Democrats' Criminalization of America's Health Care

ARRA News Service -Yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other House democrats rolled out their health care plan called "America’s Affordable Health Choices." Part of their plan would force employers to offer workers health coverage or face severe fines. Also it would forcw individuals to participate in a health insurance plan or face penalties that would generally vary with their income level. Maybe it should have been called "Criminalizing of America's Health Care" or the "Destroy Individual Choices in Health Care."

The Heritage Foundation is reporting the cost of the bill at $1.3 Trillion. The bill is 1,018 pages and comes to $1.264 billion per page. It even includes universal abortion coverage at taxpayer expense. The Congressional Budget Office, not a conservative "right minded" think-tank, reported that the health care reform plan proposed by House Democrats on Tuesday will add more than $1 trillion ($1,042 billion) to the national federal budget deficit over 10 years (2010–2019) . And, this is only their preliminary estimate of the damage.

The CBO report states that its cost estimates are not comprehensive. They are only preliminary as administrative and other costs are not yet projected. Heritage advises, "But even this analysis understates the true costs of the bill. The CBO only scores bills on a ten-year time frame, and House Democrats have designed their bill to obscure the catastrophic long-term fiscal path on which it places our country."

Heritage identifies that according to the CBO, the cost for the first four years is just $84 billion, but then it accelerates sharply. By 2019, the new entitlement is set to cost American taxpayers $254 billion. So while many Americans may look at the $1.3 trillion price tag over ten years and conclude the plan will cost $130 billion a year, in reality it will cost nearly double that. By backloading all the spending, the House is hiding the true cost of their plan from the American people. Between 2018 and 2019, federal costs for the new entitlement and the enlargement of Medicaid would increase by a combined 8.9%.

Last week CNS News reported that Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) introduced legislation calling for a $540-billion tax hike to pay for the health plan that President Barack Obama insists will be “deficit neutral.” This tax is a new surtax on households earning $350,000 and above. It starts at 1%, bumping up to 1.5% at $500,000 in income and to 5.4% at $1 million. Since many small business owners fall within this income range, this surtax will also be a huge job killer.

The Washington Post writes: [T]here is no case to be made for the House Democratic majority’s proposal to fund health-care legislation through an ad hoc income tax surcharge for top-earning households. …There is simply no way to close the gap by taxing a handful of high earners. … Pretending that “the rich” alone can fund government, let alone the kind of activist government that the president and Congress envision, is bad policy any way you look at it.

Summary: President Obama, Democrats in Congress, powerful special interests and influential lobbyists are hard at work in Washington, D.C. trying to drastically change our current health care system. They are seeking to replace it with a "nationalized health care " system where the politicians and government officials will dictate the kind of medical services you and your family receive and the rules under which you access care and coverage. Read : Patients First - Vote No on Government Run Health Care and then take action.

Senator Brownback Address the Problems with Closing Guantanamo

Senator Brownback talked to bloggers today laying out the problems with closing the Guantanamo Bay Detention Facility. The most pressing of these problems is what to do with the detainees. Senator Brownback explains that one commonly overlooked risk of bringing prisoners to U.S. prisons is that the surrounding prison communities may be subject to violent acts by groups making political statements about the prisoners' detention. He also explains that the Geneva Convention says that prisoners of war will not be held along with a general prison population. Senator Brownback lays out numerous reasons why closing Guantanamo is poorly thought out, and is decisively lacking a realistic and safe plan. The propsal also lacks support both in Congress and among the American people. A new Gallup poll shows that by a 2 to 1 margin Americans Oppose Closing Gitmo and Moving Prisoners to U.S.

This call is worth listening to as one may be surprised at the number of solid reasons the Senator gives for opposing the Obama adminstration's call to close Guantanamo.
Blogger Call with Senator Brownback

Brownback Talks Guantanamo and Foreign Policy « Purple People Vote

Want to Throw Nancy Pelosi Off the Big Plane?

ARRA News Service - H/T Flopping Aces for update on "Want to Throw Nancy Pelosi Off the Big Plane? Drop $20 for 20 to Elect Jim Tadesco (R-NY) by: Mike's America:

Start the revolution to take back the House with the special election for New York’s 20th Congressional District! The congressional seat vacated by Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), who New York Governor David Patterson (D)appointed to fill Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat is up for grabs in a special election on March 31, 2009. Favored is the Republican, Jim Tedisco, the Minority Leader in the NY State Assembly. Winning this seat will send yet another message to Pelosi and Obama that the people are in revolt against the socialist makeover they are planning for America. Can you help?

Major "Earmark" in Democrat Bailout Agreement

Update (9:58AM, Sept. 26th): While Sens. Harry Reid and Chris Dodd stand before the news this morning pontificating and mocking Republicans, especially Sen McCain, for the perceived delay in reaching agreement, they also continues to prevaricate. Sen. Reid and Speaker Pelosi initially asserted that they needed McCain to clinch a deal for Democrats and now they are like a pack rabid dogs blaming John McCain for the deal falling apart. In fact, the deal fell apart before McCain arrived.

A republican senate source has confirmed that the questioned provision reported in this post is being opposed by Senate Republicans which has upset Democrats. Republicans are not opposing the obvious issues identified by Reid. They are working to get rid of the questioned provision "if they can." Also, they have already gotten the Democrats to back down from providing "most" of the money ("future profits") to the groups mentioned in the article "to a much smaller percentage." Negotiations are likely to continue throughout the day. Obviously no one is happy - especially the majority of the American public.

Breaking News - Bill Smith, ARRA Editor. I received a copy of "Agreement in Principle" relative to the $700 billion "bailout" being proposed and supported by Senate Democrats. The one page agreement from the U.S. Senate Banking Committee details guidelines to be put in place relative to taxpayer protection, oversight and transparency, home ownership preservation and Funding Authority.

While on the surface the agreement looks generic and positive, However, the "devil is in the detail." There is one detail that Democrats are concerned that Republicans will not agree to in the bailout agreement. That is if the Republicans even see the item. It seems that this issue may be one reason that many Democrats have hounded Sen. John McCain and pushed for his speedy approval. Senate Majority Harry Reid (D-NV) has already identified that it is Sen. John McCain's approval, not Barack Obama approval, that is needed to secure the agreement of Senate Republicans. In fact, the questioned provision indirectly focus on some prior concern regarding Sen. Barack Obama involvement with various organizations. Maybe that is why Obama would prefer being at a debate in Mississippi than being in Washington D.C.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) cohorts are also hounding Sen. McCain to agree. They know that neither the House Republicans nor the House Blue Dog Democrats are going to sign on easily to an agreement extending $700 billion "bailout" if Sen. McCain disagrees. Pelosi does not have control of the fiscally conservative Blue Dogs who are not happy with committing $700 billion to the "bailout" effort.

In the "agreement in principle," there is the effect of a major "earmark" which commits money from future "profits" to be given to nonprofits organizations like ACORN, National Council of La Raza and potentially the National Urban League. This agreement clearly evidences that the Government expects to benefit in the future from the bailout when the values of property rises and mortgages or properties are then sold by the Federal government. The agreement --

"Directs a certain percentage of future profits to the Affordable Housing Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund to meet America's housing needs."

In the proposed bailout agreement, Sen. Christopher Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee and other Democrats desire to pre-direct that future funds (profits) not be returned to the taxpayers via the treasury but that they be used to underwrite potential questionable (maybe even illegal activities) of certain nonprofits which have had a hand in promoting and expanding access to "no money down" loans for minorities, illegal voter registrations and extensive lobbying activities.

Let’s examine the connection of the Affordable Housing Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund with the various nonprofit groups mentioned above. In July, 2008, a Wall Street Journal article addressed the previous housing bill signed into law:

Provide[d] a stream of billions of dollars for distressed homeowners and communities and the nonprofit groups that serve them. One of the biggest likely beneficiaries, despite Republican objections is Acorn, a housing advocacy group that also helps lead ambitious voter-registration efforts benefiting Democrats. Acorn -- made up of several legally distinct groups under that name -- has become an important player in the Democrats' effort to win the White House. Its voter mobilization arm is co-managing a $15.9 million campaign with the group Project Vote to register 1.2 million low-income Hispanics and African-Americans, who are among those most likely to vote Democratic. Technically nonpartisan, the effort is one of the largest such voter-registration drives on record.

The organization's main advocacy group lobbied hard for passage of the housing bill, which provides nearly $5 billion for affordable housing, financial counseling and mortgage restructuring for people and neighborhoods affected by the housing meltdown. A third Acorn arm, its housing corporation, does a large share of that work on the ground. Acorn's multiple roles show how two fronts of activism -- housing for the poor and voter mobilization -- have converged closely in this election year. The fortunes of both parties will hinge in part on their plans for addressing the fall of the nation's housing market and the painful economic slowdown. . . .

Partly because of the role of Acorn and other housing advocacy groups, the White House and its allies in Congress resisted Democrats' plans to include money for a new affordable-housing trust fund and $4 billion in grants to restore housing in devastated neighborhoods. In the end, the money stayed in the bill; the White House saw little choice. What most riles Republicans about the bill is the symbiotic relationship between the Democratic Party and the housing advocacy groups, of which Acorn is among the biggest. Groups such as the National Council of La Raza and the National Urban League also lobby to secure government-funded services for their members and seek to move them to the voting booth. Acorn has been singled out for criticism because of its reach, its endorsements of Democrats, and past flaws in its bookkeeping and voter-registration efforts that its detractors in Congress have seized upon. . . .

Sen. Obama is especially reliant on registration drives, such as Acorn's with Project Vote, to help him win the White House. The Illinois Democrat draws his strongest support from blacks, Hispanics and young people, groups that are among the least likely to be registered. After law school, Sen. Obama was the director of Project Vote in Chicago. . . .

Democrats on Capitol Hill have helped to steer millions of dollars in housing and other grants from the federal government toward Acorn and groups like it. The groups must qualify and compete for the money, which is typically doled out from the federal government to states and municipalities. The housing package includes a new, permanent source of affordable-housing money that congressional Democrats and grassroots groups have sought for years. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund will be funded by a tax on mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage titans.

That tax eventually will channel upwards of $600 million annually in grants for developing and restoring housing, mostly as low-income rentals, available to Acorn and other groups. Democrats on Capitol Hill and housing groups say the housing-assistance money is vital to helping Americans hit hardest by what some call the largest drop in home values since the Great Depression. But they acknowledge the perception of political conflict in giving federal funds to an organization that does political work. "We are guarding against it," said Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank in an interview. He secured the Affordable Housing Trust from his seat as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. . . .

Acorn describes itself as the nation's largest grassroots community organization, with more than 400,000 families organized into 1,200 neighborhood chapters in 110 cities. Over four decades, Acorn has turned its broad membership into a powerful lobbying tool. Its representatives are well-known in the marble halls of the Capitol, and press local, state and federal governments . . .

ACORN is the agency where Sen. Barack Obama worked as a trainer for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform (ACORN), whose affiliate, Project Vote, is known for voter fraud. It is this same organization from which a large part of the mortgage mess has grown. After Harvard Law School, Obama provided legal representation for ACORN. Obama sat on the boards of the philanthropic Woods Foundation and the Joyce Foundation which both funneled millions of dollars to ACORN.

In 2006, the Wall Street Journal addressed Acorn Indictments. In a recent article, additional complaints, indictments and arrests and conviction of ACORN members for voter fraud have been detailed for Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington State, and Wisconsin. Democrats on Capitol Hill have steered billions of the taxpayer monies to risky ventures and to nonprofits organizations like ACORN, National Council of La Raza through the government’s Affordable Housing Fund and the Capital Magnet Fund. As a result groups like ACORN have developed powerful lobby groups to secure tax money for their organizations. Now the proposed "agreement in principle" for the $700 Billion "bailout" seeks to continue the protection of this process. In another article by James H. Walsh, a former federal prosecutor, it was noted that:

ACORN Housing Corporation (AHC) was instrumental in its passage of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which has plagued the mortgage markets since 1977. The U.S. Congress through the CRA compelled banks and lending institutions to make loans to “communities of color” disregarding sound economic and risk guidelines. CRA encouraged the relaxing of “outdated” risk-management protocols and underwriting obligations by lending institutions. In the name of ending discrimination, no longer were “communities of color” required to provide verification of income, employment, credit history, ability to pay homeowner bills, or down payment. In response, many banks and mortgage groups bundled trillions of dollars of “subprime” loans and sold them to investors here and abroad. It is these bundled Community Reinvestment Act mortgages, doomed to fail, that are today causing financial strain in U.S. and global financial markets.

In short, a Democrat Congress and President demanded that banks change the rules of good banking and open the Pandora’s Box of mortgage defaults and foreclosures now coming to a head. This home-parity concept of the radical left was mobilized by ACORN resulting in a purchase of a property without any credit, income, employment, and a zero down payment.

In 2003, Fannie Mae home-parity funding in Chicago reached $600 billion. When Franklin Raines, former chair and CEO of Fannie Mae, stepped down in 2004 but managed to take with him a multimillion-dollar parachute and a monthly pension of $114, 393 for life, and should he die, for his wife’s lifetime. Until recently, Raines was an advisor to Obama.

Open Secrets reveals the investment made by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in Democrats and details the Top 25 Democrat Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac contributions in 1989-2008. The top three in order were Senators Christopher Dodd, John Kerry and Barack Obama.

When government tries to fix social issues through the use of the taxpayers’ money, there are consequences. Now the American taxpayers are being called upon again to underwrite the problems exacerbated by the prior actions of former and the current Congress and past administrations. It is hoped that Senators and Representatives will avoid this massive "earmark." All "future profits" from the resolution and disposition of the alleged current bad mortgages ("bad paper"), should accrue to the American taxpayers as a whole and be returned to the Treasury. Any determination as to the use of "future profits" should be determined by those elected and representing the people at that future point in time. No agreements should include an obligation on the potential "future profits." No agreements should support questionable programs that support organizations that contributed to the failures of mortgages or to the bad lending practices promoted by prior Congresses and administrations.

Republicans Still Rock the House - Washington D. C. - Aug 8, 2008

ARRA News Service - In the House, the Republican protest over Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s refusal to allow a vote on drilling enters its second week today. The message is clearly having an impact, as Politico reports that “MoveOn.org announced Thursday it was launching radio ads targeting Republicans for organizing the protest.” MoveOn is apparently desperate to blunt the momentum for more drilling; a new Rasmussen poll that shows 57% of Democrats and 61% of independent voters see finding new energy sources as a priority. Rasmussen Reports also notes: “With energy issues taking center stage in the presidential campaign, 81% of Americans see development of new energy sources as an urgent priority. Only 9% disagree.”

Speaker Pelosi Clueless! Arkansas Rep. Mike Ross Gets it!

Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: When it comes to addressing our national energy crisis, drilling for oil and protecting America and American interests, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representative is clueless. Even the liberal New York Times has taken notice.

On Friday, Carl Hulse in an NYT article title "Democrats Dig In as G.O.P. Presses for Oil Exploration in Protected Areas" depicts the logger-headiness of Pelosi. The article is long but worth reading. Some limited excerpts will reveal Pelosi's failure to comprehend our internal National crisis and her inept understanding of the role of the National Strategic Petroleum Reserves in a time of global crisis with existing threats against America and American interests:

House Democratic leaders took a hard line Thursday against opening up restricted areas to oil production as Republicans threatened to try to keep Congress in session this summer unless they got a vote on new drilling opportunities.

As the political and policy fight over gasoline prices escalated, the White House rejected a call by Democrats to release oil from the nation’s strategic reserves in an effort to lower prices by increasing supply. Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said, “We’d like to see members think a little bit more long term and take advantage of the opportunity that we have to do drilling from our domestic sources.”

Even as some Democratic lawmakers called on Congress to open up restricted areas to drilling, . . . “This call for drilling in areas that are protected is a hoax,” Ms. Pelosi said. “It’s an absolute hoax on the part of the Republicans and this Bush administration.” . . . But with public anxiety growing over gasoline prices, some Democrats say their party has to move beyond encouraging exploration on tracts already owned by oil companies and open new, potentially productive areas to exploration. Leaders of a coalition of moderate and conservative

Democrats known as the Blue Dogs have stepped up their push for drilling both in the Arctic refuge and offshore, saying the oil royalties produced could pay for research into new energy technologies. “I propose that we drill in ANWR,” said Representative Mike Ross, Democrat of Arkansas, referring to the refuge. “We’ve already got a pipeline going to Alaska, the ANWR, that can handle two million barrels a day. We’re only putting one million in it. Let’s fill it up.”

But Ms. Pelosi, who considers energy legislation a personal priority, does not appear ready to shift her view, based on discussions in a private meeting with members of the leadership on Thursday. According to accounts from those present, Ms. Pelosi said that if Democrats relented on drilling, “then we might as well pack it up and go home.”

Ms. Pelosi instead forged ahead with the effort to encourage the White House to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, even listing the White House telephone number and e-mail address on a poster at a news conference to encourage consumers to join the appeal. She said the release of less than 10 percent of the 700 million barrels of oil in the reserve would influence the price at the pump “now, within 10 days, not within 10 years.” . . .

Pelosi continues to prove time and again that she is a masochistic politician who is heartless in her un-willingness to do anything and everything to help the American people while at the same time she insists on placing our National Security at risk. She welds her dictatorial control over house democrats and refuses to allow anything that might in any way give partisan credit also to the Republicans. She has helped lead the U.S Congress to its lowest approval rating ever.

Let's clarify the risk that Speaker Pelosi is willing to take even though it is not a solution to our petroleum resource needs. Lee S. Gliddon, Jr in Desert Conservative hits the nail on the head regarding Pelosi approach of releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve:

If you really think about Nancy Pelosi’s demands that we use our nation’s Emergency Reserve Oil Supply as a, ‘fix,’ you will see that she has no thoughts of the real ‘why’ this Emergency Reserve exits in the first place! Should Iran actually close the Straits of Hormus after were used the Emergency Reserves, then what? Nothing to be used and what would our military do? Nancy Pelosi has ideas but her ideas are going to destroy America!

Pelosis is clueless as Speaker of the House. And that is being nice. Because if she were not clueless, then she would be a traitor based on her past actions and comments while Speaker of the House. It is time for Speaker Pelosi to step down. If unwilling to step down, we can only hope there exists enough uncompromised Democrats like Rep. Mike Ross to lead in establishing a coalition of House Democrats to replace Pelosi. The United States needs a new Speaker who is a statesperson; a person more dedicated to the people than to liberal party pandering. America deserves and needs a better person speaking for the House to the public!

Free Speech of U.S. Representatives & Senators at Risk

Bill Smith, Editor: U.S. Senate sources identified today that the Democrat leadership is seeking and developing actions to restrict the free speech of U.S. Representatives and Senators with both the public and their constituents. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised the most “open and honest Congress” when Democrats took over Congress at the beginning of last year. However, a majority Democrats have continually demonstrated that they don’t intend to live up to that pledge. In addition, online sources, Soren Dayton and Ed Morrissey are reporting that Democrat-controlled rule-making bodies in the House and Senate are trying to restrict and regulate the use of members’ communications on the Internet.

Ed Morrissey reports on the schemes in both chambers, asking “Why do Congressional Democrats fear free speech?” In the Senate, Rules Committee Chair Diane Feinstein (D-CA) is proposing a rule that would require her panel to essentially become the Internet speech police for the Senate. It would be up to the Rules Committee to “sanction” which websites and forms of communication they deem appropriate for senators to use, and would then require their regulations to apply to any domain not ending in “senate.gov.”

Even worse, the committee is seeking to be able to regulate content since the rule would give it the authority to require the removal of any content it considers in violation of Senate rules.The upshot of this proposal is that senators’ ability to use websites such as YouTube, Facebook, and others to communicate with their constituents and the American public could be jeopardized and the content of those communications subject to approval. On top of that, the rules are vague enough to raise concerns over how they might apply to basic things like guest postings on blogs like RedState and Townhall. No such restrictions exist on any other form of communication like TV and radio interviews or op-eds in newspapers. What is it about free speech online that Democrats find so threatening?