From One News Now

A conservative congresswoman is calling for an independent investigation to determine whether President Obama is attempting to trade a federal judgeship for a vote in favor of his healthcare reform plan.

President Obama hosted a closed reception at the White House Wednesday that included ten House Democrats who voted “no” on the healthcare reform bill. One of the ten was Congressman John Matheson (D-Utah), whose brother Scott Matheson, Jr., was nominated Wednesday by President Obama to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Representative Matheson contends that the president did not nominate his brother in exchange for a “yes” vote on healthcare reform. But some Republicans are not buying that claim. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) told CNN’s Larry King that there needs to be an independent investigation into the Matheson matter.
 
“We’ve seen the Cornhusker kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, the union loophole, and now the big question is: Is the White House trading healthcare votes for judgeships?” she argued. “This is a pretty serious issue, Larry.”
 
White House officials label as “absurd” the notion that the Matheson judgeship would be tied to a healthcare vote.

From Fox News

In pushing a giant step closer to a health care reform deal, Democratic leaders are once again drawing fire from their critics for extending special treatment to an interest group in exchange for its support of the bill.

In pushing a giant step closer to a health care reform deal, Democratic leaders are once again drawing fire from their critics for extending special treatment to an interest group in exchange for its support of the bill.

The latest deal was struck Thursday among the White House, Congress and union leaders over the proposed tax on high-value “Cadillac” health insurance plans.”

Unions had objected strongly to the proposed tax on high-value insurance policies, fearing it would hurt their members, and they won several concessions from the administration. Under the deal, if it becomes law, union workers will be shielded from the 40 percent tax for five years — until 2018. The threshold for the tax also was raised so that it will kick in for plans worth $24,000 instead of $23,000. And dental and vision coverage will not count toward that threshold.

But what about everybody else?

The unions, traditional supporters of the Democratic Party and a major factor in Obama’s political infrastructure, got a deal, but Republicans said that non-union workers will still have to pay the tax from the get-go starting in 2013.

“I guess this bill is only good if it doesn’t apply to you,” GOPAC Chairman Frank Donatelli said.

“Millions of non-union workers … would be forced to pay higher taxes for the same benefits their union counterparts” receive, Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee said in a written statement.

Read the rest of the story

From OneNewsNow

A constitutional historian says American courts would have to overturn their last 80 years of jurisprudence to uphold the constitutionality of the healthcare bill in Congress.

Thirteen Republican attorneys general are threatening to file a lawsuit against the Democrats’ healthcare bill if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) refuse to remove a provision being called the “Cornhusker Kickback” — the nearly $100 million Medicaid deal Democratic Senator Ben Nelson secured for his home state of Nebraska. Ostensibly, the deal was in exchange for Nelson’s vote — the 60th of 60 needed — favoring the legislation. As reported earlier, the senator’s decision has angered many Nebraskans.
 
In a letter sent last week, the 13 attorneys general argue the provision is “constitutionally flawed” and violates the U.S. Constitution’s protection against “arbitrary” legislation. Constitutional historian David Barton, the president of WallBuilders, also believes the provision is unconstitutional.
 
“I think there’s huge constitutional problems with this thing,” exclaims Barton, “and it may be that we see the power of Congress limited constitutionally through a number of different venues by these various lawsuits that are out there.”
 
Barton notes that court challenges are looming over the bill’s individual mandate, as well as its anti-trust provision that forces a government monopoly. Texas Governor Rick Perry has also threatened to file a lawsuit, arguing the bill violates states’ rights outlined in the Tenth Amendment.
 
Just before Christmas, The Heritage Foundation also questioned the constitutional legality of the healthcare legislation, publishing a legal memorandum charging that the individual mandate “takes congressional power and control to a striking new level.”
 
The letter to Senator Reid and Congresswoman Pelosi was signed by top prosecutors in Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Michigan, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington state. Four of the Republican attorneys general are running for governor in their respective states.

Health Care Vote Puts Nelson 30 Points Down in Reelection Bid

From Rasmussen Reports

The good news for Senator Ben Nelson is that he doesn’t have to face Nebraska voters until 2012.

If Governor Dave Heineman challenges Nelson for the Senate job, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows the Republican would get 61% of the vote while Nelson would get just 30%. Nelson was reelected to a second Senate term in 2006 with 64% of the vote.

Nelson’s health care vote is clearly dragging his numbers down. Just 17% of Nebraska voters approve of the deal their senator made on Medicaid in exchange for his vote in support of the plan. Overall, 64% oppose the health care legislation, including 53% who are Strongly Opposed.

Read the rest of this story at Rasmussen Reports.

The editor of this Nebraska newspaper reacts to bribe received by Senator Ben Nelson

From the Journal Star

Since when has Nebraska become synonymous for cynical “what’s in it for me”-type politics?

The term “Cornhusker kickback,” is already a favorite of television’s talking heads.

That’s how the rest of the country sees the deal that was the price for Sen. Ben Nelson’s support for the Democrats’ health reform plan.

Under its provisions, the federal government would pay all additional Medicaid costs for Nebraska “in perpetuity.” The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the deal may be worth $100 million over 10 years.

The deal is the embodiment of what is wrong with Washington.

Instead of thoughtful, careful work on real problems, Washington lawmakers cobble together special deals, dubious financial accounting and experimentation on a grandiose scale.

Nelson wasn’t the first to make a special deal. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., secured the “Louisiana purchase” – as much as $300 million in additional federal funds for Medicaid. Florida, New York and Pennsylvania would be allowed to retain Medicare Advantage. The list goes on.

It’s time to push the reset button on health reform.

The effort has gone awry. As pointed out by Sen. Mike Johanns, actuaries in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimated that costs of medical care in the country will actually be higher after reform than if nothing is done.

Promises that reform under the Senate bill will reduce the federal deficit are largely dependent on cuts to Medicaid that many observers think will be so politically unpopular that they will never happen.

There’s little doubt that the nation’s health care system has deep problems. Millions of Americans are unable to find affordable health insurance. Costs of medical care continue to outpace the overall rate of inflation.

The Senate plan and the House plan address some of these ills. Notably, however, they make little attempt to combat the root causes of rising health care costs.

As lawmakers in Washington spent months locked in partisan battle over health reform, the public has grown increasingly suspicious.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll released Dec. 16 showed that only 37 percent of respondents think that health care would be better after reform, compared with 50 percent who believe it will be better if nothing is done.

Nelson has pointed out that in coming days there will be other occasions on which Democrats will need 60 votes to muscle their plan through the Senate.

Nelson ought to use those opportunities to force Washington to start over on health care reform. Nebraska might have a sweeter deal than other states under the Senate plan, but Congress needs to do better for the overall good of the country.

What started as Sen. Ben Nelson’s personal stand against covering abortion with taxpayer money translated, somehow, into millions of dollars in federal aid for his home state — drawing criticism that his vote was bought.

From Fox News

What started as Sen. Ben Nelson’s personal stand against covering abortion with taxpayer money translated, somehow, into millions of dollars in federal aid for his home state.

The Nebraska Democrat, following weeks of negotiations with his caucus, finally agreed to back the Senate’s health care reform bill this weekend after Democratic leaders made a series of concessions. Nelson’s support gives Democrats the 60 votes they need to overcome a filibuster, barring any last-minute defections.

But critics by Sunday were heavily questioning Nelson’s motivations, given that the abortion restrictions he sought and won did not satisfy several major anti-abortion lawmakers and groups and that it took a major federal payoff to his state to seal the deal.

Critics were calling it the “cornhusker kickback” and the “Nebraska windfall,” lobbing accusations of political deal-making at Nelson.

“It’s pretty obvious that votes have been bought,” Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said.

Nelson did win restrictions on abortion coverage, which is what he sought for weeks. Under the compromise, states would be permitted to ban insurance coverage of abortions in policies sold in the exchanges, except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in jeopardy. In states where such coverage is permitted, consumers must notify their insurance company they want it, and pay for it separately.

That didn’t do much to please some anti-abortion lawmakers. But Nelson also won several other concessions, most notably a commitment from the federal government to fully fund his state’s expanded Medicaid population. All states get full federal assistance for the first three years of the bill — but Nebraska would be the only state getting full assistance afterward. One Democratic official put the cost to the federal government at $45 million over a decade.

Democratic senators defended the Nebraska deal. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said all states get a lot of federal aid for Medicaid anyway, and that special treatment is hardly unique to Nebraska.

“Personally, every state gets some kind of differential treatment based on their situation,” he told “Fox News Sunday.”

“People fight for their own states. That’s the nature of a democracy,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.

But Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said Nelson’s victory came at the expense of the other 49 states.

“That puts an added burden on all the other states, including mine,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”

The concessions didn’t end there. Nelson also got an exemption from a fee on non-profit health insurers — the language was written in a way that only applies to Nebraska and Michigan.

Read the rest at Fox News.

By Ed Morrissey

How desperate has the White House become to get anything passed under the name of health-care reform?  According to Michael Goldfarb’s source on Capitol Hill, the Obama administration has targeted the last remaining Democratic holdout, at least among moderates — and they’re willing to damage national security to extort his support.  The White House has threatened Ben Nelson (D-NE) with the closure of Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska if he opposes Reid’s latest version, despite its status as the headquarters of US Strategic Command:

According to a Senate aide, the White House is now threatening to put Nebraska’s Offutt Air Force Base on the BRAC list if Nelson doesn’t fall into line.

Offutt Air Force Base employs some 10,000 military and federal employees in Southeastern Nebraska. As our source put it, this is a “naked effort by Rahm Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelson’s vote.” They are “threatening to close a base vital to national security for what?” asked the Senate staffer.

Indeed, Offutt is the headquarters for US Strategic Command, the successor to Strategic Air Command, and not by accident. STRATCOM was located in the middle of the country for strategic reasons. Its closure would be a massive blow to the economy of the state of Nebraska, but it would also be another example of this administration playing politics with our national security.

The Obama administration has little left to use for leverage.  Why not national security?  After all, if we’re going to bring terrorists into Illinois, what does it matter if we put the US Strategic Command on wheels for a few years?

Read the rest of this story at Hot Air.

From The Hill

As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the ’09 elections, the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate support. But these — and the other endorsements — his package has received are all bought and paid for. Here are the deals:

· The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in physicians’ reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6 percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients. Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now, they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the AMA to support his bill … or else!

· The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the AARP — which supposedly represents them — will make more money. (If this galls you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact sbarton@americanseniors.org This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .)

· The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80 billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising budget at the disposal of the administration.

· Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who don’t buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers. They stood for principle and wouldn’t go along with Obama’s blackmail. So the Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.

So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.