A day before a health care opponent DeFundIt.org called for a government shutdown, Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga., left) told CNSNews.com (reported Feb. 10) that he’s committed to de-funding the national health care law. When asked if he thought the Obama Administration would shut down the government as a result, he said “it's in the hands of the President.” Rumors continue to surface that a government shutdown is possible.
Even as stories continue to surface about young girls who have suffered a host of side effects, including death, after taking the Gardasil vaccine, the drug still has not been tested for or proven as cancer-preventing. And now ObamaCare is calling for mandatory vaccinations and proof of updates in order to get healthcare.
Yesterday evening, the “Repealing the Job Killing Health Care Law Act” failed to clear a procedural vote, 47-51. Though Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had threatened not to bring the measure to the Senate floor, he agreed to allow the bill to come to the floor if Republicans agreed not to filibuster the Federal Aviation Administration bill. The vote was strictly party-line.
The obvious lesson to be gleaned from the last election is that Americans are unhappy with the policies of the Democratic Party in general and President Barack Obama in particular, especially in regard to Obama’s monumental federal takeover of the healthcare system. To a typically egocentric politician such as Obama, however, the problem lies not with his policies themselves but with those doltish voters who just don’t understand and appreciate the blessings his policies are bestowing upon them.
Oklahoma's Republican Governor Mary Fallin appeared on Fox News on January 20 to announce that the state is filing a lawsuit against ObamaCare. On the same day, state Rep. Mike Ritze filed nullification legislation to declare the federal healthcare law null and void in Oklahoma.
ObamaCare was marketed to the American people as healthcare reform — something that would ensure that everyone could obtain health insurance and never lose it. It was most certainly not sold to us as a package of tax increases, especially considering that candidate Barack Obama had made “a firm pledge” that under his administration “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.”
Item: “Thousands more children would eat lunches and dinners at school and all school food would become more nutritious under a bill President Obama signed into law Monday, part of an administration-wide effort to combat childhood obesity,” reported an Associated Press story on December 13.
Prior to the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known colloquially as ObamaCare, the Congressional Budget Office issued an analysis of the bill stating that it would result in a reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion between 2010 and 2019. This projected deficit reduction was never very convincing. It relied on politically untenable cuts in Medicare and Medicaid physician reimbursement — cuts that have already been forestalled for another year by Congress and the President. It counted as savings minor reductions in enormous future outlays. It was skewed because the tax increases in the bill began almost immediately while much of the spending — including, for example, a long-term at-home healthcare benefit that the CBO projected would “add to future federal budget deficits in a large and growing fashion” — will not commence for several years. And it did not include $115 billion in probable additional spending because of the speed with which the bill was rammed through Congress. (Most of these matters were raised by Richard Foster, chief Medicare actuary, in a pair of reports, one during the congressional debate on the bill and one last August.)