomplishment, the 2010 Affordable Care Act. Forty-six percent said the Court made the right decision, while 46 percent said the disagreed with it. Indpendent voters were mostly likely to agree with the result by a small margin, 45 percent to 42 perecent.

(unlike you, I always supply a LINK)

Hey whaddya know, we're BOTH right!
 
Joe Wilson was ridiculed for telling Obama 'YOU LIE, but he has now been vindicated. Obama said there would be no new taxes on anyone making less than $250,000, and the Supreme Court now tells us ObamaCare is an entire bag full of new taxes, at least half on middle class families making less than $25K. Yes indeed, Obama lied bigtime...
 
Five Health Care Mandates Republicans Support

By Annie-Rose Strasser on Jun 29, 2012 at 2:10 pm

Republicans are in complete upheaval over Obamacare, fired up by the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law yesterday. They have continuously claimed that the government is ramming this legislation down the throats of the American people, and now they are calling it an unwanted financial burden on everyday Americans. In fact, the individual mandate — the portion of the law that Republicans most vociferously oppose — wouldn’t even affect most Americans.

It might be time for Republicans to take a look back at their own record of health care legislation that they did like — and that forced American people, particularly women, into a lot of things:

Forcing women to get transvaginal ultrasounds: Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell wanted to force every woman seeking an abortion to go through the extremely uncomfortable and medically unnecessary procedure of a transvaginal ultrasound — sticking a medical wand far into a woman’s vagina to get a clearer ultrasound image.

Ordering women to cremate and bury their miscarried fetus: A huge abortion omnibus bill in Michigan could force women who miscarry to cremate the miscarried fetuses. This comes at no small expense to the woman: cremation of a fetus costs hundreds of dollars, and interment can be additional thousands. The bill has been passed by the Michigan House, and is awaiting a vote by the Michigan Senate.

Requiring doctors to lie to female patients: In Kansas, Republicans tried to force doctors to tell women that they faced risk of cancer from having an abortion. That is patently untrue, and making doctors say that it was true would be, in effect, requiring them to lie to their patients.

Making a dying woman consult two doctors before she can get a life-saving abortion: The New Hampshire legislature just overrode a veto by the Governor, forcing through a law that bans “partial birth” abortions. The law only reinforces federal law, but has the additional requirement that any woman who is exempt from the abortion ban because her life is at risk must visit not one but two doctors before she can get the procedure to save her life. For many rural women, especially those facing life-threatening conditions, this is near impossible.

Mandating people pay extra to give medical device companies a tax break: Rep. Erik Paulsen (R-MN) worked so hard to protect medical device companies from having to pay, that he has instead passed their costs onto the consumer — regular Americans — by increasing the cost of health coverage.


http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/29/508902/health-mandates-republicans-support/
 
Truth is James this law shouldn't have been upheld under any article of the Constitution. Roberts should have joined the other four Justices and the whole damn monstrosity would have been struck down.

Instead Roberts saved Obama Care with a manufactured and incoherent construction that maintains the penalty is a tax. But, it is not a tax under the Constitution, its not a direct tax, not an excise tax, not an income tax, and Roberts could not apply any of those to the penalty in a way that makes any sense.

Since the Constitution enumerates the Congressional power to tax, and enumerates the kinds of taxes Congress may levy, if the tax isn't any of those three, the Congress is not permitted by the Constitution to levy it.

In this case the Congress maintained the penalty wasn't a tax, the word "tax" doesn't even appear in the text of the law. Government lawyers never maintained the penalty was a tax, arguing aggressively instead that it wasn't a tax, maintaining from start to finish that congressional authority was grounded in the Commerce Clause.

Roberts, instead of deciding the case on that assertion, comes to the rescue to legislate a tax from the bench. A tax not contemplated by the Congress, the law itself, or the government, and failing as well to define the kind of tax the penalty represents.

Roberts constructs an argument that never took place with this little jewel:

"the Commerce Clause does not give Congress that power.
It is therefore necessary to turn to the Government’s alternative argument: that the mandate may be upheld as within Congress’s power
to “lay and collect Taxes.”

The government, in this case, never made this argument.

The idea that inactivity cannot be regulated, but it can be taxed is an absurdity that does violence to our Constitution and our liberty. We can repeal the law, but how do we fix our Constitution?

I agree. I still think Roberts hung a tax bell on the cat, and got 4 Libs on the court to agree. I expect Boner will hold a vote to repeal the ObamaCare Tax & Spend Law before the election, then hang bells on all the Democrat cats in the House.

Roberts stuck Barack in an untenable position.

I agree with all your points, tho. And I expect ObamaCare Tax & Spend Law will go away.
 
It's a tax... and it's a tax on a depression economy.

There's an easy way to avoid the tax penalty associated with the ACA, buy some fucking health insurance. It's called personal responsibility. You know, that shit conservatives harp on constantly. For some reason when a law is passed that tells you that you MUST be personally responsible for your health insurance suddenly personal responsibility is a "Bad Thing™".

Insurance companies fucking LOVE ACA, because the number of people paying premiums for health insurance will increase dramatically. All of those 20-somethings that think they don't need health insurance because they're still "immortal" and immune to injury and disease, will be buying health insurance to avoid the tax penalty.

Two very important things about health insurance under ACA:
From Forbes:

1. Even the sickest of the sick cannot be turned down for health insurance coverage.
2. Having an illness has nothing to do with the price individuals will pay in insurance premiums.

Insurance premiums under the ACA will be determined based on only four factors:
1.Age – older people will pay more, but will not pay more than three times what the youngest person will pay.
2.Premium rating area – people who live in high cost health areas New York or Miami will pay more than people who live in lower cost areas like Palatka, Florida.
3.Family composition – the more people you have in your family, the more you will pay for coverage.
4.And finally, a lifestyle factor – tobacco use. Tobacco users pay 1.5 times what non-tobacco users pay.

So, if you have a health condition, you will be able to get insurance and your premiums won’t be any higher than a person of the same age who lives next door to you, unless you smoke. You can have heart disease, a history of cancer, an ingrown toenail, hemorrhoids, or any variety of conditions, and your premium will be equal to a person of the same age who is totally healthy and lives in your area.
 
Last edited:
Taxes Are The New Death Panels: Exposing The Latest Lie About Obamacare

By Igor Volsky posted from ThinkProgress Health on Jun 29, 2012 at 11:14 am

Republicans are responding to the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the individual mandate by constructing a new “death panels”-like lie. The law, they argue, imposes a burdensome tax on millions of middle class families who will have to pay a penalty for not purchasing health care coverage by 2014. The line originates in the majority’s decision, which found that Congress has the authority to require individuals to buy coverage under its taxing power, but it doesn’t mean what the Republicans are suggesting.

The truth is that the penalty for not buying insurance — $695 or 2.5 percent of household income — is well in line with other policies that are designed to encourage and promote a particular kind of economic behavior. On Friday morning, NBC’s Chuck Todd compared the penalty to a speeding ticket and asked House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) to distinguish between the two taxes. Cantor could not:

TODD: On the tax front quickly, is a speeding ticket a tax? By that same definition? You can avoid paying this tax if you get insurance. [...]

CANTOR: First of all, let me — I can’t respond to whether the speeding ticket would be considered a tax or not under the states’ authority any states’ authority. What I can tell you is the court came down on this issue decided that it was a tax to coerce some type of behavior.


In the case of health care, the law is offering an incentive for younger and healthier Americans to purchase health insurance coverage before they fall ill and pass on the costs of their treatments on to the government and other premium payers. Widespread take-up of coverage could cut government expenditures on uncompensated care in half. As Mitt Romney explained in 2006, “I don’t think the free market ever envisioned an idea that people would be able to do something and make other people pay for it.” And after successful implementation of reform in Massachusetts, few are.

On the federal level, the Congressional Budget Office is projecting that 30 million Americans will enroll in insurance as a result of the law, millions more will receive a tax cut to help them afford coverage, and of the remaining uninsured, “the majority of them will not be subject to the penalty“:

21 million nonelderly residents will be uninsured in 2016, but the majority of them will not be subject to the penalty. Unauthorized immigrants, for example, are exempted from the mandate to obtain health insurance. Others will be subject to the mandate but exempted from the penalty—for example, because they will have income low enough that they are not required to file an income tax return, because they are members of Indian tribes, or because the premium they would have to pay would exceed a specified share of their income (initially 8 percent in 2014 and indexed over time). CBO and JCT estimate that between 13 million and 14 million of the uninsured in 2016 will qualify for one or more of those exemptions. Of the remaining 7 million to 8 million uninsured, some individuals will be granted exemptions from the penalty because of hardship, and others will be exempted from the mandate on the basis of their religious beliefs. [...]

After accounting for all of those factors, CBO and JCT estimate that about 4 million people will pay a penalty because they will be uninsured in 2016 (a figure that includes uninsured dependents who have the penalty paid on their behalf).


Real world experience suggests that Americans are more likely to purchase insurance than pay the penalty for going without coverage. For instance, in Massachusetts, the only state with an insurance mandate, less than 1 percent of the state’s residents paid the penalty in 2009. Surveys of the uninsured have also found that an overwhelming majority — 76 percent of the uninsured — would rather comply with the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act and purchase insurance than pay the far less onerous penalty for forgoing it. Experts believe that “health insurance mandates differ from some other requirements, such as the requirement to pay taxes” because “enrollees individually receive a tangible good–health insurance—that they value.”

UPDATE

During a press conference call this afternoon, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber — who advised both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama on health care — stressed that less than 1 percent of (or 44,000 out of 6 million) Massachusetts residents are paying the penalty for not enrolling in health insurance. That fee helps the state fund the uncompensated care of people who become sick but don’t have personal insurance. Since Romneycare went into effect, “annual state spending for uncompensated care dropped by $118 million over the first five years of reform.”


http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/29/508794/taxes-are-the-new-death-panels-exposing-the-latest-lie-about-obamacare/
 
Back
Top