Now that we have had the opportunity to digest the magnitude of the Senate vote on Healthcare Reform taken in the early morning of December 24th, the television has been ablaze with heated debates between factions of both pro and con camps. I couldn’t help but notice how many Democratic Strategists appear on these programs and some shows have a new one every week. The problem with strategists is that their job is to advance an agenda; in essence, to create a winning strategy and not necessarily to tell the truth.
Of course winning is everything to a strategist and the truth tends to get lost if it is not complimentary to the strategy. Despite the authoritative assurances of the strategists, every independent review of the bill says the costs have been understated and that it will add to the deficit and the debt. Recently, even the CBO accused the Congress of showing the savings achieved from the cuts in Medicare twice; once to reduce the general cost of Medicare and then a second time, as a revenue source for a new entitlement to subsidize the purchase of health insurance for low income individuals and families.
When an average citizen writes two checks using the same money that is called check fraud and eventually, there are criminal charges levied for that. When the Congress does it, the strategists hit the news channels and tell us it is a misrepresentation of the facts by zealot Republicans. Well, the CBO is neither Republican nor Democrat; it is supposed to be a non-partisan arm of Congress. When the CBO showed the deficit reduction in the healthcare bill, the White House used that as proof positive of the financial benefit of the bill. When the CBO unveiled this corrupt scam of using the same money twice, the very same people in the administration said that was just ridiculous and unworthy of comment. Either the CBO is impartial and honest or not, they are going to have to pick one or the other.
Curiously, the main debate has now shifted to the means by which Congressional leadership secured the sixty votes they needed to move this bill forward. In a move now called “Cash for Cloture”, the leadership used your money to bribe Senate members into voting for a bill that 61% of Americans do not want. The out and out prostitution witnessed by America as one member after another sold their votes (Hi Mary!) to Harry Reid in exchange for some sizeable payoffs is just another example of the culture of corruption in Washington.
No less that ten States have their Attorney Generals looking into the legality of certain States being exempted from damaging increases in Medicaid liability promised by this bill, leaving the rest of the States to cover the full impact of the increases of not only their own state, but of the exempted states. The Constitutionality of which is brought into question by both Section eight of the Constitution as well as the fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights.
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
It is clear that Section Eight, which grants Congress the authority to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, also states quite clearly that those Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. But how can there be Constitutional required uniformity if certain States are exempt leaving the non-exempt States to carry the full burden?
The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the people equal protection under the law but there is nothing equal about a Federal tax on one segment of the population that residents of a neighboring State do not bear. Additionally, the Fourteenth Amendment not only prevents the States from passing any legislation that would abridge the Constitutional rights of its citizens, but prevents them from enforcing Federal law if that law would abridge those same rights.
There are clear Constitutional issues with the deals that were cut to obtain passage of this bill. Perhaps some of our brilliant Constitutional lawyers in Congress would have realized this if they weren’t so insanely intent on achieving cloture before the Holiday break but Harry Reid was not going to risk giving the general public access to their Senators and upset the process. After all, if one of these sequestered Congressmen found out just how unpopular this bill is at home they might not have voted for it.
Unfortunately, there are many members of Congress that have seen the poll numbers on healthcare reform and thanks to our friends, the Democratic Strategists, they have dismissed the unpopularity of this bill as a result of the massive amounts of “disinformation” that has been distributed to the public by the opposition. It is not disinformation that has caused the loss of support for this bill; it is the actions of a Congress that seems determined to pass it at any cost that has given the public good cause to reject it.
The idea that the final Senate version was crafted behind closed doors with no Republican and very few Democrat Congressmen present is a point of concern. That Harry Reid negotiated with Senators to obtain a commitment on their vote before they were even allowed to read the final version sounds off alarms to any thinking person. Most disturbing is the disparity of claims among the supporters of the bill. This proves that the Senators that just voted for it have no idea what it says in its entirety.
What a difference a week makes. Now that they have concluded the vote in the Senate, the music has changed quite a bit. Just last week supporters of the bill said that it would reduce the cost of healthcare insurance by bringing much needed competition into the system. This week the “strategists” are saying that health insurance would climb even higher without the reforms in this bill. Last week they said that this bill will not destroy the private healthcare insurance system, this week they say that without reform your employers wouldn’t be able to afford the increases in cost and you would lose that insurance anyway. Last week anyone that said there would be care rationing and death panels was just plain crazy but this week they say that insurance companies have been making those life and death decisions for decades.
So what are they saying? Yes you will pay more but less than it would have been? Yes this bill will bring about the loss of your private coverage but at least it will provide you with an alternative? Yes there will be bureaucratic panels deciding what care you will and will not receive but at least it’s the government and not the evil insurance company making that choice?
Since this change in heart is only one week after the Senate vote, what will we find out in two or three or four weeks? This was the argument on the part of those that wanted the pace slowed so that everyone had a chance to read and understand what we were actually doing with one sixth of the United States economy. When you see the difference between what the proponents said last week compared to what they are saying this week, it is clear there was a lot of misinformation given to the public about healthcare reform. Unfortunately for the Democratic Strategists, it appears that the misinformation came from the President, his advisors, Democratic members of Congress and the cadre of special interests that stand to make billions after the passage of this national lie.
Paul
Of course winning is everything to a strategist and the truth tends to get lost if it is not complimentary to the strategy. Despite the authoritative assurances of the strategists, every independent review of the bill says the costs have been understated and that it will add to the deficit and the debt. Recently, even the CBO accused the Congress of showing the savings achieved from the cuts in Medicare twice; once to reduce the general cost of Medicare and then a second time, as a revenue source for a new entitlement to subsidize the purchase of health insurance for low income individuals and families.
When an average citizen writes two checks using the same money that is called check fraud and eventually, there are criminal charges levied for that. When the Congress does it, the strategists hit the news channels and tell us it is a misrepresentation of the facts by zealot Republicans. Well, the CBO is neither Republican nor Democrat; it is supposed to be a non-partisan arm of Congress. When the CBO showed the deficit reduction in the healthcare bill, the White House used that as proof positive of the financial benefit of the bill. When the CBO unveiled this corrupt scam of using the same money twice, the very same people in the administration said that was just ridiculous and unworthy of comment. Either the CBO is impartial and honest or not, they are going to have to pick one or the other.
Curiously, the main debate has now shifted to the means by which Congressional leadership secured the sixty votes they needed to move this bill forward. In a move now called “Cash for Cloture”, the leadership used your money to bribe Senate members into voting for a bill that 61% of Americans do not want. The out and out prostitution witnessed by America as one member after another sold their votes (Hi Mary!) to Harry Reid in exchange for some sizeable payoffs is just another example of the culture of corruption in Washington.
No less that ten States have their Attorney Generals looking into the legality of certain States being exempted from damaging increases in Medicaid liability promised by this bill, leaving the rest of the States to cover the full impact of the increases of not only their own state, but of the exempted states. The Constitutionality of which is brought into question by both Section eight of the Constitution as well as the fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights.
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
It is clear that Section Eight, which grants Congress the authority to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, also states quite clearly that those Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States. But how can there be Constitutional required uniformity if certain States are exempt leaving the non-exempt States to carry the full burden?
The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the people equal protection under the law but there is nothing equal about a Federal tax on one segment of the population that residents of a neighboring State do not bear. Additionally, the Fourteenth Amendment not only prevents the States from passing any legislation that would abridge the Constitutional rights of its citizens, but prevents them from enforcing Federal law if that law would abridge those same rights.
There are clear Constitutional issues with the deals that were cut to obtain passage of this bill. Perhaps some of our brilliant Constitutional lawyers in Congress would have realized this if they weren’t so insanely intent on achieving cloture before the Holiday break but Harry Reid was not going to risk giving the general public access to their Senators and upset the process. After all, if one of these sequestered Congressmen found out just how unpopular this bill is at home they might not have voted for it.
Unfortunately, there are many members of Congress that have seen the poll numbers on healthcare reform and thanks to our friends, the Democratic Strategists, they have dismissed the unpopularity of this bill as a result of the massive amounts of “disinformation” that has been distributed to the public by the opposition. It is not disinformation that has caused the loss of support for this bill; it is the actions of a Congress that seems determined to pass it at any cost that has given the public good cause to reject it.
The idea that the final Senate version was crafted behind closed doors with no Republican and very few Democrat Congressmen present is a point of concern. That Harry Reid negotiated with Senators to obtain a commitment on their vote before they were even allowed to read the final version sounds off alarms to any thinking person. Most disturbing is the disparity of claims among the supporters of the bill. This proves that the Senators that just voted for it have no idea what it says in its entirety.
What a difference a week makes. Now that they have concluded the vote in the Senate, the music has changed quite a bit. Just last week supporters of the bill said that it would reduce the cost of healthcare insurance by bringing much needed competition into the system. This week the “strategists” are saying that health insurance would climb even higher without the reforms in this bill. Last week they said that this bill will not destroy the private healthcare insurance system, this week they say that without reform your employers wouldn’t be able to afford the increases in cost and you would lose that insurance anyway. Last week anyone that said there would be care rationing and death panels was just plain crazy but this week they say that insurance companies have been making those life and death decisions for decades.
So what are they saying? Yes you will pay more but less than it would have been? Yes this bill will bring about the loss of your private coverage but at least it will provide you with an alternative? Yes there will be bureaucratic panels deciding what care you will and will not receive but at least it’s the government and not the evil insurance company making that choice?
Since this change in heart is only one week after the Senate vote, what will we find out in two or three or four weeks? This was the argument on the part of those that wanted the pace slowed so that everyone had a chance to read and understand what we were actually doing with one sixth of the United States economy. When you see the difference between what the proponents said last week compared to what they are saying this week, it is clear there was a lot of misinformation given to the public about healthcare reform. Unfortunately for the Democratic Strategists, it appears that the misinformation came from the President, his advisors, Democratic members of Congress and the cadre of special interests that stand to make billions after the passage of this national lie.
Paul
No comments:
Post a Comment