From American Solutions

5 Facts About ObamaCare

By Tim Cameron on March 11, 2010 5:57 PM

Here are five key facts about ObamaCare that you should know. If you want to get active and start doing meaningful things to stop this bill make sure to include them in letters-to-the-editor, calls to talk radio, and conversations with your Congressman and his/her staff.

1.) Nearly half of a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts. This is a program that will be broke in six years, yet the Senate bill does nothing to put it on firm financial footing

2.) Dramatic expansion of government. The Senate bill creates 159 new offices, agencies, and programs. What will these new agencies, commissions, and programs do? They will regulate, they will dictate, they will spend.

3.) Raises taxes by more than $500 billion by raising payroll taxes, fines to businesses, new investment taxes, fees on medical technology companies

4.) Corrupt backroom deals to buy votes, like the Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase, and exemptions for certain states and companies so they avoid new regulations or cuts that others will bear

5.) Taxpayer funded abortion coverage. Individuals can use federal subsidies to help pay for insurance that covers abortion, and they buy abortion coverage through an insurance exchange that the federal government creates, funds, and administers. Thus the federal government will be actively promoting and facilitating the purchase of abortion coverage.

Also make sure to check out the Doctors 4 Patient Care video showing actual doctors warning that ObamaCare will be a disaster for patients.    

***********************
Author's Comments


So what are you doing about this? Sitting back, forwarding e-mails and blogging will do NOTHING to stop this!

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” - Edmund Burke

It's never the wrong time to do the right thing! Please contact your Congressmen NOW! Your voice makes a difference!

Activist Judge Restores ACORN Funding

U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon has issued her ruling that the cutoff of funding to ACORN was unconstitutional. She ordered all federal agencies to put the word out about it.

To refresh your memory, ACORN workers were caught in undercover stings offering questionable to unlawful advice to individuals posing as various applicants for funding. In one instance a couple posing as boy/girlfriend was given advice on how to run a prostitution ring and disguise it as a massage parlor. And that wasn't the worst part - they offered advice on how to launder the money so it would not look as profitable! Two crimes were committed yet Brooklyn prosecutors said the ACORN employees did not commit a crime.

The U.S. Department of Justice, several Congressional offices, conservative organizations and countless citizens filed briefs, placed calls and made their opinions known. Gershon would hear none of it. In her ruling "Nutty Nina" (as she is sometimes referred to) stated that Congress was attempting to punish ACORN without following a systematic process outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations requiring hearings and other steps before permanently stopping the funding.

How ridiculous is this? In its simplest form it's like the ACLU getting bail for a bank robber who was caught in the act of commiting an armed holdup. The argument could be made that, "If he's not free to rob, how can he feed his family?"

Wait, it gets worse! ACORN is in line for MORE funding if the pending overhaul of our health care system is passed into law. Wait, it gets even worse! ACORN is a "community activist" group with strong ties to President Obama. ACORN has been involved in countless acts of voter registration violations and mass fraud.

ACORN worker with dual identities flashes camera and documentation on how ACORN aids in illegal voter registrations

President Obama's ties to ACORN

CNN Exposes How ACORN Steals Votes For Democrats

CNN - Obama's relationship to ACORN

Are you sick yet? I am. What are you doing about it? Reading blogs or getting involved in activism yourself?

Letter to Senator Specter on Immigration

March 5, 2010

Senator Specter:

I heard that President Obama will now focus his attention on something that will have an immediate, dramatic impact on our country's finances and budget so please help me understand if my thought process is correct or if I am missing something here . . .

IF YOU CROSS THE NORTH KOREAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET 12 YEARS HARD LABOR.

IF YOU CROSS THE IRANIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE DETAINED INDEFINITELY.

IF YOU CROSS THE AFGHAN BORDER ILLEGALLY, YOU GET SHOT.

IF YOU CROSS THE SAUDI ARABIAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE JAILED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CHINESE BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU MAY NEVER BE HEARD FROM AGAIN.

IF YOU CROSS THE VENEZUELAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE BRANDED A SPY AND YOUR FATE WILL BE SEALED.

IF YOU CROSS THE CUBAN BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU WILL BE THROWN INTO POLITICAL PRISON TO ROT.

IF YOU CROSS THE THAI BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU ARE IMMEDIATELY DEPORTED AFTER A SPELL IN THE MONKEY HOUSE.

IF YOU CROSS THE UNITED STATES BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET:

• A JOB
• A DRIVERS LICENSE
• SOCIAL INSURANCE CARD
• MONEY FROM SOCIAL SECURITY
• FOOD STAMPS
• CREDIT CARDS
• SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE
• FREE EDUCATION
• FREE HEALTH CARE

So Senator, what sayest thou?

Steve Knepp
Pottstown PA

Entitlement Reform vs. Health Care Reform

When I received a copy of this letter at first I thought it might be bogus because of the reference to "tennis shoes". No one calls them that anymore right? This physician does, and after a quick Google search I found the letter to be very credible (although one e-mail version incorrectly referred to this as a letter to the President):

Dr. Roger Starner Jones 
Letter to the Editor
Clarion Ledger, Jackson MS
August 29, 2009
_______________________
Dear Sirs:

During my shift in the Emergency Room last night, I had the pleasure of evaluating a patient whose smile revealed an expensive shiny gold tooth, whose body was adorned with a wide assortment of elaborate and costly tattoos, who wore a very expensive brand of tennis shoes and who chatted on a new cellular telephone equipped with a popular R&B ringtone.

While glancing over her patient chart, I happened to notice that her payer status was listed as "Medicaid"!  During my examination of her, the patient informed me that she smokes more than one costly pack of cigarettes every day and somehow still has money to buy pretzels and beer.

And our Congress expects me to pay for this woman's health care?  I contend that our nation's "health care crisis" is not the result of a shortage of quality hospitals, doctors or nurses. Rather, it is the result of a "crisis of culture," a culture in which it is perfectly acceptable to spend money on luxuries and vices while refusing to take care of one's self or, heaven forbid, purchase health insurance.  It is a   culture based in the irresponsible credo that "I can do whatever I want to because someone else will always take care of me."  Life is not really that hard. Most of us will reap what we sow. 
_______________________
Sources:
http://spotlight.vitals.com/2009/10/dr-roger-starner-jones-muses-crisis-culture
http://www.meetup.com/WeSurroundThemGathering/messages/boards/thread/7706531
http://activerain.com/blogsview/1374274/dr-starner-jones-md-racist-of-the-week (this one paints the Dr. as a racist!)

Whether you agree with the racist accusations is your decision, but in my opinion the Dr. is RIGHT ON with his "Crisis of Culture" statements. Our tax dollars paid for the grille, the tattoos, the cell phone, the ring tone, the sneakers, the smokes and the beer. Why? We cultivated, and then enabled this entitlement mentality for too long!

Able bodied welfare recipients (which are the vast majority) should work as they did since the inception of Welfare, not in the 1930's, 40's, 50's or later, but in the Old Testament book of Ruth! The concept of welfare is NOT a product of the 20th century. Wealthy farmers and business people felt compassion - and to a degree an obligation - to help those less fortunate, but handouts were never the solution. Work, in exchange for that assistance was the norm. The "gleaners" were permitted to follow the "reapers" through the fields to gather what may have been missed.

The concept of "Workfare" is completely foreign to many generations of recipients, and likewise to the politicians who exchange these handouts for votes. In my opinion health care reform is an important issue, but two issues far more pressing are Tort (lawsuit) reform and Welfare reform. Until we reform a handout system that requires nothing but breathing for a paycheck; and a system where people can sue for trivial issues and walk away with multi-million dollar settlements not much else will matter. But don't hold your breath on either. As I said it's those handouts that insure votes, and 43% of today's Congress and four of the past eight presidents are/were lawyers so don't expect any meaningful change on regulating the very industry that provides their paychecks.

Please, write your elected officials WEEKLY, not weakly to let them know your opinions! Don't ever forget that your elected officials work for you!

Should President Obama Have Lifted Stimulus Funding Caps From Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Christmas Eve is a sacred time where those who align themselves with Jesus Christ gather to celebrate the birth of their Savior. Those of the Jewish faith celebrate Hanukkah (sorry if I missed your religion, time and space!). It's a time where little else can distract you from sharing precious family moments, faith and blessings. Unless of course, you're a politician hoping to play Santa Claus with no one watching!

For example, presidential pardons date back to the 1800's and Christmas Eve pardons seem to have become a tradition. Casper Weinberger and five others tied to Iran-Contra were pardoned on Christmas Eve 1992 by President George H.W. Bush. Like President Bush, with one foot out the door in 2001 President Clinton pardoned nearly as many people in one day than President Bush had in eight years, among the most notorious was Marc Rich, a fugitive financier with close financial ties to the Democratic Party. These pardons transcend political lines. The key is the news cycle. Who's really watching on Christmas Eve?

In his first term in office President Obama was not so gratuitous with a single pardon, but he gave away much more that. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, two organizations who played a substantial role in our current economic crisis were given an unbelievable gift. Under the current economic stimulus plan both agencies were tied to a funding cap of $200 million. President Santa Claus lifted that cap. The new cap? Unlimited! Merry Christmas Fannie and Freddie! Spend all you want, we'll print more!

The role of these two agencies in our economy's meltdown is alarming. Enter the phrase "fannie mae freddie mac role in financial crisis" into your favorite search engine, specify "video" under criteria and view the videos at your leisure. You will see both Democrats and Republicans warning of the dangers we faced if these agencies were not reigned in and closely watched.

Democrat Maxine Waters declared there was no need for tighter regulation, and further categorized the leadership of Franklin Raines as "outstanding". History has proven otherwise. Without going to go into great detail, you'll have plenty of information to reach your own conclusions. My point is that the calls for more scrutiny and tighter regulation go back to the Clinton administration, yet in spite of these warnings regulations were eased, reserve requirements were lowered, sub-standard loans were made in record numbers and the house of cards toppled under the slightest of breezes. The ultimate insult to the taxpayer? Raines leaves under a multi-million dollar golden parachute. Couldn't we all be that lucky?

Therefore my only question to President Obama is - WHY? What legitimate reason do we have to turn the entire hen house over to the den of foxes?  Unfortunately I don't have the answer. Naturally I have suspicions but my fear is they are unpalatable to most readers. What' your take?

Next: Entitlement Reform vs. Health Care Reform

Should Abortion Be Part of the Health Care Debate?

In my previous post I stated that my intent is not to come down on either side of this issue, but to provide facts and allow you to make your own decisions. First, here are facts as provided by the Guttmacher Institute (GI) in their July 2008 report Facts on Induced Abortion in the United States:

• 22% of all pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion.
• About 60% of abortions are obtained by women who have one or more children. 
• Women who have never married obtain two-thirds of all abortions.
• Nearly half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and four in ten of these are terminated by abortion. 
  

GI also states that 46% of women who have abortions had not used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant. Of these women, 33% had perceived themselves to be at low risk for pregnancy, 32% had had concerns about contraceptive methods, 26% had had unexpected sex and 1% had been forced to have sex.

Let's summarize this dilemma. Foremost, I found it interesting that GI supports what right to life groups have been stating for years, that 1% (or fewer) of all abortions were the result of forced sex. Does that mean 99% were not the result of forced sex? Lets check - 46% used no contraceptive methods whatsoever, 33% thought they'd never get pregnant and 26% said, "I know I'm not using contraceptives, I don't really know (or care) where I'm at with my monthly biological clock, but this guy's smokin' hot so here it goes!"

How's the math work out? 46+33+26=105%! OK, so the Guttmacher Institute counts and reports, but they certainly don't add very well. Can we give them a mulligan for now?

Regardless of your position on the act of abortion, we've already determined the economic impact to Social Security alone is at least $450 billion dollars. We did not even factor other financial benefits into the equation, such as purchasing homes, cars, clothing, food, paying for education and our affinity for Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts coffee. Gosh that's got to be billions there right? How much revenue is this draining from the economy?

Opponents to this rational thought process have actually written how much abortion has saved the economy through welfare benefits not being paid, food stamps not being issued, costs not being incurred in criminal prosecutions and incarcerations, criminal acts and resulting losses not being inflicted on victims, blah blah blah. This rhetoric assumes that every one of the 48 million plus abortions would have become the dregs of society. In compiling the data in my previous post I factored into the equation that 20% of the aborted babies would not become productive members of society, and in my opinion that's more than fair.

Now to the abortion industry itself.  The most recent numbers I've uncovered on Planned Parenthood (PP) alone are $1 billion in revenues, with 30% of that revenue provided by the federal government. Notwithstanding PP's questionable tactics in providing the services is the strategic location of their clinics. Statistics from GI and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reveal that the overwhelming majority of their clinics are in metropolitan areas. Independent studies have also suggested that upwards of 75% of the PP clinics are in predominantly minority neighborhoods.

These facts could possibly substantiate allegations of racism levied against PP's Margaret Sanger. I recently read an article in the Washington Post simply titled The Abortion Industry. I'll quote these two paragraphs so I'm not taken out of context:

"It is well known that Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, aligned herself with the eugenicists concerned with eliminating undesirables from the population. Moreover, Sanger received and accepted an invitation to address a Ku Klux Klan chapter and gave a speech that led to additional Klan invitations. Although we do not know what she said, we do know that recently questions have been raised about racism at Planned Parenthood clinics.

"Documented in a widely-circulated recording and transcript, a UCLA student researcher for a pro-life magazine hired a professional actor in February 2008 to call Planned Parenthood clinics around the country, offering donations to "lower the number of black people" by targeting black babies for abortion. She found Planned Parenthood clinics in seven states that agreed to take the monies. Not one Planned Parenthood employee objected to the caller's racist remarks or purposes." 

Furthermore, do your own web search on the term "how much money is made by the abortion industry" and analyze the results. I was surprised by the number of people who boast of $150k incomes simply by making abortion referrals.

Whether you agree or disagree with PP's possible motives, or those acting as agents earning abortion commissions is not the issue. The issue is should our tax dollars be paying for abortions, directly or indirectly? Should abortion even be part of the health care debate?

Next: Should President Obama have lifted the stimulus cap from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

The Impact of Abortion on Social Security

There is plenty of discussion on the topic of abortion in our society today. In this post I'm not attempting to land on either side of the issue, but simply look at the economics as the subject relates to Social Security.

Since Roe v. Wade became the law of the land in 1973, estimates range from 48 million to 52 million abortions have been performed. Most of these figures are provided by the Guttmacher Institute, whose founder Alan Guttmacher was the former President of Planned Parenthood, Inc. Even Guttmacher estimates that 3% to 6% of abortions are not counted or reported so the true number is potentially higher. Additionally, some states such as Alaska, California, New Hampshire, Oklahoma and West Virginia do not provide data for the purpose of federal reporting. Accordingly the number could conceivably be as high as 60 million or more.

Recently I did some number crunching and was alarmed at what I believe to be conservative estimates. In arriving at my calculations I relied on government provided data and made only a few assumptions:

• Of all babies aborted since 1973 I allowed 20 years to begin working,
• Not everyone will become a productive member of society for many reasons so I reduced all my projections by 20%,
• If someone aborted in 1973 had the opportunity to begin working in 1993 they would have worked 16 years; born in 1974, worked 15  years and so on,
• U.S. Treasury data on median individual income was used.
  

Are you ready for the number? $450 billion dollars is the conservative impact abortion has had on Social Security alone! This figure does not even consider the economic impact of the dollars spent in the economy on items such as housing, cars, clothing, food or any and everything we purchase today!

Now I'm neither a mathematician nor an economist, but I am very efficient with research and extremely proficient with spreadsheets. Therefore my challenge to anyone reading this blog is if you don't agree, or if you have better or more accurate data please prove me wrong!

Again, keep in mind that the intent of this post is not to come down on either side of the issue. In the past I've frequently posed the question as to where Social Security would be without that lost revenue. Now that I have a better grasp on the financial impact I'll be writing on similar topics.

Next: Should abortion even be a part of the pending health care debate?