U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK), a practicing physician and author of one of the first health care reform bills introduced this year – the Patients’ Choice Act – released the following statement tonight after voting against a procedural motion that will help Congress enact a massive, budget-busting government-run health care bill.

“This bill is the most reckless, irresponsible and dishonest piece of legislation I have seen in my time in Congress. I’m disappointed my colleagues voted for a bill that will bust the budget, increase taxes, coerce taxpayers into funding abortion, and grant politicians and bureaucrats the power to ration and deny medically-necessary care,” Dr. Coburn said.

While many Senators who voted for this measure called it a harmless procedural vote, experts disagree. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, bills that pass procedural tests like the one tonight have a 97.6 percent chance of passing the Senate.

“The accounting tricks in this bill would make Bernie Madoff and Enron executives blush,” Dr. Coburn said. “The bill’s author, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), makes the outlandish claim that this bill ‘saves’ money over ten years. However, he fails to inform the American people that benefits won’t begin for four years while taxes will increase immediately. This would be like a mortgage banker demanding payments for four years before allowing a family to move into their new home. These gimmicks insult the intelligence of every American.”

“Once implemented, the Reid bill will cost at least $2.5 trillion over ten years. Creating a costly new entitlement while we face the risk of a double-dip recession is the height of irresponsibility. Every major government-run health care program is broke or is headed for bankruptcy. Medicare alone faces a long-term debt of $89.3 trillion, which is about six times the size of our entire economy,” Dr. Coburn said. “History shows that great nations collapse over loose fiscal policy, not external threats. The scope of our debt and our reliance on borrowing from potential adversaries, such a China, is a serious national security threat to the United States. This bill will make us more vulnerable and more dependent on excessive and unsustainable borrowing.”

“The bill’s mandate that all Americans must buy insurance is an unconstitutional and unworkable assault on individual liberty and personal responsibility. If this bill passes millions of younger, healthy Americans will saves thousands of dollars every year by dropping coverage until they get sick. The low penalties of not buying coverage in the bill combined with assurances that no one can be denied coverage will push younger and healthier Americans out of the system, leaving older Americans to endure skyrocketing costs,” Dr. Coburn said, noting that eleven studies from government and private sources show health care premiums will increase faster because of the policies in the Reid bill.

“The Reid bill also takes a historic step toward forcing every American taxpayer to finance abortion. The bill gives the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to include elective abortions in the government-run and taxpayer-funded ‘public option,’ which is a radical departure from the federal government’s current policy of not funding abortion with public funds,” Dr. Coburn said.

“Sadly, this bill’s lack of respect for life doesn’t end with coercing public funding for abortion. The bill gives bureaucrats the ability to deny coverage on the basis of cost, not care. For instance, the bill specifically authorizes the Secretary of HHS to deny payments for prevention services the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has recommended against. This is the same task force that recently suggested women under 50 should not receive annual mammograms. As a practicing physician, such decisions should be made by a doctor and her physician, not a politician or bureaucrat in Washington,” Dr. Coburn said.

From LifeSiteNews

The statistics are scary when it comes to the percentage of unborn children born with special needs who become victims of abortion. One fiscal conservative group says the task for parents raising such children is made more difficult by extra taxes found in Harry Reid’s new Senate health care bill.

The measure has already been condemned by pro-life groups and the Catholic bishops for its abortion funding and this latest analysis won’t make it any more endearing.

Ryan Ellis of Americans for Tax Reform notes that the bill contains 18 separate tax increases — one of them targeting parents of disabled children.

“One of them caps the amount that can be deferred in Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) at $2500 per year (a similar provision was included in the Pelosi-Obama health bill),” Ellis notes.

“There is currently no limit to how much can be saved, though all monies must be used by the end of the year. Employers may put a cap in place for their employees, but this would put a cap in federal tax law for the first time. According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), 30 million American families use an FSA,” he explained.

Most Americans won’t notice a $2,500 cap as FSAs tend to be used for things like small deductibles, co-payments, eyeglasses, over-the-counter medicines, and laser eye surgery.

But parents of special needs children will, he says.

Read the rest of the story

On last night’s radio show, Mark Levin identified four Democratic US Senators that he believes are MOST VULNERABLE in terms of their re-election: Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Ben Nelson (D-NE).

Levin encouraged EVERYONE – regardless of where they live – to contact all four Senators and tell them “if you vote to allow the health care bill to proceed to the floor of the Senate, I will do everything in my power to see you are defeated.”

The best opportunity to kill the health care ‘reform’ bill is on the motion for cloture.  A total of requires 60 votes is required for cloture.  Once the bill reaches the floor, only 51 votes will be required to pass it.

We have setup a special ACTION PAGE on our website to allow you to easily contact all four of these Senators TODAY.  It includes  SEND A FAX function that will fax a message to all four Senators with a statement, “I intend to pledge $___against you if you vote in-favor of allowing the health reform bill to come to the floor.”

A vote to allow the bill to proceed is expect THIS SATURDAY – so people must ACT NOW.

From Hugh Hewitt’s blog

The best way to turn not just three but many more than three is by sending a message that support for Obamacare is a political death wish, with support pouring into the campaigns of challengers to pro-Obamacare House members from center-right districts.

ReverseTheVote.org has been established by the National Republican Congressional Committee to collect funds to be used only in campaigns against the 24 House Democrats from districts which could go GOP in 50 weeks.  The funds raised at ReverseTheVote.org will be divided equally among the eventual nominees from those districts.  This is the perfect way to make your voice heard and your money count in the campaign against Obamacare.  Give $1 a campaign, or $5, or even $10 or more.  This is a highly focused effort to make these two dozen Democrats pay a political price for ignoring the wishes of their constituents in order to do Nancy Pelosi’s bidding.

Not only will vulnerable House Democrats see the clear consequences of joining in the Pelosi parade, so too will Senate Democrats considering their votes on Obamacare.  Nothing makes so great a sound on the Hill than that of coins falling into your opponents campaign war chest.  Please give generously to ReverseTheVote.org and help stop Obamacare before it destroys American medicine.

From Fox News

Last Saturday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi begged, cajoled, and threatened health care legislation to a successful vote in her chamber, albeit by a razor thin margin of 220-215. The administration and House leadership touted this as a landmark vote, which it is, but only if you ignore the fact that the bill achieves almost none of President Obama’s promised health reform goals. In fact, it is very likely to explode the deficit, drive up health care costs, and inflict massive new taxes on middle-class Americans.

Watching events unfold in Washington at first hand, it’s become clear that health reform has become the Democrats version of “Moby Dick,” as party leaders embrace the premise that they must pass something this year and declare victory, no matter how flawed the final product is. Unfortunately, they may sink the economy along the way.

If clearer heads prevailed, Congress would scrap these partisan bills and start over:

Both the House and Senate bills will cost well over $1 trillion over the next ten years. The CBO scores the Senate bill at $829 billion and the House bill at $1.055 trillion, but only because of the most transparent budget gimmicks. The Senate Budget Committee puts the fully-implemented price tag at roughly $2.5 trillion for the first decade – demolishing the president’s promise that reforms would not cost more than $900 billion.

The cost curve for spending gets bent…up. The CBO says spending in both bills rises at 8 percent annually as far as the eye can see and CMS actuary Richard Foster says that national health spending gets worse, not better. So much for the president’s repeated assurances that reform would slow the rate of health care inflation.

New entitlements plus cost growth equals taxes, and debt, debt, debt. The CBO only scores the bills as reducing the deficit because Democrats pretend that Medicare docs will get slashed by over 20 percent in two years. Reality says Congress will borrow about $240 billion for the “doc fix”. Democrats pretend they will cut over $400 billion out of Medicare through more vigorous price controls – cuts that will never live to see the light of day. Get ready for a bubble in health entitlement debt.

What isn’t borrowed in these plans is inflicted on drug companies, diagnostic companies, private health insurance companies, “Cadillac” health plans, and individuals and businesses that don’t buy government mandated coverage. These taxes and fees, roughly 90 percent of which fall on families making under $200,000 a year, must grow even faster (10 percent annually) to keep up with the new spending spree.

Private insurance: expensive or off-limits. Taxes, fees and ill-conceived insurance reforms raise the specter of double-digit premium inflation for the majority of Americans with insurance. Millions will find their policies don’t pass muster with the bill’s insurance czar, driving them to more costly policies. The rest? Fifteen million will be thrust into Medicaid as eligibility rises to 150 percent of poverty.

It’s not too late for moderates and conservatives in Congress to force Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to chart a safer, bipartisan course. Here are five fundamental, commonsense reforms that will cost less, improve health care quality, and expand coverage:

read the rest of the column

From Investors Business Daily

Failure to buy health insurance in the just-passed health care bill could get you five years in jail with a $250,000 fine. How can violating a law that’s unconstitutional be a felony?

The passage last Saturday night of the House health care measure by a fragile 220-215 margin may well prove to be a Pyrrhic victory. In polls, townhall meetings and tea parties, Americans have shown they don’t want a “reform” that costs a staggering $1.2 trillion yet fails to meet the left’s desire of insuring all the uninsured.

And they certainly don’t want a bill that threatens them with incarceration if they don’t comply.

This monstrosity would raise insurance premiums and taxes to prohibitive levels and add unconscionably to the national debt.

It will force physicians to leave the medical profession in droves, exacerbating an already perilous doctor shortage. This and so-called cost controls will lead to rationing.

The mechanisms for deciding who gets what, if any, care — and even what care will be available — are already in place. Some, like a cost-effectiveness board, slipped into the failed stimulus bill.

Under sections 7201 and 7203 of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s bill, Americans who don’t maintain acceptable health insurance coverage and who choose not to pay a fine/tax of up to 2.5% of income are subject to fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.

As Dave Camp, R-Mich., ranking member of the House Ways and Means Committee, observed, “This is the ultimate example of the Democrats’ command-and-control style of governing — buy what we tell you or go to jail.”

Read the rest of the story

From the Wall Street Journal

The health bill that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is bringing to a vote (H.R. 3962) is 1,990 pages. Here are some of the details you need to know.

What the government will require you to do:

• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a “qualified plan.” If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a “grace period” to switch you to a “qualified plan,” meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there’s no grace period. You’ll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.

• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a “qualified plan” covers and how much you’ll be legally required to pay for it. That’s like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.

On Nov. 2, the Congressional Budget Office estimated what the plans will likely cost. An individual earning $44,000 before taxes who purchases his own insurance will have to pay a $5,300 premium and an estimated $2,000 in out-of-pocket expenses, for a total of $7,300 a year, which is 17% of his pre-tax income. A family earning $102,100 a year before taxes will have to pay a $15,000 premium plus an estimated $5,300 out-of-pocket, for a $20,300 total, or 20% of its pre-tax income. Individuals and families earning less than these amounts will be eligible for subsidies paid directly to their insurer.

• Sec. 303 (pp. 167-168) makes it clear that, although the “qualified plan” is not yet designed, it will be of the “one size fits all” variety. The bill claims to offer choice—basic, enhanced and premium levels—but the benefits are the same. Only the co-pays and deductibles differ. You will have to enroll in the same plan, whether the government is paying for it or you and your employer are footing the bill.

• Sec. 59b (pp. 297-299) says that when you file your taxes, you must include proof that you are in a qualified plan. If not, you will be fined thousands of dollars. Illegal immigrants are exempt from this requirement.

• Sec. 412 (p. 272) says that employers must provide a “qualified plan” for their employees and pay 72.5% of the cost, and a smaller share of family coverage, or incur an 8% payroll tax. Small businesses, with payrolls from $500,000 to $750,000, are fined less.

Eviscerating Medicare:

In addition to reducing future Medicare funding by an estimated $500 billion, the bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.

• Sec. 1302 (pp. 672-692) moves Medicare from a fee-for-service payment system, in which patients choose which doctors to see and doctors are paid for each service they provide, toward what’s called a “medical home.”

The medical home is this decade’s version of HMO-restrictions on care. A primary-care provider manages access to costly specialists and diagnostic tests for a flat monthly fee. The bill specifies that patients may have to settle for a nurse practitioner rather than a physician as the primary-care provider. Medical homes begin with demonstration projects, but the HHS secretary is authorized to “disseminate this approach rapidly on a national basis.”

A December 2008 Congressional Budget Office report noted that “medical homes” were likely to resemble the unpopular gatekeepers of 20 years ago if cost control was a priority.

• Sec. 1114 (pp. 391-393) replaces physicians with physician assistants in overseeing care for hospice patients.

• Secs. 1158-1160 (pp. 499-520) initiates programs to reduce payments for patient care to what it costs in the lowest cost regions of the country. This will reduce payments for care (and by implication the standard of care) for hospital patients in higher cost areas such as New York and Florida.

• Sec. 1161 (pp. 520-545) cuts payments to Medicare Advantage plans (used by 20% of seniors). Advantage plans have warned this will result in reductions in optional benefits such as vision and dental care.

• Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of “medical items and services.”

Questionable Priorities:

While the bill will slash Medicare funding, it will also direct billions of dollars to numerous inner-city social work and diversity programs with vague standards of accountability.

• Sec. 399V (p. 1422) provides for grants to community “entities” with no required qualifications except having “documented community activity and experience with community healthcare workers” to “educate, guide, and provide experiential learning opportunities” aimed at drug abuse, poor nutrition, smoking and obesity. “Each community health worker program receiving funds under the grant will provide services in the cultural context most appropriate for the individual served by the program.”

These programs will “enhance the capacity of individuals to utilize health services and health related social services under Federal, State and local programs by assisting individuals in establishing eligibility . . . and in receiving services and other benefits” including transportation and translation services.

• Sec. 222 (p. 617) provides reimbursement for culturally and linguistically appropriate services. This program will train health-care workers to inform Medicare beneficiaries of their “right” to have an interpreter at all times and with no co-pays for language services.

• Secs. 2521 and 2533 (pp. 1379 and 1437) establishes racial and ethnic preferences in awarding grants for training nurses and creating secondary-school health science programs. For example, grants for nursing schools should “give preference to programs that provide for improving the diversity of new nurse graduates to reflect changes in the demographics of the patient population.” And secondary-school grants should go to schools “graduating students from disadvantaged backgrounds including racial and ethnic minorities.”

• Sec. 305 (p. 189) Provides for automatic Medicaid enrollment of newborns who do not otherwise have insurance.

For the text of the bill with page numbers, see www.defendyourhealthcare.us.

—Ms. McCaughey is chairman of the Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths and a former Lt. Governor of New York state.

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.

From FOX News

In a victory for President Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed landmark health care legislation Saturday night to expand coverage to tens of millions who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry. Republican opposition was nearly unanimous.

The 220-215 vote cleared the way for the Senate to begin a long-delayed debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.

A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi likened the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later — and Obama issued a statement saying, “I look forward to signing it into law by the end of the year.”

“It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone, regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need it,” said Rep. John Dingell, the 83-year-old Michigan lawmaker who has introduced national health insurance in every Congress since succeeding his father in 1955.

In the run-up to a final vote, conservatives from the two political parties joined forces to impose tough new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be sold to many individuals and small groups. They prevailed on a roll call of 240-194.

Ironically, that only solidified support for the legislation, clearing the way for conservative Democrats to vote for it.

The legislation would require most Americans to carry insurance and provide federal subsidies to those who otherwise could not afford it. Large companies would have to offer coverage to their employees. Both consumers and companies would be slapped with penalties if they defied the government’s mandates.

Read the rest of the story

Click here to see how your representative voted.

From the Washington Times

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Monday sought to assuage the left wing of his Democratic Party by deciding to include a government-run insurance plan in his health care reform bill, bypassing the lone Republican who supported the effort and ensuring a bruising political battle in pursuit of President Obama’s top legislative priority.

In an attempt to gain pivotal support from moderate Democrats, Mr. Reid also said the bill he sends to the Senate floor will allow states to “opt out” of the insurance plan, also known as a public option. But moderates withheld their backing, waiting to hear more details.

Sen. Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, the only Republican to vote for a Democratic reform bill in five congressional committees, said she was “deeply disappointed” with Mr. Reid’s decision and would not support the bill. She favored a plan to hang the threat of a public plan over private insurers to encourage them to lower costs, but not to include it in the initial health reform program.

Mr. Reid, of Nevada, offered few other specifics of his bill and declined to say whether he had the 60 votes required to overcome a Republican fillibuster.

Read the rest of the story

From National Center for Policy Analysis

The Senate Finance Committee bill written by Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) (the Baucus bill) will drive up the cost of health insurance for all Americans and then force everyone to buy it or face tax penalties or jail time.  While the Baucus bill does cap out-of-pocket costs based on a person’s income, the effect on American families is still staggering, says PricewaterhouseCoopers. 

Other findings:

• For individuals making $34,140 (three times the Federal Poverty Level) the Baucus health care proposal could mandate up to $4,097 in annual premiums, a sum which could have been spent on over nine months of food, almost four months of housing or well over a year of utilities.
• For a family of four making $69,480 (300 percent above poverty) the Baucus bill mandates annual health insurance premiums of $8,338, which would be worth the equivalent of over 10 months of food, four months of housing or almost two years of utilities.
• For individuals earning $45,520 (400 percent above poverty) Baucus mandates $5,462 for health insurance, or over a year of food, four months of rent or a year and a half of utilities.
• For families earning $92,640 (400 percent above poverty) Baucus mandates $11,117 in health premiums, the equivalent of over a year of food, five months of housing or two years of utilities.

Those numbers include the subsidies for health insurance in the Baucus bill.  To pay for all this new health care spending, plus the massive expansion of Medicaid, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the Baucus bill will collect $4 billion in fines from those who do not purchase insurance, $200 billion taxing health insurance companies with generous health plans, and $25 billion in taxes on employers.  Not to mention the billions in cuts to Medicare payments to hospitals which will result in significant cost shifting to consumers.

Instead of reducing the average family’s health insurance premiums by $2,500 per year, as President Obama promised, the Baucus bill would actually raise them by $4,000 more than they would have been without reform.  The Baucus bill spends at least $1 trillion, fails to cover all Americans, taxes employers for creating jobs, and inflicts higher out-of-pocket health care costs on all Americans. 

Source: Report, “Potential Impact of Health Reform on the Cost of Private Health Insurance Coverage,” PricewaterhouseCoopers, October 2009.

For report:

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/pwc_report_on_Costs_final_101109.pdf?sid=ST2009101102325

From the Wall Street Journal

The Senate Finance Committee holds its big health-care vote today, but the bigger story is that the health-care industry may finally be coming to its senses. After months of serving as Rose Garden props, insurers, doctors and hospitals are discovering they’ve been taken for a ride on ObamaCare. Too bad it may be too late to stop the train.

The best scales-from-the-eyes moment comes courtesy of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the industry lobby. Yesterday AHIP released an important PricewaterhouseCoopers study showing that the Finance bill would on average add some $1,700 a year to the cost of family coverage in 2013. A decade from now, family premiums would cost $4,000 more than if Congress did nothing, and singles would pay about $1,500 more. Hardest hit would be the individual market, with rates rising by 49%, but even the largest employers would see increases between 9% and 11%.

The study’s findings won’t shock anyone who’s read the bill’s details, but its provenance might: In a deal cut earlier this year, the insurance industry acquiesced to rules requiring them to take all comers, regardless of health status or history, and also charge them more or less the same premiums. In return, Congress would subsidize individuals to buy their products and provide new customers by requiring everyone to buy insurance or pay a tax penalty.

Read the rest of the column.

From the Wall Street Journal

How good is Sen. Max Baucus’s health reform bill? So good that Democrats have made sure some of the most costly provisions don’t apply to their own states.

The Senate Finance Committee is gearing up for a final vote next week, and Chairman Baucus now appears to have the Democratic votes to pass his bill. Getting this far has of course meant cutting deals, and those deals, it turns out, are illuminating. The senators are all for imposing “reform” on the nation, so long as it doesn’t disadvantage their constituents.

A central feature of the Baucus bill is the vast expansion of state Medicaid programs. This is necessary, we are told, to cover more of the nation’s uninsured. The provision has angered governors, since the federal government will cover only part of the expansion and stick fiscally strapped states with an additional $37 billion in costs. The “states, with our financial challenges right now, are not in a position to accept additional Medicaid responsibilities,” griped Democratic Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland.

Poor Mr. Strickland. If only he lived in . . . Nevada! Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who is worried about losing his seat next year, worked out a deal by which the federal government will pay all of his home state’s additional Medicaid expenses for the next five years. Under the majority leader’s very special formula, only three other states—Oregon, Rhode Island and Michigan—qualify for this perk, on the grounds, as Mr. Reid put it recently on the Senate floor, that they “are suffering more than most.”

Continue reading the article

From National Center for Policy Analyis

By John Goodman — It’s such a simple idea. Yet powerful. Compelling. Alluring. Irresistible.

And it’s scaring the bejeebies out of the health reform crowd on Capitol Hill.

Here it is: Before Congress votes on a final health reform bill, the full text goes up on the Internet for everyone in the nation to read, along with the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score — giving the expected price tag and the expected impact on seniors, small business, employer-based coverage, etc.

Think about it. For three days and three nights, everybody in the country can read, debate, discuss and give last-minute “up” or “down” input to their congressional representatives.

What’s so terrifying about that?

Here’s a summary of where the idea stands in the House, prepared by the NCPA’s Brian Williams:

• Congress has rushed through several pieces of legislation this year, allowing little or no time to read the actual text of the legislation before voting. This is a common abuse of power when one party controls the legislative process (in other words, Republicans were not immune either).
• When she was elected as Speaker, Nancy Pelosi promised that members would have at least 24 hours to examine bills prior to floor consideration. See page 24 of the Speaker’s New Direction for America.
• However, the Speaker has broken her own 24-hour rule multiple times by rushing through dozens of major bills. Recent examples on the list include several bills that were more than 1,000 pages in length, such as economic stimulus legislation, cap-and-trade legislation and S-CHIP expansion.
• A House rules change has been introduced (H. Res. 554) that would require legislation to be available on the Internet for 72 hours before consideration. The resolution was introduced by Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) and currently has 164 cosponsors.
  • Because the Democratic leadership won’t consider H. Res. 554, a motion to discharge (a “discharge petition”) was introduced on September 23 and is currently collecting signatures.
  • A discharge petition bypasses the Speaker and Democrat-controlled committees to bring the measure directly to the House of Representatives for consideration.
  • To succeed, a discharge petition needs at least 218 signatures.
  • As of 10/5, the discharge petition has 182 signatures.
• The day after the discharge petition was introduced, Speaker Pelosi was asked whether she supports the requirement for legislation to be available for 72 hours before consideration. She responded, “Absolutely.” But if Speaker Pelosi “absolutely” supported the 72-hour rule, there wouldn’t be any need for a discharge petition (the purpose of which is to bypass the Speaker).

From LifeSiteNews.com

The Senate Finance Committee torpedoed two key pro-life amendments on Wednesday designed to prevent government-subsidies of abortion and guarantee conscience protections for health-care providers in the health-care reform bill.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) proposed to amend the “America’s Health Future Act of 2009″ under consideration by the Finance Committee led by Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.). His amendments would have codified current conscience protections for health-care providers with moral objections to abortion and also made permanent the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits federal funds from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from paying for abortions.

Hatch instead proposed that women could purchase additional coverage for abortions through “riders” that would not be subsidized by the government.

However, the amendments were rejected by the Committee by votes of 13 – 10. In both amendments, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) joined committee Republicans in support of the measures, while pro-abortion Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) joined Baucus’ committee Democrats to vote against the bill.

As it stands, the Baucus legislation permits the federal government to mandate the inclusion of abortions in the “minimum benefits package” for health-insurers participating in the “Health Insurance Exchange.”

As long as the Hyde Amendment is renewed the federal government cannot directly subsidize health-care plans from taxpayer funding of the federal Health and Human Services Department.

But if Congress failed to renew the Hyde amendment, then health-care co-ops and private plans could be required to cover elective abortions.

“While Senator Hatch’s abortion funding amendment would keep government federal funds from paying for abortion or plans that cover abortion, it clearly stated that it would not prevent women from obtaining their own separate abortion policies if they choose to do so,” stated Tony Perkins of Family Research Council.

“And instead of codifying existing law protecting conscience rights for plans and providers, these same Senators voted to undermine current law by rejecting Senator Hatch’s conscience protection amendment on abortion,” continued Perkins.

“This isn’t the status quo, it’s a pro-abortion expansion.”

Read the rest of the story.