A Year in Review: Obamacare in Pictures

by on

Obamacare flatline

As health care becomes an increasingly debated topic, it is critically important for every American to understand the impact of Obamacare. The Heritage Foundation’s newly updated “Obamacare in Pictures: Visualizing the Effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” shows through charts and graphs Obamacare’s far-reaching negative effects on all Americans.

Here are a few examples of what the chart series depicts:

  • Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare. Obamacare cut $716 billion out of the Medicare program to pay for new spending in Obamacare. These cuts come from Medicare Advantage, hospice services, nursing homes, and more. Taking this money out of Medicare will have serious implications on seniors’ ability to access care. For instance, the Medicare Actuary predicts that by 2017, 50 percent of the seniors enrolled in Medicare Advantage—7.4 million—will have to leave their private plans and move into traditional Medicare—which offers less generous benefits, no cap on catastrophic costs, and separate plans for drug coverage.
  • 18 new taxes and penalties. Obamacare includes 18 new taxes and penalties that will cost Americans $836 billion by 2022. Many of these will fall heavily on the middle class, including the much debated individual mandate tax. Nearly 70 percent of those responsible for paying the individual mandate tax will have incomes below 400 percent of the federal poverty level, even a family of four making less than $24,600 a year in 2016 could be subject to this egregious tax.
  • The states’ cost of a Medicaid expansion. The Obama Administration is pushing states to expand their Medicaid programs to the new Obamacare level. This graphic shows how much an expansion is likely to cost each state—and it certainly isn’t “free.”
  • Premiums continue to rise. One of the boldest promises President Obama made when advocating his health care law was that premiums would significantly drop for American families. Thus far, that hasn’t happened. Premiums have increased by almost $2,000 for families with employer-sponsored coverage over the last two years.
  • 30 million Americans will remain uninsured. Obamacare’s main provisions expand health coverage by increasing enrollment in Medicaid and offering subsidies in the new government exchanges. Despite spending $1.68 trillion on these coverage expansion provisions over the next 10 years, Obamacare leaves 30 million Americans uninsured in 2022.

Muth’s Truths: Inconvenient Truths Hidden by New Assault on “Assault Weapons”

by on

Chuck Muth

by Chuck Muth

In a guest column titled “Fundamental rights must be limited,” published by the Las Vegas Review-Journal on December 26, former Nevada Attorney General George Chanos maintains that a ban on “assault weapons” is “a reasonable, necessary and appropriate limitation on our rights under the Second Amendment.”

This, of course, is in response to Adam Lanza’s horrific murder of 26 innocent people in Newtown, Connecticut – including 20 defenseless little children; defenseless because no one at the school was armed with the ability to shoot back.

Mr. Chanos, a highly regarded and extremely accomplished lawyer, wrote:

“Ultimately, the battle to ban assault weapons will end at the U.S. Supreme Court.  Hopefully, the Justices will agree that even our most fundamental rights, such as those found in the Second Amendment, have certain essential and inherent limitations – limitations which are necessitated by certain equally important rights, such as the rights of a 6-year-old to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Rights that are undeniably infringed upon, at least to some extent, by allowing unfettered rights under the Second Amendment.”

Now, I’m no lawyer, but I couldn’t disagree more.

The rights of the children and adults who were killed in Newtown weren’t infringed upon by the right to BEAR arms; the rights of those people were infringed upon by the illegal USE of such weapons.  Indeed, the rights of the victims to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness would have been infringed upon had they been killed by a knife, an axe, a bomb, a baseball bat or even strangulation.

It’s the act of killing which is illegal, not possessing the means of inflicting death.

Which brings me to a couple other semi-related issues, all of which are VERY touchy.

On Thursday, the body of another innocent child, 10-year-old Jade Morris, was found in the desert in North Las Vegas.  The likely killer, a deranged animal named Brenda Stokes, reportedly stabbed the little girl to death on the same day she sliced up a co-worker’s face with a pair of razor blades at the Bellagio.

Should we now ban “assault knives” and “assault razor blades”?

Secondly, the Las Vegas Review-Journal also reports the suspect “wasn’t taking her Xanax prescription the day of the attack.”

So before we launch another national gun control – yes, GUN CONTROL, not “gun safety” – campaign, shouldn’t we have an honest conversation about the wisdom of allowing potentially violent people on psychoactive drugs – drugs which they can stop taking at any time without the community knowing about it – to roam freely amongst the population?

Instead of controlling gun possession, shouldn’t we be focusing more on controlling people in our society who we know are potential “walking time bombs”?

Yeah, sphincter-clenching question, right?  But that’s not the real red-hot potato.  Here goes…

Divorce.

Adam Lanza’s parents were divorced.   So are/were the parents of a lot of violent criminals.  Is it time, maybe, to re-evaluate the wisdom of granting automatic no-fault divorces during child-rearing years?

And I pose that question as someone whose parents divorced while my siblings and I were growing up, yet none of us has killed anyone (yet).  But isn’t this a serious societal problem we should be talking more seriously and openly about?

Or if you really want to hit a raw nerve, how about a discussion on the potential ramifications of single motherhood/fatherless households?

Indeed, Wade Horn, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families for the Department of Health and Human Services under President George W. Bush, noted in a Hudson Institute study that “Among long-term prison inmates, 70 percent grew up without fathers, as did 60 percent of rapists and 75 percent of adolescents charged with murder.”

Or maybe it’s time to talk about the effects on children who are being raised during the day by non-family child-care workers.

No, we do NOT want to go there, do we?

Think about it.  Which is easier for our “courageous” elected leaders in Washington to do:

1.) Go to war with the pharmaceutical industry over tighter controls of psychoactive drugs?

2.) Go to war with society over possibly re-tightening our divorce laws?

3.) Re-stigmatizing out-of-wedlock births?

4.) Discouraging the outsourcing of parenthood?

5.) Or banning “assault weapons”?

Exactly.  Because each and every one of us either falls into one of the first four categories or knows close friends or relatives who do – none of whom are going to go on a murderous rampage in a gun-free public school anytime in the near future.

So gun control it is!

And one final thought so I can successfully irritate just about every liberal in the country today (and a fair amount of conservatives, as well)…

Did you read about the guy in New York, William Spengler, who set a house on fire last week and ambushed the firefighters who showed up to battle the blaze, killing two of them?

Existing law, by the way, prohibited this human piece of garbage from possessing the guns he used in the shootings. So he just had a friend buy them for him.  Real effective law, huh?  Yeah, let’s pass some more, right?

But that’s not the point.

You see, Spengler had served 17 years in prison for killing his grandmother in 1980 – not with a gun, but by beating her to death with a hammer.  Time to ban “assault hammers”?

But that’s not the point either.

The point is, we, as a society, have moved away from “take a life; lose a life.”  And for those who claim, stupidly, that the death penalty is not a deterrent, allow me to point out the obvious…

Had Mr. Spengler been executed for murdering his grandmother instead of being paroled 17 relatively short years later, he absolutely, positively, without a shadow of doubt, would have been completely and totally deterred from killing those two firefighters!

Instead of coddling cold-blooded murderers in prisons at taxpayer expense, perhaps it’s time to again embrace “eye for an eye” as punishment and send a powerful message to future would-be killers?

I say yes.  And we start by executing child-killer Brenda Stokes, in the most excruciatingly painful manner possible, within 24 hours after her final, expedited appeal is over…preferably by Labor Day.

And do it in public.

Beats limiting a fundamental right, wouldn’t you agree?

Cliff Notes: The Price of Politics

by on

fiscal cliff

Cliff Notes: The Price of Politics

After months of warning Americans of the devastating economic consequences of going off the cliff, all we’ve seen from Congress is more grandstanding, more press conferences and the same sticking points we’ve known about for more than a year. Now, according to recent reports, some in Washington believe the politics of going off the fiscal cliff could be better for their own self-interests than actually finding a solution. So if going over the cliff is better than a raw deal, Americans should be asking who exactly it’s better for—them or the politicians?

WASHINGTON PUTTING POLITICS AHEAD OF THE ECONOMY

Politicans Likely To Benefit From Going Over Fiscal Cliff:

Going Off the Cliff Might Be A Good Thing – But Only For Lawmakers. “Washington’s Democratic and Republican power brokers have sent the message to the nation that going over the fiscal cliff is a worst-case scenario. But they’re not acting that way, not at all. Instead, many of them have calculated that it’s better to go over the cliff — at least temporarily — than swallow a raw deal.” (Jonathan Allen, “Why They Want to Go Over the Cliff,” Politico, 12/28/12)

Both Sides Playing The Blame Game, Acting In Own Political Self-Interests: “Both sides are playing blame-game politics, with no budget deal in sight just days before the year-end deadline. … The capital’s politicians seem wedded to acting in their own self-interest, rather than the national interest, even as we barrel toward a fiscal train wreck.” (Howard Kurtz, “Parties Resort To Finger-Pointing As U.S. Heads Over Fiscal Cliff,” The Daily Beast, 12/28/12)

Republicans Can Blame Obama For Big Tax Hike And Later Vote For “Tax Cuts.” “For many Republicans, a cliff dive means blaming President Barack Obama for a big tax hike in the short term and then voting to cut taxes for most Americans next month. That’s an easier sell back home in Republican-heavy districts than a pre-cliff deal that raises taxes on folks making over $250,000 or $400,000, extends unemployment benefits and does little if anything to curb entitlement spending. If they back a bad deal now, they run the risk of facing primary challenges in two years.” (Jonathan Allen, “Why They Want to Go Over the Cliff,” Politico, 12/28/12)

Democrats See Greater Room For Negotiating With Republicans Post-Cliff Dive. “For Democrats, the cliff is better than setting a rich man’s cutoff in the million-dollar range — or worse yet, extending the Bush tax cuts for all earners — and slashing Medicare and Social Security to appease Republicans. They, too, see an advantage in negotiating with Republicans who will feel freed from their promise not to vote to raise taxes once the rates have already gone up.” (Jonathan Allen, “Why They Want to Go Over the Cliff,” Politico, 12/28/12)

Obama Approval Rating Up, Republicans Down. Why Cave To GOP? “Obama’s polling in the mid-50s on his handling of the fiscal cliff situation, according to Gallup. Republicans are mired in the 20s. Why cave to the GOP when the president is winning?” (Jonathan Allen, “Why They Want to Go Over the Cliff,” Politico, 12/28/12)

DAYS AWAY FROM FISCAL CLIFF, WASHINGTON TWIDDLES THUMBS

Congress Playing Politics As Usual, No New Ideas To Avoid Cliff:

Days Left To Avert Cliff And Congress Shows No Urgency. “[W]ith days left before the fiscal punch lands, both sides are exhibiting little sense of urgency, and new public statements Wednesday appeared to be designed more to ensure the other side is blamed rather than to foster progress toward a deal.” (Jonathan Weisman, Jennifer Steinhauer, “Senators to Return With 5 Days Left and No Clear Fiscal Path,” New York Times, 12/26/12)

Lawmakers Revert To Old Bargaining Positions. “So, with just five days to go before some $600 billion in tax hikes and spending cuts take hold, congressional leaders are hunkering down in bargaining positions back to where they were before the August break.” (Gail Russell Chaddock, “’Fiscal cliff’: Finger-pointing furiously, Congress slouches toward deadline,” Christian Science Monitor, 12/27/12)

Congress Returns From Vacation Only To Resume Gridlock. “Democrats and Republicans snarled across a partisan divide and showed no sign of compromise to avoid year-end tax increases and spending cuts.” (“Congress bickers over ‘fiscal cliff’ as Obama cuts vacation short, returns to White House,” Associated Press,  12/26/12)

WHAT ABOUT ALL WASHINGTON’S PROMISES OF COMPROMISE A MONTH AGO?

Washington Is All Talk And No Action On Bargaining:

Obama Promised “Action,” No More “Politics As Usual” After Election-Night Win. “’Tonight, you voted for action, not politics as usual,’ Obama said.” (Christi Parsons and Kathleen Hennessey, “Obama pledges ‘not politics as usual’ in second term,” LA Times, 11/6/12)

Boehner Post-Election: There’s A “Mandate For Us To Find A Way To Work Together.” “If there’s a mandate in yesterday’s results, it’s a mandate for us to find a way to work together on solutions to the challenges we all face as a nation.”—House Speaker John Boehner (video: “John Boehner: There’s a Mandate to Work Together,” ABC News, 11/8/12)

Obama: Let’s Get A Fiscal Cliff Deal By Christmas. “’I believe that both parties can agree on a framework that does that in the coming weeks. In fact, my hope is to get this done before Christmas,’ Obama said.” (Mark Felsenthal, “President Hopes For Deficit Deal By Christmas,” Reuters, 11/28/12)

Reid: We Don’t Have To Fight. “Everything doesn’t have to be a fight. That is the way it’s been the last couple of years.”—Sen. Harry Reid (Josh Levs and Tom Cohen, “Re-elected Obama plunges into debate about deficit,” CNN, 11/8/12)

Obama: “[W]e Can’t Risk Partisan Bickering And Political Posturing.” “’The nation, as you know, is at a critical point,’ [President Obama] said. ‘At a time like this, we can’t risk partisan bickering and political posturing. Our leaders have to reach across the aisle to do the people’s work.’” (Josh Levs and Tom Cohen, “Re-elected Obama plunges into debate about deficit,” CNN, 11/8/12)

AMERICANS BRACING FOR THE IMPACT OF THE FISCAL CLIFF

Cash-Strapped Parents “Terrified,” Small-Business Owners Worried. “Cash-strapped parents are terrified they won’t be able to buy essential items for their children if tax credits are slashed by half. Wall Street brokers are afraid that higher taxes will lead investors to pump less money into the economy. And small-business owners worry they’ll have to cut staff and implement hiring freezes.” (“NYers brace for full impact of fiscal cliff,” New York Post, 12/28/12)

American Paychecks Set To Shrink. “After strong gains in income in November, American households will see their paychecks shrink a bit when a two-year payroll tax ‘holiday’ expires Dec. 31.” (John W. Schoen, “Consumers, businesses brace for ‘fiscal cliff’ impact,” NBC News, 12/27/12)

Going Over The Cliff Means A $3,500 Increase In Annual Taxes For The Average American. “The Tax Policy Center estimates that the combined effect of the tax hikes will raise taxes by an incredible $500bn over the next decade, which means a $3,500 increase in the yearly tax bill for the average American.” (Heidi Moore, “Fiscal cliff: what happens if Congress can’t strike a deal?” The Guardian, 12/28/12)

U.S. Senator Roy Blunt Delivers Weekly Republican Address

by on

www.youtube.com screen capture 2012-12-31-8-46-47

On Friday the White House and Congressional leaders agreed that the Senate must now act to avoid going over the fiscal cliff and that this will require a bipartisan approach. In the Weekly Republican Address, U.S. Senator Roy Blunt (R-MO), Vice Chairman of the Republican Conference, highlights that effort and notes that lawmakers have an opportunity to kick off the New Year by working together to solve some of the big challenges facing our country today.

“Hi, I’m Senator Roy Blunt from Missouri. As we bring 2012 to a close, leaders in Washington have an opportunity to kick off the New Year by working together to solve some of the big challenges facing our country today.

“At a time when our federal debt’s topped a record $16 trillion, it’s been more than three years since the Democrat leaders in the Senate have passed a federal budget, and the Senate Majority Leader has refused to bring any appropriations bills to the floor this entire year. There’s an old saying that when you fail to plan, you plan to fail, and that’s exactly what they’ve been doing.

“Meanwhile, small businesses and farm families don’t know how to deal with the unfair death tax—a tax that the President and congressional leaders have threatened to expand to include even more family farms and even more small businesses.

“More American energy means more American jobs. But unfortunately, energy projects in the United States are being held back by federal obstacles of all kinds, and the Keystone XL Pipeline been hanging in the balance because President Obama has refused to move forward on what should have been an easy decision for more energy and more jobs.

“Republicans hope to work across the aisle to solve these and other critical challenges facing America in the New Year. Divided government is a good time to solve hard problems—and in the next few days, leaders in Washington have an important responsibility to work together and do just that.

“Unless Congress and the President act immediately, every American will be forced to pay for the largest tax hike in our nation’s history on January 1st. At the same time, the federal government—including our Armed Forces and defense workers—will undergo deep, across-the-board budgetary cuts. Remember, these are cuts that President Obama promised during the campaign would never take effect. And while we need to reduce spending, we can do it in a much smarter, more targeted way.

“Economists not representing either political party have continually warned that going over the so-called fiscal cliff will lead to devastating job losses at a time when American families and small business owners are still struggling to get back on their feet. In contrast, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that extending tax rates for all Americans would create nearly 1.8 million jobs and increase the nation’s Gross Domestic Product by almost 1.5 percent next year.

“Every American taxpayer got a tax cut in 2001, and those tax cuts were good for the economy and good for families. Congress’ action to make the first tax bracket 10 percent instead of 15 percent, double the child tax credit, and deal with the marriage penalty in the tax code made a real difference to a whole lot of American families.

“Fortunately, going over the fiscal cliff is avoidable. There’s not much time, but there’s still time to act. Both President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid have claimed that an achievable plan is one that can pass both houses of Congress and Republicans agree.

“The Republican-controlled House has taken a step in the right direction. The House has already passed bills to protect all Americans from burdensome tax increases. In addition, they’ve passed legislation to replace damaging across-the-board spending cuts with responsible targeted ones, and to bring our nation’s record debt under control. But instead of working across the aisle and considering the House-passed plan to protect taxpayers, Senate Democrats have spent months drawing partisan lines in the sand.

“The President’s proposal to raise taxes on the top 2 percent of Americans won’t even pay one-third of the annual interest that’s now owed on this massive $16 trillion debt. In fact, the President’s tax hike would only fund the government for eight days. Americans deserve to know: What does the President propose we do for the other 357 days of the year?

“Inaction shouldn’t be an option. The problems facing our country are big, but they’re not necessarily all that complicated. The President will never have more political capital than he does right now, and the next few days will begin to define his second term. He was elected to lead.

“We still can avoid going over the fiscal cliff if the President and the Democrat-controlled Senate step forward this week and work with Republicans to solve this problem and solve it now.”