I’m sure you will remember back in March, when the health care legislation was being so hotly debated. At the time, Congressman Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan, said that he would not vote for any legislation that included federal funding for abortions. He said that he would ONLY vote for President Obama’s health care legislation as long as the President would issue an Executive Order clarifying that no federal funds would be used for abortions.
The President signed an Executive Order purporting to do just that.
It is unfortunate that Cong. Stupak and his small band of followers didn’t listen to the pro-life warning sirens in March – when they warned of obvious pathways created by Obamacare that lead straight to federal funds being used to pay for abortions. Still, Cong. Stupak and several other blue dog Democrats trusted President Obama and voted for his health care bill.
Fast forward to the present: Pro-Life organizations just reported that more than $160 million in federal funding was being allocated to state high-risk insurance pools in Pennsylvania and New Mexico that included abortion services.
After this news surfaced, the Department of Health and Human Services was quick to post a statement rejecting this claim. Then they issued a second statement promising to communicate to state agencies that federal funds for patients with “pre-existing conditions will not” be used for abortion services.
While that is certainly good news, it does nothing to alleviate the concerns of pro-life Americans. After all, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has still never refuted her comments in a letter to Democratic and Republican congressional leaders on the implementation of the President’s healthcare law when she wrote, “States may choose whether and how they participate in the program, which is funded by the federal government.”
I believe this confusion between the states, the federal government and HHS, only proves the President’s Executive Order on this issue is meaningless and can’t be relied on to protect the lives of the unborn.
Whether the policy consequence was intended or not, this latest revelation is sadly just another example of a President whose track record with the truth has left many Americans scratching their heads.
I want to remind you:
- It was this President who said if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor – but even the New York Times reported that in fact, under Obamacare, that’s not necessarily might not be the case.
- It was this President who said, “We must pass the stimulus to keep unemployment from reaching double digits,” However, a year after its passage, the unemployment rate had already skyrocketed to double digits, and continues to hover around 10%.
- It was this President who said, he “will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days,” but that hasn’t been true – many bills have been signed within hours or days of passage.
- It was this President who said, “we’ll have the negotiations (about healthcare) televised on C-SPAN, so that people can see who is making arguments on behalf of their constituents, and who are making arguments on behalf of the drug companies or the insurance companies,” instead, the meetings were held behind closed doors.
- It was this President who said he was, “committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994.” However, for the fiscal year 2010, total earmarks are costing taxpayers $15.9 billion.
As I’ve said many times before, elections have consequences – but at least we can do something about it come November. Support Huck PAC as we continue working tirelessly to elect conservative candidates and send them to our State Capitals and to Washington D.C. – let’s hold our elected officials accountable for their promises.
(Governor Mike Huckabee Newsletter 7/21/2010)
The Heritage Foundation’s “Morning Bell” on July 20, reminds us of Obama’s campaign promise of no tax increase for families making $250,000 a year, or less. He repeated this promise September 9, 2009 as president of the United States that there would be no higher taxes but instead we would have greater security. The penalty we face for not purchasing Obamacare is from the IRS, as noted by Obama’s Justice Department, people will be required to report it on their income tax returns. The CBO estimates a cost of $4,000,000,000 a year to American taxpayers. “ Yale Law School professor Jack Balkin told a meeting of progressive activists last month that President Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill. This bill is a tax.” ”
Congress uses the “Commerce Clause” as grounds to force us to buy their Obamacare or face sanctions from the IRS. The logic in that leads to a Congress that can do anything it wants. ” They could: require us to buy a new Chevy Impala each year to support the government-supported auto industry; require us to buy war bonds to pay for the Iraq and Afghan wars; or force us to eat our vegetables.”
The Heritage Foundation clearly understands and explains the myriad of problems Obamacare has with the Constitution. ” The Obamacare mandate is still unprecedented and unconstitutional.”
“But perhaps more importantly, what does the episode say about the integrity of the White House? The President went on national television and insisted in unequivocal terms that his individual mandate was not a tax. Now his administration is saying the exact opposite. At what point do the American people lose all faith in this President’s word?”
Haven’t we reached that point long ago? Where do we go from here? For starters, Repeal Obamacare. http://heritageforamerica.org/issue-briefs/repeal-obamacare/
(Source: Heritage.org – Morning Bell, July 20, 2010)
When the Legislature took its final action on the FY 2011 Health and Human Services budget in March, a major assumption was built into that bill. It was expected that Congress would pass legislation extending the enhanced federal matching funds for Medicaid so that the additional money would run throughout the whole year. Things have changed since adjournment and the prospect of a Medicaid shortfall in the new year has increased dramatically.
The ability to balance the state’s FY 2011 budget hinged on the federal government providing more Medicaid funding. The Democrats’ Medicaid budget reduced the General Fund appropriation from $606 million in FY 10 to just $394 million in FY 11. Believing they would receive a full year of an additional 6.2 percent of federal Medicaid funds from Washington enabled legislative Democrats’ to divert money to other departments. Instead of putting $119 million towards Medicaid, it was spent on numerous other items throughout the budget. Kind of a “rob Peter to pay Paul” scheme.
Extension of the federal Medicaid enhanced match was considered for inclusion in the federal health care reform bill, but was not added due to the cost – $24 billion. After health care reform passed, it was assumed that this could be attached to the emergency appropriation bill to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Republicans, who are needed to pass that bill, refused to vote for any domestic spending included in the bill.
Next, congressional leadership decided to add it to this year’s stimulus bill. Instead of being honest with the American public on what the money was to do, they claimed it was a “jobs” provision. The money would go to save public employee jobs. That didn’t work either, as Blue Dog Democrats in the House refused to vote for the bill until the money was stripped out.
Once the House voted before Memorial Day on the bill, the experts in Washington believed the Senate would add the funding to the bill and jam it down the House members’ throats. That has yet to happen since Senate Republicans refuse to go along with the plan. Early last week, Senate leadership offered up a sliding scale where states would instead get 5.3 percent bump for January through March and then 3.2 percent bump from April to June. That idea would have lowered Iowa’s allotment from $119 million to $80 million. That didn’t work either.
Then last Wednesday night, Senator Reid announced that the plan had been changed to 3.2 percent for January through March, and 2.1 percent for April, May, and June. Estimates on Iowa’s share under this plan are not available yet, but it is likely to be significantly less than the previous estimate of $80 million. He also said he didn’t know if he had the 60 votes needed to pass the bill and that he had no backup plan. And, he had no assurance that the House would accept the Senate’s new plan. So, Iowa’s Medicaid budget for FY 2011 looks like it might be short at the start of the new fiscal year, July 1.
(From Representative Dwayne Alons Capitol Comments June 30, 2010)
Take Action Now: In June, Congressman Steve King of Iowa filed a petition that would force the U.S. House of Representatives to vote on repealing Obamacare. We must repeal Obamacare, now! Tell your Member of Congress to sign the petition to repeal Obamacare.
The Heritage For Action is supporting Steve King”s bill to repeal health care. Pelosi has stopped the bill in the house so we need to get 218 votes to get the bill to the floor for a vote. Heritage For Action is featuring a phone number a day of congressman who have not yet signed the bill to flush out those who say that they want to repeal health care but will not sign the discharge petition. Todays congressman is Eric Cantor.
Everyone should call Cantors office today and ask him to sign the petition……202-225-2815.
There is also a prepared email to just fill in your name and send to congress. Here is the website http://heritageforamerica.org/
Heritage Action for America launched a national campaign to repeal Obamacare. Heritage Action will work aggressively to advance a discharge petition filed today in the House of Representatives by Rep. Steve King (R-IA). The discharge petition would force a vote on H.R.4972, a bill to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
“This is a great day for the American people,” said Heritage Action CEO Michael A. Needham. “The effects of Obamacare are being felt more and more every day. For Americans all across the country, the reality of a hostile government takeover of health care is setting in and poll after poll continues to show the public’s disapproval. We must act now to reverse this poor policy.”
Cameron Sutton, a longtime Heritage supporter and President and CEO of Iowa’s ARAG, praised Rep. King, saying he “took a bold step forward in leading the fight to repeal Obamacare with the filing of this discharge petition. As a businessman and employer of hundreds of people in Iowa, I know first hand how damaging this law will be not only to businesses but to every Iowan and every American.”
Fighting for the full repeal of Obamacare will be the first major initiative of Heritage Action.
“As a long time member of The Heritage Foundation I am excited to see their new sister organization Heritage Action for America take the lead to push Members of Congress across the country to sign this petition to begin the repeal process of this damaging law,” said Mr. Sutton.
“By filing a discharge petition to force a vote on repeal, Rep. King demonstrates an understanding that conservatives cannot wait for a new Congress to fight this hostile government takeover of our health care system. Heritage Action will stand with Rep. King and every other Member of Congress who signs onto the repeal effort,” Mr. Needham said.
“Heritage Action will commit substantial resources toward repealing Obamacare and make clear that those who fail to support this effort are responsible for Obamacare,” Mr. Needham said.
Heritage Action will engage in political grassroots advocacy to educate Members of Congress and their constituents about the problems with Obamacare. Heritage Action will target Members of Congress at home in their districts and in Washington, DC with paid political advertisements, local grassroots activity, online activist tools and earned media.
With more than 661,000 members across the country, The Heritage Foundation and its sister organization, Heritage Action for America, are committed to building an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity and a civil society flourishes. Obamacare hinders those objectives. For more information on how we plan to repeal Obamacare, visit heritageforamerica.org.
March 22, 2010 by Bob Livingston
For 15 months there has been a growing opposition to the increasing encroachment of the Federal government over the rights of its citizens. It finally reached a crescendo last week as the House worked to steamroll Obamacare through despite objections by the vast majority of the electorate. The past 12 months have been extremely frustrating for many. People voiced their opposition to Obamacare, Cap and Trade and stimulus bills to their Representatives and Senators, but it seemed that most of their opposition fell on deaf ears. The Tea Parties were formed, and the shouting grew louder. Many of the elected class who were supporting the growing government—both Democrats and Republicans—found their town hall meetings to be unpleasant places to be. But still, government grew and spending increased… and the march to Obamacare continued. Deciding that their voices weren’’t being heard and their marches on Washington were being ignored, voters wanting smaller government and a return to Constitutional principals voted in droves. The results were upsets in New Jersey, Virginia and finally, in Massachusetts. The election of Republican Scott Brown to the late Ted Kennedy’s senate seat seemed to end the threat of Obamacare by eliminating the Democrats’ filibuster-proof majority. Supporters of small government and Tea Party activists breathed a sigh of relief. But, despite President Obama’’s promise to focus on jobs, Obamacare didn’’t die. It continued to fester and so the shouting got loud again. But still the elected class, pushing their socialist agenda and seeking to control us from cradle to grave—seeking to enslave us with unconstitutional mandates—didn’t listen. Writing in Anti-Federalist letter No. 1, Brutus (Robert Yates) said that in a free republic, all laws are derived from the consent of the people and passed by representatives who are supposed to know the minds of their constituents and possessed of the integrity to declare this mind. Unfortunately, the representatives holding the majority don’t possess this integrity. So Brutus wrote: “If the people are to give their assent to the laws, by persons chosen and appointed by them, the manner of the choice and the number chosen, must be such, as to possess, be disposed, and consequently qualified to declare the sentiments of the people; for if they do not know, or are not disposed to speak the sentiments of the people, the people do not govern, but the sovereignty is in a few.” That’s were we are now—with sovereignty in the hands of a few. So now it’s time to take the next step. Fortunately, we have the words and deeds of some of our Founding Fathers to direct us. Since its beginning the Federal government has sought to grow and even those who took part in the framing of the Constitution have tested it’s parameters by trying to intrude on the rights of Americans. The second president, John Adams, signed legislation that made it a treasonable activity to publish “any false, scandalous and malicious writing.” This was one of the laws that became part of the Alien and Sedition Acts. As a result, 25 men, most of them Republican supporters of Thomas Jefferson were arrested and their newspapers forced to shut down. One of those arrested was Benjamin Franklin’s grandson, Benjamin Franklin Bache, editor of the Philadelphia Democrat-Republican Aurora. In response, Jefferson, then the vice president, secretly wrote the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. In them he argued that the Alien and Sedition Acts were acts of usurpation—that the Federal government had overstepped its bounds and was exercising powers which belonged to the states. After all, the 10th Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. He saw the Constitution not as a document that restrained the people, but as one that restrained the Federal government. And he believed that was a good thing. As an aside: Obama has stated just the opposite. He has said he finds it unfortunate that the Constitution contains the restrictions on Government that it does. Jefferson corresponded with James Madison (known as the father of the Constitution) about the Kentucky Resolutions and Madison drafted similar Resolutions for Virginia. Both Kentucky and Virginia adopted the resolutions which essentially said that when the Federal government assumes undelegated powers—those not enumerated in the Constitution—those acts are un“authoritative, void, and of no force.” These came to be known as the Principals of ’98. It’s time to lobby your state representative and state senator and governor and push for a law to prohibit the enforcement of Obamacare and other unconstitutional laws in your state. It’s time to resurrect the Principals of ’98. Both Virginia and Idaho have voted to sue the Federal government over Obamacare. You must push your state to do the same. The overreach has gone on for far too long. In addition to Obamacare there is the looming Cap and Trade legislation, there are restrictive gun laws and, under George W. Bush, there was the USA PATRIOT Act and the REAL ID Act (which states have resisted). Resistance to a tyrannical government is very American. And if the Federal government continues its oppression then it will be time to consider other steps. Writing to Madison in 1787, Jefferson said, “I hold it that a little rebellion, now and then, is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms are in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people, which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” And then there is one more step to consider. It was commonly understood prior to 1861 that the states reserved the right to secede. There had been talk of secession by the northern New England states many times. Even Abraham Lincoln, as a representative, recognized the states had the right to secede—he only changed his mind after he held the reins of the presidency. In 1825, Jefferson wrote: “If every infraction of a compact of so many parties is to be resisted at once as a dissolution, none can ever be formed which would last one year. We must have patience and longer endurance then with our brethren while under delusion; give them time for reflection and experience of consequences; keep ourselves in a situation to profit by the chapter of accidents; and separate from our companions only when the sole alternatives left are the dissolution of our Union with them or submission to a government without limitation of powers. Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there can be no hesitation. But in the meanwhile, the States should be watchful to note every material usurpation on their rights; to denounce them as they occur in the most peremptory terms; to protest against them as wrongs to which our present submission shall be considered, not as acknowledgments or precedents of right, but as a temporary yielding to the lesser evil, until their accumulation shall overweigh that of separation.” For too long we have failed in being watchful of every “material usurpation” of our rights. But for the last year at least, we have protested them. And our protests have fallen on deaf ears. Dissolution must be in the back of our minds now. But, we’re not ready for that step… not yet.
Bob Livingston
(Paraphrased from reports on the trip to Iowa City 3/25/10)
President Obama came to our beautiful state last week to sell us on the health care bill already pressed upon us. The Republicans called a rally at the Pentacrest the night before and the Patriot movement called for a protest right in front of Obama. With many state and national speakers, the Republican rally reportedly had 200-250 attend. There were about 1,000 marchers on the streets of Iowa City the next morning before President Obama arrived and about 300 stayed in front of the Field House, where he was speaking until about 2:30.
Parking was difficult for people driving in and although Iowa City is the greatest bastion of liberalism in Iowa, bus loads of people came in from outside the state to fill seats for his speech.
The Patriots outside were focused on the issues and were peaceful. Many reported observing U of I students mingling in the Patriot crowd, trying to provoke confrontations without success.
The northwest Iowa group received many encouragements at their stops on the return trip home where people thanked them for taking the time to go down there and represent Americans in expressing their displeasure over things that have been going on in DC. Some participants had been interviewed several times by the the TV crews and reporters crawling all over Iowa City yet none was shown on the evening news from the Patriots protesting. The articles posted on web sites were negative, lies of racism and invariably referred to us as “teabaggers”.
“As normal, humble, kind and caringn Americans, and Christians of every denomination, we are the best argument aggainst their campaign of misinformation about the Patriot movement. Our friends and neighbors know us, they know we are not monsters, so get out and use every opportunity to witness for your God, your Country, and your brothers and sisters in the Patriot movement. Do not be shy about pointing out the liberal/progressive lies for what they are….We will be heard, our concerns will be addressed, and the Republic will be restored, for we will not quit until it is so! God bless each and every one of you, and may God forever bless this great land!” (Larry)
President Lincoln signed the Homestead Act in 1862. It was “short and beautiful” giving plots of 160 acre land in the west to anyone with the backbone to live and work on it. These plots were given regardless of who they were or who they would vote for in the next election. They were entrusted with freedom to govern themselves as they developed the property and assumed personal responsibility in being productive land owners. This impartial act of legislation built America and the character of the people who spread across it, leading to unprecedented growth.
How different from legislation today. The health care bill recently passed forces us to purchase government mandated insurance and anything different will be considered illegal. This is bullying the American people. We are being seen not as equals to the legislators, capable of caring for ourselves but as something to be shaped and perfected by the experts – by our government who see themselves as knowing better than ourselves. This attitude has been in the schools for about 100 years, based on Woodrow Wilson’s progressivism that the Declaration of Independence is obsolete and we need to be liberated from it. Today we are being governed by a President and Congress that considers the Constitution obsolete, a “living” document requiring constant change depending on our times. They do not believe there is an absolute truth and in the absence of absolute truth, ”good” is subject to the ideas of this President and his party.
(comments based on article in Imprimis, December 2009)
President Obama will be in Iowa City, Thursday, March 25. A bus is leaving from Sioux Falls and will be making stops along the way for anyone needing a ride. The bus will arrive by noon in Iowa City before President Obama’s Health bill speech at 1:00. Please let Larry or Joy know as soon as possible if you are interested in joining your voice with others in Iowa City tomorrow.
March 22, 2010 12:39 PM EDT by Elizabeth MacDonald
The IRS’s powers are effective immediately, as an estimated $400 billion in new taxes and fees kick in starting in 2013.
The insurance mandate takes effect in 2013, too. New coverage subsidies for small businesses begin immediately; the new long-term care entitlement starts in 2011; and new insurance exchanges start in 2013 as well.
Broader IRS powers also are being enacted despite the news that dozens of states may mount potential court challenges based on the constitutionality of health reform’s insurance mandate, among other things (Click on EMac’s January column: “Is Health Reform Unconstitutional?”). Florida, Alabama, Idaho, Nebraska ,Virginia, Texas, Utah and Washington number among the states planning court challenges.
Some legal experts say this fight may reach the level of the US Supreme Court, as it centers on the US Constitution’s interstate commerce clause. Congressional Democrats say they have the power to mandate that taxpayers must buy health insurance or pay a fine.
Even though legal experts say the US constitution does not force Americans to buy any good or service as a condition of being a citizen, and that the constitution does not let Congress regulate the act of doing nothing, meaning having to pay a fine if you don’t buy insurance.
Also, the insurance exchanges launched in the bill essentially do not let taxpayers buy health insurance across state lines, although the new law says states may merge their exchanges with neighboring states.
The IRS will now have the ability to issue liens, seize tax refunds, assess penalties, and to verify whether taxpayers’ health insurance coverage is “acceptable.”
“One of the most troubling aspects of this new IRS authority is the newly granted power to collect additional taxes from Americans whose health insurance coverage is deemed to be insufficient to meet the definition of minimum coverage, as defined by federal bureaucrats, required to be purchased,” the House Republicans’ analysis says.
The report adds: “Disturbingly, the IRS would be in charge of verifying that every American taxpayer has obtained acceptable health coverage for every month of the year. If the IRS determines that a taxpayer lacks acceptable insurance for even a single month, then the IRS would impose a new tax on that taxpayer, even auditing the taxpayer and could assess interest and penalties on top of the tax.”
The agency might have to hire as many as 16,500 additional staffers, including new auditors and agents, so as to oversee the program, says Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., the ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee. That would come at an additional taxpayer cost of $10 billion, estimates show.
“It is a very dangerous expansion of the IRS’ power and reach into the lives of virtually every American,” Rep. Camp said in a statement.
The Ways and Means report says, among other things:
- IRS agents would be tasked with determining whether Americans had obtained the insurance coverage required under the individual mandate.
- Individuals could be fined $2,250 or 2 percent of income, whichever is greater, if you are unable to prove you have “minimum essential coverage.”
- The IRS would be empowered to confiscate tax refunds if necessary.
- Audits probably would increase as a result of the legislation’s new requirements.
- The budget for IRS operations will balloon by $10 billion in the next decade in order to administrate the new program.
- Nearly half of the new individual mandate taxes will be paid “by Americans earning less than 300 percent of poverty, $66150 for a family of four.
http://emac.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/03/22/irs-gains-broader-powers-under-health-reform/