If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
THINKING ABOUT RE-ELECTION?
by Sharon Rondeau
(Sep. 10, 2013) — On August 29, The Post & Email published a letter from Rep. Joseph Courtney (D-CT2) indicating his continued support of “Obamacare,” the health care law from which unions, a myriad of private companies, and states have refused to embrace.
In his letter, Courtney stated that he was “opposed to repealing or defunding the law” and cited discounts which Connecticut seniors had allegedly received on prescription drugs resulting from Obamacare. Courtney called the law “imperfect,” but maintained that small businesses had already benefited from “tax credits” by the “billions.” Courtney’s Facebook page states that he supports the “Improving Access to Medicare Coverage Act (H.R. 1179).”
There is nothing in the U.S. Constitution which authorizes Congress to have passed a law mandating U.S. citizens to purchase anything, which is the principle on which Obamacare is based.
Large insurance companies including Aetna, CIGNA, and United Healthcare have opted not to participate in the state health insurance exchanges scheduled to begin on October 1. Some state exchanges will be run by a “partnership” with the federal government.
Although Obama promised to “build an economy that creates more good paying jobs in the fast-growing industries for hard-working Americans,” as reported on Monday, only 63% of working-age adults are employed, the lowest rate since 1978 under President Jimmy Carter. Many employers are reducing the hours of their employees to avoid having to participate in Obamacare.
As of February, only 17 states had chosen to set up their own insurance exchanges.
The law was challenged at the U.S. Supreme Court by 26 states and several businesses, but a 5-4 ruling joined by an apparently conflicted Chief Justice John Roberts, who reportedly wrote both the majority and minority opinions, upheld the “individual mandate” part of the law.
Along with the court’s opinion, Roberts included an unusual statement to the effect that if the people do not like a particular piece of legislation, they should take action at the ballot box to change their elected representatives.
There is speculation based on some factual evidence that Roberts was “intimidated” into upholding the law. The U.S. House of Representatives has voted several dozen times to repeal the law, but the Senate, led by Harry Reid, has held firm.
Analysts predicted months ago that the $716 billion which will not be spent on Medicare would be used for “new spending.” On Tuesday, the same source reported that Obamacare will result in fewer choices of medical facilities, physicians and treatment options. Reductions to Medicare Advantage, home health providers and in payments made to hospitals are also built into the law which Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) called “a train wreck.” Baucus was a proponent of the bill while it was in its early stages. He announced earlier this year that he will not seek re-election in 2014.
Many Americans have urged their congressmen to “defund” Obamacare through the congressional budget appropriations in October. Over the summer, Sens. Mike Lee and Ted Cruz have led a campaign called “Don’t Fund It.” A slogan appears on Lee’s website which reads, “You Fund It, You’re For It.”
Lee wrote a book as to why he believes Roberts made the wrong decision on Obamacare.
During the debate before passage of the law, prominent politicians voiced their concern about the creation of “death panels.” When former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin warned Americans that Obamacare’s inclusion of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) would decide life and death for the elderly and the sick, Obama called her “a liar.” However, The Washington Times reported on Tuesday that well-known progressives, including former presidential candidate Howard Dean, have affirmed “that Mrs. Palin was actually correct in her assessment — that the Independent Payment Advisory Board does indeed decide who receives care versus who does not. Many Democrats have since joined the call to repeal this particular aspect of Obamacare.”
National Review Online reports that the IPAB provision creates a “super-legislature” consisting of “up to 15 unelected government ‘experts’” who will have the authority to “raise taxes, spend money, place conditions on federal grants to states, and exercise other powers the Constitution reserves solely to Congress.” The IPAB was reportedly included in the bill to review and reduce Medicare costs but could become more powerful than Congress.
In George Orwell’s Animal Farm, Napoleon the pig sold Boxer the horse to a glue factory “for profit” rather than treat his illness, despite Boxer’s having been the hardest-working animal on the farm for years. Socialist and communist regimes decide who will live and die, depending on individual medical conditions and the cost to treat them, including infants.
In January, a proposal to abolish the IPAB, referred to as a “rationing board,” was introduced by Rep. Phil Roe of Tennessee.
While defending Obamacare overall to his constituents, Courtney supports Roe’s proposal as evidenced by a flyer mailed last week to his constituents.
The flyer reads:
Congressman Joe Courtney Supports the Protecting Seniors Access to Medicare Act (HR 351)
It will stop unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats from dictating your care and MAKES SURE NOTHING COMES BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR
making your medical decisions.
Courtney then says:
Here’s how you can say thanks:
CALL 860-741-6011 OR
On another page of the brochure, Courtney reports:
IPAB IS BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH CARE:
– MORE BUREAUCRACY AND LESS CONTROL: Creates a needless and unaccountable bureaucracy that comes between you and your doctor
– LIMITING ACCESS TO CARE: The IPAB bureaucrats could deny you the latest, most innovative care
– POSSIBLE CUTS TO MEDICARE REIMBURSEMENTS: Threatening patient care and pushing out doctors who want to accept Medicare patients
Another page shows the following:
At present, HR 351 is reported to have been referred to a committee, with a 12% chance of passing out of committee and 2% chance of becoming enacted, which requires a majority of the Congress and the president’s signature.
This writer has asked Courtney to launch an investigation into the long-form birth certificate image posted on the White House website deemed to be a forgery by experts, as Obama’s signature on the health care law and all other laws may not be valid.
Should Courtney be “thanked” or voted out?