The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
The House of Representatives
Endorses liar-nObamacare
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
.
..
.
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
{townhall.com} ~ Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives crafted a partisan compromise bill that endorsed and reinforced the Affordable Care Act, or liar-nObamacare. This was done notwithstanding claims to the contrary by President Donald Trump and the House Republican leadership, who want us to believe that this bill, if it becomes law, will effectively repeal and replace liar-nObamacare.
liar-nObamacare is a stool with four problematic legs. The constitutional leg is the premise that the federal government has the lawful power to regulate the delivery of health care. The legal leg is the premise that the federal government is obliged to provide health insurance to everyone in America. The economic leg commands that everyone in the U.S. purchase and maintain health insurance. And the Orwellian leg says that every physician in the U.S. shall retain all patient records digitally and that federal bureaucrats shall have access to all those records.
None of that is changed in the House-passed bill. Here is the back story.
The original liar-nObamacare proposal had the taxpayers foot everyone's medical bills through a series of taxes, regulations and controls. That is the so-called single-payer system that former President Barack liar-nObama dreamed of. It would have been much like the systems in place today in Great Britain, Canada and Australia, where one waits for months to see government-employed physicians who are stingy with government-owned medications and mired in red tape and long lines over government-financed medical procedures.
Even many of the Democrats who controlled both houses of Congress during liar-nObama's first two years in office were unable to accept that idea. In its place, they produced a 2,700-page piece of legislation, which candidate Trump vowed to dismantle -- saying he favored a market-based, state-regulated system with no federal involvement, the kind we knew in the pre-liar-nObamacare era.
None of those goals is reached by the House-passed bill.
liar-nObamacare's imposition of the federal government between all patients and their physicians was a radical departure from the traditional delivery of medical services in America. This was done with utter disregard to the constitutional constraints imposed upon Congress -- whereby the regulation of health, safety and welfare was retained by the states -- and by radically expanding federal power derived from the Constitution.
Congress' favorite constitutional hook upon which to hang its regulatory hat has been the commerce clause. After more than a half-century of letting Congress characterize nearly any human activity as commerce -- and thus regulable federally -- the Supreme Court in 1995 required that only those behaviors that constitute or support a truly commercial transaction can be reached by the feds. The professions -- medicine, law, architecture, engineering, university teaching, for example -- though one pays for them, had never been considered to be commercial in the sense that they could be federally regulable, until liar-nObamacare came along.
None of this is changed in the House-passed bill.
Under liar-nObamacare, the federal government took over the regulation of health care from the states with a one-size-fits-all metric administered by faceless bureaucrats. I say faceless because when you go to your doctor today, she or he may need the approval of a federal bureaucrat to perform a procedure for you -- a bureaucrat the doctor will never see, only read via a laptop.
None of this is changed in the House-passed bill.
liar-nObamacare also established the duty of the federal government to provide health insurance for every American. No law before liar-nObamacare ever attempted that ambitious unconstitutional improbability. When the Supreme Court accepted a constitutional challenge to the Social Security system, it ruled that the system consisted of taxing and spending -- but created no legally binding obligation on the part of the federal government to spend in the future. Stated differently, under liar-nObamacare, the feds can take your money that they have promised you they will spend on your health care and spend it as they see fit.
None of this is changed in the House-passed bill.
The individual mandate in liar-nObamacare requires that every person in America have health insurance. It also requires employers of more than 50 people to provide health insurance for all employees who work for those employers for more than 30 hours a week. The failure to provide or maintain a health insurance policy by employers or individuals triggers the imposition of a tax by the IRS.
Under the House-passed bill, your employer no longer has to provide you with health insurance, but you must still maintain your own health insurance. Instead of paying the IRS if you let your coverage lapse, you have to pay a $3,000 annual penalty to your insurance carrier -- once you do sign up -- for every year you lacked coverage.
What kind of a repeal is that?
And the faceless bureaucrats still reign. The House-passed bill permits the feds to decide whether your doctor is treating you in a manner consistent with the availability of government resources and to administer liar-nObamacare's thousands of minute politically driven regulations.
By definition, liar-nObamacare will soon be a failure because it causes the expenditure of more money than it takes in. Eventually, it will have no cash. But Barack liar-nObama may have subtly succeeded in changing the landscape of thinking about federal involvement in health care. For those who believe that the Constitution means what it says, it was disheartening to see President Trump and so many Republicans in Congress who once defended the free market now assume that all Americans want the feds to care for them and that somehow the Constitution permits it.
Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton rarely agreed on principles of government. But they did agree that when the public treasury becomes a public trough and the people recognize that, the people will send to the federal government only those who will bring home the biggest piece of the federal pie. The House-passed bill was produced by federal government representatives who manifest that.
That's the same federal government that can't deliver the mail.
https://townhall.com/columnists/judgeandrewnapolitano/2017/05/11/the-house-of-representatives-endorses-obamacare-n2324844?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=
America's Growing 'Gun Gap'
A new study out of the University of Kansas confirms what many have anecdotally known — a majority of gun owners vote Republican. What may be news, however, is the growing "gun gap." That term is a reference to the disparity in the percentage of gun owners who identify with either Democrat or Republican parties. The study found that while the percentage of gun owners who vote Republican since 1973 has remained relatively constant, the number of gun owners voting Democrat has dropped significantly.
Over the last three presidential elections the gap has grown, with the highest disparity seen in 2012 — a 30 percentage-point difference. And for three consecutive presidential elections the Republican candidate has seen the percentage of gun owner votes garnered steadily increase, with 62% of gun owners voting for Donald Trump.
Meanwhile, gun ownership among Democrats and Independents has been steadily dropping, primarily due to leftists' campaign to negatively stigmatize gun ownership, as well as their outright demonization of those, such as the NRA, who fight to protect Americans' Second Amendment rights.
However, as lawlessness and crime increase, especially in large Democrat-run urban poverty plantations, more individuals will appreciate the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in recognizing the right of every citizen to have the power to arm and protect themselves against threats, whether it be from criminals or tyrants. In fact, firearms instructors around the country are reporting an increase in the number of black women seeking firearms training for self-defense. That notwithstanding, so long as Democrats continue to fight against Second Amendment rights, one can expect to see the gun gap only increase. ~The Patriot Post
.
Spain: "Pacifist" Imam Arrested
on Terror Charges
Jijona, in Alicante Province, Spain
by Soeren Kern
{gatestoneinstitute.org} ~ Spanish authorities have arrested a Muslim cleric — whom the New York Times once praised for his efforts to fight radicalization within Germany's Islamic community — for alleged ties to the Islamic State... Hesham Shashaa (aka Abu Adam), a 46-year-old Egyptian-Palestinian, was detained near Alicante in southeastern Spain on April 26 on charges of aiding the Islamic State, extolling terrorism and promoting Salafi-jihadism. The Spanish Interior Ministry said that Shashaa had facilitated the travel to Spain of Islamic State jihadists from Syria and Iraq by providing them with money, refuge and fake documents... https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10332/hesham-shashaaJijona, in Alicante Province, Spain
by Soeren Kern
Emory University Is Paying 100% of School
Costs For ‘Needy’ Illegal Aliens
by Howard Portnoy
{lidblog.com} ~ Universities throughout America are continuing to play Truth or Dare when it comes to how far they are willing to go to pamper students who are in the U.S. illegally... Last month, Duke approved a resolution to create a “safe space” on campus for illegals that supposedly makes them impervious to immigration law and its enforcers. Now Emory in Atlanta has taken the lunacy a step further, announcing a program to be rolled out this fall that pledges to pay “100% of demonstrated financial need for undergraduate Undocumented Students (with or without DACA) who are admitted as first-year, first-degree-seeking students.” That’s “one hundred percent,” as in all. I would say it’s the whole enchilada, but then I would be accused of cultural appropriation!...http://lidblog.com/emory-university-illegal-immigrant/.
Democrats: Still Trying To Sell
The Same Old Sh…er…Stuff!
by Joe Messina
{lidblog.com} ~ The Democrats keep telling us how wrong the Right is. How wrong Republicans are for America. And how Republicans hate illegals, clean air, clean water, and so much more... I say, it’s the Democrats that have lost their way. It’s the Democrats who hate America. “Elitism” is not only owned by Democrats, but is actually being perfected by them and is shining brighter in their outrages since the election. Americans as a whole rejected Democrat policies and foundations. Now the first thing my Dem friends will say is that liar-Clinton won the popular vote. I know so what! She won the majority of votes in the very Liberal inner city areas. Large, densely populated, Democrat cities (NYC, Chicago, LA, etc) don’t and shouldn’t speak for the rest of our country...http://lidblog.com/democrats-still-trying-to-sell-same-old/.
Failing Those Who Served Us
by JANET LEVY
{familysecuritymatters.org} ~ Three years after the 2014 Veterans Health Administration scandal erupted in headlines, outrage, investigations, and the resignation of then-secretary of veterans' affairs Eric Shinseki... veterans still must contend with an agency that provides less than stellar service. A government report issued in February found that the VA's shift to using more private-sector care for veterans has its own problems. They include cumbersome authorization and scheduling procedures, inadequate provider networks, and the potential for veterans having to pay their own treatment costs. Plus wait times for care, the heart of the 2014 scandal, are still long: an average of 45 days for 53% of veterans. Problematic health care, as well as the descent into homelessness for a growing number of our nation's veterans, belies our posture of national pride in our troops. We label them heroes, and then we fail to properly provide for them... http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/failing-those-who-served-us?f=must_readsby JANET LEVY
.
Mark Levin On Comey: "A Lot Of Legal And Historical Illiterates Posing As TV Hosts And Commentators"
.
TUCKER: "Totally Irresponsible" to Link Comey Firing & Russia Investigation
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5429517100001
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5429517100001
.
Former FBI Assistant Director on James Comey Firing
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5429211915001
VIDEO: http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5429211915001
.
The Strongest Media Reactions to President Trump's Firing of James Comey
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYG0VsyfhuA
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYG0VsyfhuA
.
Colbert audience cheers wildly after learning Trump fired Comey (Before MSM slants their views)
VIDEO: http://www.mrctv.org/videos/colbert-audience-cheers-wildly-after-learning-trump-fired-comey
VIDEO: http://www.mrctv.org/videos/colbert-audience-cheers-wildly-after-learning-trump-fired-comey
.
White House Daily Briefing: Deputy press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders (05-10-2017)
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvkLKF07-vQ
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvkLKF07-vQ
.
The House of Representatives
Endorses liar-nObamacare
{townhall.com} ~ Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives crafted a partisan compromise bill that endorsed and reinforced the Affordable Care Act, or liar-nObamacare. This was done notwithstanding claims to the contrary by President Donald Trump and the House Republican leadership, who want us to believe that this bill, if it becomes law, will effectively repeal and replace liar-nObamacare.
liar-nObamacare is a stool with four problematic legs. The constitutional leg is the premise that the federal government has the lawful power to regulate the delivery of health care. The legal leg is the premise that the federal government is obliged to provide health insurance to everyone in America. The economic leg commands that everyone in the U.S. purchase and maintain health insurance. And the Orwellian leg says that every physician in the U.S. shall retain all patient records digitally and that federal bureaucrats shall have access to all those records.
None of that is changed in the House-passed bill. Here is the back story.
The original liar-nObamacare proposal had the taxpayers foot everyone's medical bills through a series of taxes, regulations and controls. That is the so-called single-payer system that former President Barack liar-nObama dreamed of. It would have been much like the systems in place today in Great Britain, Canada and Australia, where one waits for months to see government-employed physicians who are stingy with government-owned medications and mired in red tape and long lines over government-financed medical procedures.
Even many of the Democrats who controlled both houses of Congress during liar-nObama's first two years in office were unable to accept that idea. In its place, they produced a 2,700-page piece of legislation, which candidate Trump vowed to dismantle -- saying he favored a market-based, state-regulated system with no federal involvement, the kind we knew in the pre-liar-nObamacare era.
None of those goals is reached by the House-passed bill.
liar-nObamacare's imposition of the federal government between all patients and their physicians was a radical departure from the traditional delivery of medical services in America. This was done with utter disregard to the constitutional constraints imposed upon Congress -- whereby the regulation of health, safety and welfare was retained by the states -- and by radically expanding federal power derived from the Constitution.
Congress' favorite constitutional hook upon which to hang its regulatory hat has been the commerce clause. After more than a half-century of letting Congress characterize nearly any human activity as commerce -- and thus regulable federally -- the Supreme Court in 1995 required that only those behaviors that constitute or support a truly commercial transaction can be reached by the feds. The professions -- medicine, law, architecture, engineering, university teaching, for example -- though one pays for them, had never been considered to be commercial in the sense that they could be federally regulable, until liar-nObamacare came along.
None of this is changed in the House-passed bill.
Under liar-nObamacare, the federal government took over the regulation of health care from the states with a one-size-fits-all metric administered by faceless bureaucrats. I say faceless because when you go to your doctor today, she or he may need the approval of a federal bureaucrat to perform a procedure for you -- a bureaucrat the doctor will never see, only read via a laptop.
None of this is changed in the House-passed bill.
liar-nObamacare also established the duty of the federal government to provide health insurance for every American. No law before liar-nObamacare ever attempted that ambitious unconstitutional improbability. When the Supreme Court accepted a constitutional challenge to the Social Security system, it ruled that the system consisted of taxing and spending -- but created no legally binding obligation on the part of the federal government to spend in the future. Stated differently, under liar-nObamacare, the feds can take your money that they have promised you they will spend on your health care and spend it as they see fit.
None of this is changed in the House-passed bill.
The individual mandate in liar-nObamacare requires that every person in America have health insurance. It also requires employers of more than 50 people to provide health insurance for all employees who work for those employers for more than 30 hours a week. The failure to provide or maintain a health insurance policy by employers or individuals triggers the imposition of a tax by the IRS.
Under the House-passed bill, your employer no longer has to provide you with health insurance, but you must still maintain your own health insurance. Instead of paying the IRS if you let your coverage lapse, you have to pay a $3,000 annual penalty to your insurance carrier -- once you do sign up -- for every year you lacked coverage.
What kind of a repeal is that?
And the faceless bureaucrats still reign. The House-passed bill permits the feds to decide whether your doctor is treating you in a manner consistent with the availability of government resources and to administer liar-nObamacare's thousands of minute politically driven regulations.
By definition, liar-nObamacare will soon be a failure because it causes the expenditure of more money than it takes in. Eventually, it will have no cash. But Barack liar-nObama may have subtly succeeded in changing the landscape of thinking about federal involvement in health care. For those who believe that the Constitution means what it says, it was disheartening to see President Trump and so many Republicans in Congress who once defended the free market now assume that all Americans want the feds to care for them and that somehow the Constitution permits it.
Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton rarely agreed on principles of government. But they did agree that when the public treasury becomes a public trough and the people recognize that, the people will send to the federal government only those who will bring home the biggest piece of the federal pie. The House-passed bill was produced by federal government representatives who manifest that.
That's the same federal government that can't deliver the mail.
https://townhall.com/columnists/judgeandrewnapolitano/2017/05/11/the-house-of-representatives-endorses-obamacare-n2324844?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=
Comments