Posts Tagged 'Abortion'

The Right to Taxpayer Funded Abortion

Imagine if Mitt Romney gets elected, makes polygamy legal and mandates mission trips for young people.  I think we would be pretty shocked at the bold establishment of religion coming from the white house.  Yet we did not have that same gut reaction when Obama established his religion from the white house and got it passed without the required majority support through budget reconciliation. 

This is why the conservative movement has been so unprepared to handle charges that they are oppressing women or denying people rights when we object to being forced to pay for abortion.  Being told that by me not paying for someone else’s birth control, I am denying them the right to birth control is like telling a jungle native that they must be born again and put Jesus in their heart.  It just doesn’t translate.  The argument that healthcare is a right and society must therefore provide it is so ridiculous that conservatives reject it automatically.  But for Obama and social justice, liberation Christians it is gospel truth.

I checked, healthcare isn’t in the constitution.  But neither are puppies, and there are certain things you just have to be cautious about when arguing against.

What is in the constitution is religion and guns.  In fact, the private ownership and practice of both are enumerated rights.  What if I am too poor to afford a gun?  What if my community is too poor to support a church?  How is it that social justice does not then require the government or society to purchase my gun for me?  And as simply as that, for the non-liberation theologian, the idea of society owing me healthcare is defeated.

So why doesn’t this concept fall so easily?  If you listen to the liberal argument, Georgetown is denying Sandra Fluke the right to birth control by not buying it for her.  The right has a “war on women” because we want to protect the religious liberty and conscience of churches and religious organizations.  Conservatives have already ceded the rights of the religious employer in a secular field.  And how easily we let go.  I often wonder if Ben Nelson, Democrat from Nebraska who sold his conscientious objection to abortion funding for an earmark, ever wishes he could buy back his soul.

To understand the religious connotations of social justice in healthcare and why this religion shamelessly trumps the constitution, you have to understand liberation theology and James Cone.  Cone was required reading at Obama’s church.  Cone divided his teaching into dogmatic and methodological teachings.  The dogmatic teaching was the paradox that there is no universal truth.  Not even revelation in the Scriptures is absolute truth.  In fact, God is not in control and the very evidence of that is the existence of racism.

Cone’s methodological approach was contextual-dialectic.  What this means is that scripture has value in the way it relates to the reader’s context.  For Cone, this meant that the value of scripture was how it confirmed his own perception of racism against blacks.  From his perspective, there was no value in the original, contextual meaning of the scriptures.

Apply this to Obama’s thinking, and it makes sense that he would think Jesus wanted him to raise taxes, or that healthcare is a social justice right that trumps the constitution.  It also explains a lot about the ambiguity of Obama’s faith, his comfort level with the Muslim faith, and why he is so eager to impose his liberation theology on the country.  Obama is what the media keeps trying to convince us Santorum is.  Obama is a religious fanatic who is seeking to impose his beliefs on the country.  He is not alone, social justice and liberation theology is the spine of the liberal movement in the United States.  Documents like the constitution have value only to the extent that they endorse the liberal readers personal context.

That is why when a religious employer refuses to buy abortion pills for their employees, they are actually denying that employee the right to have abortion pills and are stealing her rights.  This is truth from the liberal perspective.

If Conservatives are going to successfully defend the constitution, perhaps James Cone should be required reading for us as well.

A Fluke? Or A Movement?

In case you have been living under a rock, Sandra Fluke is the college student attending Georgetown University who testified before Congress that her birth control costs $3,000 a year and the only way she can get birth control is if Congress allows the President to force religious institutions (like Georgetown) to pay for it, which they then did.  Rush Limbaugh got himself into some trouble when he used a two naughty words to describe someone who wants others to pay for her to have sex.  Judging by family friendly ABC’s new show GCB (originally titled Good Christian Bitches), if only Rush had called Fluke an SP, he would have been ok.

The left wants us to see Fluke like this:

She is a very young, very poor college student who perhaps has acne or cysts on her ovaries that only birth control can fix.  However, Republicans are voting to make Georgetown revoke her rights to buy birth control because every sperm is precious.  In the end, perhaps she wrote a letter to her senator and her senator actually read it, but somehow Fluke came in contact with Democrats in Washington DC who found her story so compelling that they tried to have her testify before Congress, but Republicans hate women and wanted only men testifying so they said no.

In actual fact, Sandra Fluke is a 30 year old law student who can afford $50,000 a year for law school, but can’t seem to find her way into Target or Wal Mart where birth control is $9 a month.  She wants to force her Catholic college and all Americans to pay so that she can have as much consequence-free sex as she can fit between classes.  She also is not random.  Fluke has been an activist promoting the idea of forcing others to pay for birth control and morning after abortion pills.  In fact, she was the president of Law Students for Reproductive Justice.  It’s amazing to me that no one blinks at the fact that this seemingly random student somehow ended up as the star witness for the Democrats, even though Pelosi’s office can’t seem to confirm or deny if the two had ever talked previously.  In fact, Democrats pulled their official witness in order to put Fluke in front of the cameras with her false sob story.  The last minute switcheroo violated policy which is the real reason she wasn’t allowed to testify by those mean old women-hating Republicans.

By the way, which is more offensive?  Rush using naughty words to describe her?  Or Obama giving Christian hospitals, colleges, orphanages, churches and other religious institutions the choice of either providing contraception AND morning after abortion pills or shutting their doors?  Even more offensive is Obama’s hardline on religious institutions while he simultaneously cuts military health benefits.

This brings us to the scary question.  What was Fluke doing at a Jesuit-run Catholic university in the first place?  Doesn’t she know the Catholic church’s teachings on contraception?  Actually, she does and that is why she went there.  Fluke reviewed the Georgetown student insurance policies and enrolled in order to change them.  As a liberal activist, she infiltrated Georgetown in order to use the hand of government to overturn their first amendment rights and force her personal, secular ideologies on them.

This line of attack should scare any religious institution.  It’s one thing when liberals are attacking religion from the outside, like ABC’s new anti-Christian show.  I wouldn’t infringe on people’s freedom of speech and I can control my own remote (imagine that).  But this idea that liberal activists are going to be infiltrating religious institutions in order to impose their secular beliefs on the rest of us should be far more alarming than any naughty words used by an entertainer. Should Christian schools start screening students to make sure they are not liberal plants?

I went to a Christian college for two years.  They taught creation.  They would never pay for morning after pill abortions and actually had rules against pre-marriage intercourse.  They had rules against drugs, homosexuality, drinking, and even foul language.  But it was ok.  We knew that when we went there.  I made a personal choice to go there and live under those rules for two years.  That is something people can do in a free society.  This freedom is the core target of the Fluke-style infiltration assault on Christianity.

This is pretty serious stuff.  The Left has a lot to answer for.  Was Fluke a plant?  If so, it is Fluke and Pelosi who should be apologizing to the country for this blatant fraud and attempt to steal our first amendment rights.

Selfishness of the Pro-Abortion Movement

Does the government have the right to tell religious institutions to buy birth control and morning after abortion pills for their employees?  Is it enough to have a religious exemption for institutions whose sole goal is to spread their faith?  If you have been asking yourself these questions lately, you are asking yourself the wrong questions.

First, let’s briefly address the exemption for religious organizations who solely exist to share their faith. Those organizations are few and far between.  Very few religious organizations seek to share their faith without also offering humanitarian aid, social work with teenagers, child services, food and training for the poor.  Aid to the poor is one of the largest purposes for the church and for Christians.

The question we should be asking when it comes to the religious exemption, is what about private business owners who object to birth control and morning after pills based on religious principle?  Why don’t they get an exemption?

Here is what this debate really comes down to.  I am a Protestant Christian and we use birth control.  We oppose morning after pills.  Every month we shell out $9 for our birth control pills, and I guess we forgo a date for two to McDonalds to do it.  I would never ask anyone else to pay that $9 for me.  I especially would never ask someone who objected to birth control on religious grounds to pay for it for me.  That is the epitome of selfishness.

I guess there are people out there who can’t afford $9 a month and can’t keep it in their pants.  Don’t ask religious people to give you that birth control or morning after pill.  Don’t ask the government to violate our 1st amendment rights and force us to provide that.

As far as the pro-abortion movement, if you truly believe that “they are just going to do it anyway”, sex among 13 and 14 year olds is a free expression of love, babies are a disease that kill dreams, or whatever, then set up a foundation that collects donations and pays for birth control and morning after pills.   You could form the organization after a charitable model like Toys for Tots and deliver a year’s supply of birth control to needy teenagers every Christmas.  You could call it Kontraception for Kids.  Or how about Planned Parenthood.

Some people mistakenly think this year’s election has anything to do with banning contraception on the federal level.  No, it has to do with whether everyone will be forced to pay for each others contraception.  It has to do with whether the liberals are going to force people to go against their religious objections and pay for something they find morally reprehensible in violation of their 1st amendment rights.  Does the constitution still matter?  That is the question in this debate.  Nobody is threatening to ban birth control.

If you are on Obama’s side and think Christians, Muslims and Jews should be forced to pay for your contraception, stop and think about how selfish that request is.

The Abortion Deduction

In four hours the government shuts down.  Republicans refused to fund abortion both directly in DC and indirectly at Planned Parenthoods across the country.  The result is that after failing to pass a budget in 2010 when Democrats controlled both houses and the Presidency, after failing to even consider HR 1, and after refusing the latest stop gap, Democrats are going to let the government shut down.  Apparently abortion funding is something Democrats won’t compromise on.

But that actually isn’t what this blog is about.  It is about a different abortion bill.  While Obamacare canceled the ability to use HSAs and Flex plans to buy over the counter drugs, and raises the AGI floor for medical deductions from 7.5% to 10%, abortions are still considered medical expenses.

In fact, cosmetic procedures, health club dues, quit smoking programs, non-prescription drugs, weight loss programs, vitamins, acne treatments, and even specially designed cars for the handicapped are non-deductible medical expenses.  But abortion is deductible for taxes.

Republicans are currently working on passing a bill that will add abortion to other non-deductible medical expenses except in the case of rape, incest, or danger to the mother’s life, but Democrats are expected to kill the bill.

That is the country we live in.  You can kill an unborn baby on demand, and then deduct the cost from your taxes.

Abortion Compromise?

“All mutual concession in the nature of compromise must necessarily be unwelcome to men of extreme opinions.” – Democrat Millard Filmore, December 2, 1850

Millard Filmore was celebrating the success of a series of compromises that kept slavery legal, caused the Federal Government to be in charge of capturing runaway slaves, and in return admitted California as a free state and kept slavery out of the territories of Utah and New Mexico. This got me thinking.

In a debate in Florida for the Senate seat, Charlie Crist accused his Republican opponent Marco Rubio of being radically against abortion.  Crist then claimed he himself is pro-life.  He is among a growing number of so-called moderate Republicans and independents who think we must compromise on abortion and not emphasize it in elections.  Some Republicans suggest we compromise by allowing some early abortions in order to stop late term abortions and partial birth abortions.  Here is my question, what compromise on slavery would Crist have been happy with?  Is it an ok compromise to make California a free state if it means leaving people in Georgia enslaved?
Compromises on the life and death issue of abortion puts us on the wrong side of the issue no matter what side we are coming from. Abortion is contrary to the constitution, to basic human rights, and to a civilized culture. Yet the left argues that it is constitutional. As though this is some moral determining factor, the left argues that it is the law of the land, therefore it is right. Again, this echoes the moderates of a century and a half ago.  Consider these words:

“I believe that involuntary servitude (slavery), as it exists in different States of this Confederacy, is recognized by the Constitution. I believe that it stands like any other admitted right, and that the States where it exists are entitled to efficient remedies to enforce the constitutional provisions. I hold that the laws of 1850, commonly called the ‘compromise measures,’ are strictly constitutional and to be unhesitatingly carried into effect…I fervently hope that the question is at rest, and that no sectional or ambitious or fanatical excitement may again threaten the durability of our institutions or obscure the light of our prosperity.” – Democrat Franklin Pierce, from his inauguration, 1852.

The left and the middle are portraying pro-life Republicans as radicals.  Thank God for radicals like Harriet Beecher Stowe, John Brown, Frederick Douglas, and the “black Republican” Abraham Lincoln.

Should true pro-lifers compromise on abortion because our opponents tell us that is how to win elections?  Unless moderate Republicans can provide an example of a compromise on slavery they would be comfortable supporting in which the practice was allowed to continue, I will continue to be counted among the “sectional…ambitious…radical” members causing “excitement” about the issue. I will continue to hold my “extreme” position. I cannot in good conscience sacrifice millions to save millions when all should be saved.

May those who are truly pro-life recross to my side of the line in the sand, and may we continue to fight until every baby is granted not just their constitutional right to life, but their divinely-endowed right to life.

Obama’s Healthcare Plan vs. My Healthcare Solutions

A few months ago I wrote fifteen Conservative Constitutionalist healthcare solutions that would fix our healthcare system.  Since then, Obama has passed his healthcare reform tax bill.  Let’s see how his solutions measure up.

1. End medicare and medicaid. These open ended guaranteed government payments allow businesses to operate and make millions while justifying poor service because the Government thinks it is paying discounted prices. Any medical assistance programs must be implemented on a state level where it is not unconstitutional.

Instead, Obama cut Medicare payments to doctors and Medicare prescription plans for seniors.  At the same time he expanded Medicaid requirements for states, except for states of Senators whose vote he bought.  And he expanded Medicare to everyone who makes under 133% of the poverty level, starting in 2014.  He also increased Medicare taxes for individuals who make more than $125,000 (if married) and on investment income.

2. Employers should be able to let employees choose their individual plan based on their needs. For example, I am not going to get pregnant, and I don’t anticipate most of the health problems that come with age at this point in my life. Yet I am paying for all of that in my insurance plan.

Instead, companies will be penalized up to $2,500 per employee who they don’t cover under one of Obama’s qualified plans that covers what Obama thinks should be covered.  If your company doesn’t cover you, you will face fines up to $2,260 for not buying your own health insurance that Obama thinks you should have.

3. Insurance should be portable and easily picked up and dropped. When you buy car insurance, you are covered at that moment. When you buy health insurance, you have to wait a year for some coverage to become applicable. This will create competition.

When Obamacare finally comes online in 2014, your insurance plan still won’t be portable because your company will still be required to cover you.  However, it will supposedly be easier to purchase insurance since you can’t be denied for pre-existing conditions.  It does mean though that insurance will be more expensive.

4. People should be able to buy policies from other states. However, insurance companies should also have the option to not sell to certain states that have strict laws regulating insurance companies.

Buying across state lines is still not allowed.  And many insurance companies will be squeezed out of current state markets through higher taxes on insurance companies and increased regulations.

5. People shouldn’t have to go to doctors with 8 years of college debt to get simple physicals or other simple procedures and diagnosis. They can if they want to, but they shouldn’t have to. I can go to Wal Mart for a $70 eye exam, or I can spend a couple hundred dollars to see a private eye doctor practice.

Actually, Obama’s bill makes you need to go to the doctor for more.  Under the Obama bill, you cannot deduct over the counter medical expenses or pay for them with your HSA or 125 plan without a doctor prescription.

6. Some prescriptions should be de-regulated. Think about it, you can get Plan B over the counter, but for a much lower dose birth control taken daily you have to get annual checkups and pay prescription costs.

Again, not only will there be greater impetus to get doctor prescriptions for drugs, but this bill actually subsidizes name brand prescriptions which will squeeze cheaper generics out of the market.

7. HSA plans are a good idea, but the fees make them not worth it. HSA plans must be made simple like a self-directed IRA to be used for any medical costs no matter what your insurance is. If someone wants full coverage and an HSA, go for it. If they want no insurance and an HSA, go for it.

This bill severely limits what you can contribute to health savings accounts of all kinds, limits what you can spend the funds on, and doubles penalty taxes if you spend the funds on the wrong things, like over the counter drugs. And again, it makes it illegal to not patronize the insurance companies even if you can afford your own healthcare without insurance.  This bill makes insurance companies the permanent middleman which will keep prices for basic medical care high.

8. Doctor/patient confidentiality must apply only to citizens and legal residents. Illegal aliens must be treated and then sent back to their home country where they can obey our immigration laws just like everyone else, however they must pay any medical expenses outstanding as part of the citizenship process.

This bill does nothing to curb use of our healthcare system by illegal aliens.  In fact, this is a better system for them because they don’t have to pay penalty taxes for not paying for insurance.

9. Uninsured individuals must pay for procedures. They can negotiate payment plans and prices with the doctors, but if they use medical services they must pay what the doctor determines they owe. Medical liens should be available to doctors so that they can choose whether or not to treat a delinquent patient before doing an operation.

Now, uninsured individuals can wait until they get sick or injured and then buy insurance that day.  It will increase the price of insurance, which will cause more people to choose to not buy insurance and pay the penalty taxes instead.  The result is a spiral upward of healthcare prices. The mandates don’t bring down health insurance prices, they only fund Obama and the government for more spending.

10. There must be truth in advertising. Doctors must be able to let you know exactly what you will owe for a procedure before you have it and you must be able to easily acquire from your insurance company what they will and will not cover. Except in emergencies, reimbursements must be issued before the procedure takes place. This will ensure limited legal action and no recalculations of what you owe after the fact.

The insurance exchanges are supposed to produce this.  But with insurance companies as the permanent middleman between us and our doctors and the government as the permanent middleman between us and our insurance companies, don’t count on it.

11. We need serious and real tort reform. I would recommend a standardization of what a doctor or insurance company must pay for each situation. I would also recommend a clear understanding between doctor and patient of what creates a legal liability for a doctor. For example, if they amputate the wrong foot, it should be clear what your legal options are. If they are doing a procedure and due to no fault of their own something goes wrong, they should be protected from lawsuits. If a doctor explains an operation to you, listing the risks, and you choose to have the operation, you must be the one responsible for that decision.

We got nothing.    Obama would not sell out his lawyer supporters.

12. Doctor education needs to be reformed. The cost of doctor education is unreasonable. But education is a whole other topic that I have dealt with in other places.

Now, when doctors finally get out of school, they will be paying taxes on their services as well.    And when they go to school, there will no longer be competition in regards to their student loans because the Government has taken over the entire school loan sector of our economy.  Apparently that makes us healthier.

13. Patients medical records should be made electronic with every patient being able to access and transfer them from doctor to doctor. GOVERNMENT MUST NOT BE ABLE TO ACCESS THESE RECORDS. You think voter ID cards are a violation of civil rights…

Not only will the government have access to our personal records, but so will the IRS and Social Security administration.  The chief of Health and Human Services will use our medical records to standardize and de-humanize treatments.

14. It’s up to the states, but I would recommend that states do not cover abortions, smoking or drug related illness, sexually transmitted diseases or cosmetic surgery.

Smoking and age are now the only two factors insurance companies can use in determining what you pay.  Apparently you can still drink, eat twinkies for breakfast lunch and dinner, engage in promiscuous sex, do drugs, and whatever else as long as you don’t smoke.  And when you get AIDS, liver disease and diabetes from your unhealthy lifestyle, the insurance companies have to cover you that day and charge you the same as what they charge your health-nut neighbor (unless he smokes in which case they can charge him more).  Philip Morris must not have sent enough lobbyist muscle to Washington.

The government will ensure that everything else is covered.  And if you want an abortion, the government will write you a blank check.  Just don’t tell them what it’s for.  It’s like telling anti-gun advocates that you are going to give $1 million to every gunstore in the country so that they can increase their inventory of safety equipment.  You’re not anti-safety, are you?

15. Businesses and individuals should be allowed and encouraged to pool insurance plans or create healthcare associations to negotiate for lower rates and create pooled risk. Already there are many Christian community organizations who do this and provide medical coverage for less than $100 a month.

The government will allow for government regulated non-profit insurance co-ops, but with taxes on doctors, healthcare equipment, drugs, and increased regulations on health savings accounts and insurance companies, it’s doubtful whether even a non-profit co-op would be affordable.

So, when do they pass healthcare REFORM?

The bill is passed.  Finally, after hundreds of years, we have healthcare.  No more poverty, no more sickness, no more evil insurance company profits.  But before you cancel your policy and call your representative for your free health insurance card, you might want to do a little research and see just what is, and isn’t, in this bill.

First of all, you won’t see the majority of the provisions in this bill until 2014.  The tough parts of the bill hit in odd years, and the best provisions start in even years.  Guess what else happens in even years…elections.

In 2010, we see expansions of coverage.  Children with pre-existing conditions cannot be denied coverage, even if parents had ample time to establish coverage before the condition was discovered.  The definition of a dependent (for insurance purposes only) will change to anyone up to 26 years of age and insurance companies must cover them under their parents’ plan.  Seniors who have spent more than $2,830 on prescriptions will get an extra $250.  There will be tax credits for businesses with up to 25 employees, but that may be subject to average salary levels which could be as low as $25,000 a year.

Hospitals, healthcare providers, home health agencies and others will face significant reductions in Medicare payments.   Many will probably stop taking new Medicare patients, especially when healthy young 26 year olds can go to the doctor’s office for the sniffles and daddy’s insurance has to pay for it.  When I was 26 I was making less than 25k a year and buying health insurance for my family.

What about taxes?  Well, in 2010 we see a 10% sales tax on indoor tanning.  Good thing I live in a beach town.  What about free healthcare?  Not yet.  In fact, we will all be paying more to make up for lower Medicare payments to doctors.  But senior voters will get their $250 vote bribe.

In 2011 we see a voluntary long-term care benefit created to cover nursing home costs or home health, but benefits won’t start until you’ve been paying in for five years.  Medicare patients who have spent that $2,830 get a 50% discount on name brand drugs, not generics.  Doctors in underserved areas, who are still taking Medicare patients, get a 10% bonus to continue taking Medicare patients.  Payments to Medicare Advantage are frozen, but funding for community health centers is boosted.  Whether or not those centers will be able to perform abortions with that funding is still up in the air.  And finally, the bill imposes a $2.3 billion tax on drugmakers which will go up every year.  It shouldn’t take an economics degree to know who will pay that $2.3 billion tax.

In exchange for that $2.3 billion in extra taxes that drug-makers will pass on to consumers, competition from generics is crushed.  Also, with this bill it is illegal for the Government to negotiate for lower prices on Medicare drugs.  That’s probably why the Wall Street Journal calls this bill a huge victory for big drug companies. Good job Democrats.  By the way, in 2011 still no free health insurance.

In 2012 we will have the public option.  Yes, you read that right.  A new government program will be set up to create non-profit insurance co-ops to compete with commercial insurers.  While it is not a government run insurance program, it will be interesting to see how it is implemented and subsidized.  Also, hospitals with high readmission rates will be penalized and possibly cut off through lower Medicare reimbursements.

So, no free health insurance in 2012.  But it is Obama’s re-election year, so we will see a de facto public option.  Will the public option cut costs?  It’s doubtful when everything else in this bill sofar increases actual healthcare costs.  Public option co-ops may not have to pay for profits, but they will have to pay the embedded taxes and make up for Medicare cuts.  But that doesn’t matter.  What matters is the PR generated by the public option being generated in Obama’s election year.

In 2013 we have some good news.  Insurance company paperwork will be standardized, which should hopefully eliminate confusion and cut costs.  The bad news is that it is being standardized by the Government.  More bad news in 2013 includes limits on Flexible Spending Accounts (cafeteria plans) deferrals and higher taxes.  The wage threshold for deducting medical expenses will go up from 7.5% to 10% for all Americans, and we will pay a 2.3% sales tax on medical devices and equipment.  All these additional taxes will take effect in 2013 but the only mandates sofar are that insurers provide coverage to children with pre-existing conditions and 26 year olds under their parents’ plan.  There is some relief for Medicare patients (not enrolled in Medicare Advantage), however experts feel Medicare doctors and providers are hit hardest by the bill.

For individuals making $200,000 (joint filers making $250,000) Medicare taxes are going up .9%.  Also these individuals will also owe an additional 3.8% in taxes on investment income, including stock sales, dividends, interest, rental income, etc.  I suppose Obama is counting on the economy being all better before we get hit with these taxes on economic growth.  Of course, by the time these taxes hit, we might have a Republican President.

2013, still no free healthcare.  Not even cheaper healthcare.  Instead, by 2013 prices will have skyrocketed from embedded taxes.  Insurers will still be able to drop anyone older than 26, and drug companies will be making out like bandits with little competition.

2014 is when the major provisions of the bill finally hit.  So free healthcare, right?  In 2014, insurers will no longer be able to deny coverage to anyone based on pre-existing conditions.  But they also won’t be able to vary rates based on anything beyond age, location, and tobacco usage.  This means that healthy Americans will pay the same rates as the obese and drunk, so long as they don’t patronize the evil tobacco industry.  Insurance rates can go as high as $27,000 per family without the insurance company paying additional taxes.

States will be forced to create and maintain insurance exchanges (whether they can afford it or not), but these insurance exchanges won’t provide free coverage.  They will just squeeze any smaller insurance companies out of the market so that the bigger companies can charge more.  Every American will be forced to purchase insurance, which will increase demand and prices.  In fact, businesses will have to pony up $2,000 for every employee they don’t cover, and individuals will have to pay up to $2,250 in penalties to the IRS if they don’t buy insurance.  The government is hiring 17,000 new IRS agents to enforce this unconstitutional mandate.

So when does the government start giving us free insurance?  It doesn’t.  When you get laid off from your job because your boss can’t afford another $2,000 per employee, how do you afford $27,000 premiums and embedded taxes on your drugs, equipment and doctor’s visits?  The government gives you tax credits.

To qualify for this government handout, you have to be making less than 400% of the poverty level.  The subsidy would be on a sliding scale, up to 9.5% of your income.  So how would this work?

If you are single, making $42,400 or less you can get a tax credit.  But 9.5% of your income on a sliding scale means you probably wouldn’t even see $4,000 in subsidies.  If you make more than 400% of the poverty line, you are out of luck.    My wife and I are just above the threshold for couples and would not be eligible for any tax credits.

In the meantime, in addition to higher prices on drugs and medical supplies, embedded taxes on doctors and providers, and limitations on competition, in 2014 every insurance company left is hit with $8 billion a year in taxes to pass on to us.  This tax will weed out any remaining competition, and will help drive prices up even higher so that even an $8,000 credit for a family of four won’t cover half your plan.  With additional taxes not hitting insurance plans until they reach $27,000, that may be the point.  We can’t have the single payer socialist system Obama always wanted until this plan fails.

No free healthcare, no competition, no help for the middle class, no punishing evil CEOs, and surprise surprise, no healthcare reform.


Share This Blog

Bookmark and Share

Categories