ABC, CBS and NBC Turn a Blind Eye to ObamaCare Setbacks Read more: http://newsbuster

[red states rule]

and so have a few posters here as well.




For the past couple of weeks there has been a steady drip of bad news for ObamaCare, but you wouldn't know it if you only get your news from the Big Three (ABC, CBS, NBC) networks. From a Society of Actuaries report that determined premium costs will shoot up thanks to a thirty-three percent average increase in claims; to thirty-three Senate Democrats joining Republicans in voting to repeal an ObamaCare tax on medical devices; to a Quinnipiac University poll showing even two-thirds of self-identified Democrats saying the law will either hurt them or have no effect, the recent news has been bad for the President's chief legislative victory. However, not one of these trouble spots for ObamaCare has been mentioned on ABC, CBS or NBC's evening or morning show broadcasts.

The following setbacks for ObamaCare haven't received a single second of air time on the Big Three networks:


■ On March 22, ObamaCare hit a major snag (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/22/democrats-obamacare_n_2934217.html)when even 33 Senate Democrats openly defied the President as they joined 45 Republicans in voting to repeal a 2.3 percent sales tax, crucial to paying for ObamaCare, on medical devices such as pacemakers and MRI machines. The measure was co-sponsored by liberal Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar (http://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/newsreleases_detail.cfm?id=341148&), who said in a statement that she would "continue to work to get rid of this harmful tax."

Big Three coverage 0 stories.

http://www.mrc.org/sites/default/files/uploads/ObamacareSawyer.jpg■ On March 26, the Society of Actuaries, released a study (http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/032713-649596-obama-yawns-about-obamacare-premium-spikes.htm) that determined health claims will increase by an average of 32 percent with some states seeing claims rise as much as 80 percent. The study estimated that states will now have to double their health spending to cover the millions of the previously uninsured. The study went on to report that claims will be driven higher because many employers will stop covering their employees once Obamacare is instituted and those workers will be more expensive to insure than those already in the individual market.

Big Three coverage: 0 stories.

■ On March 26, Obama's own Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius admitted that premiums will rise for some people buying new insurance policies in the coming fall, because of ObamaCare requirements. As the March 26 Wall Street Journal (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/03/26/sebelius-some-could-see-insurance-premiums-rise/?mod=rss_mobile_uber_feed) reported: "The secretary's remarks are among the first direct statements from federal officials that people who have skimpy health plans right now could face higher premiums for plans that are more generous."


■ On April 3 Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/03/obamacare-in-trouble-exchange-provision-delayed-as-lawmakers-push-to-repeal/) reported that the Obama administration admitted a system of exchanges designed to make it simpler for small businesses to provide health insurance, the very core of ObamaCare's promise, will be delayed an entire year. According to Jim Capretta of the Ethics and Public Policy Center this is a huge setback because: "Lots of small businesses struggle with providing insurance for their workers so this was supposed to facilitate it and make it easier for small business to do this," and added: "It was a huge portion of the sale job. When they passed the law in 2010 there were many senators and members of Congress who were saying 'I am doing this because it's going to help small businesses.'"

Big Three coverage: 0 stories.

■ On April 4 Quinnipiac University released a poll (http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1877) showing that even two-thirds of Democrats now believe Obama's health care reforms will either hurt them personally or have no effect on their daily lives, vs. 27% of Democrats who believed they would be helped. Overall, only 15% of voters think ObamaCare will mostly help them personally, vs. 78% who expect it to hurt them or have no effect.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2013/04/09/abc-cbs-and-nbc-turn-blind-eye-obamacare-setbacks#ixzz2Q3d9AUJz

[red states rule]

Oh, and it's all the Republicans fault





ObamaCare Was Designed, Passed, and Implemented by Democrats. Obviously Republicans Must Be Responsible for Its Failures (http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/04/obamacare-was-designed-passed-and-implem)


It was probably inevitable that as ObamaCare began to fail, Republicans would get the blame. After all, Republican legislators in Congress didn’t vote for it, Republican voters have never supported it, and nearly every Republican governor has let the federal government build and run the law’s health exchange in their state. Republican critics of the law warned before it was passed that it would be too expensive, to complicated, and too onerous on both individuals and businesses. So of course now that the implementation process has begun to reveal signs of trouble, it’s the Grand Old Party’s fault. Who else could possibly be responsible?


If you want the complete argument for why Republicans are the culprit here, you can find it in Think Progress health wonk Igor Volsky’s piece (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/04/03/1815391/why-republicans-are-to-blame-for-obamacares-delays/) making the case for, in his words, “why Republicans are to blame for ObamaCare’s delays.” The piece is hooked to this week’s announcement (http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/02/hhs-officially-delays-a-key-part-of-obam) that the choice option in ObamaCare’s small business exchanges would be delayed for a year, and the short version is that because Republicans refused to implement the law themselves in the states and have declined to provide additional funding for implementation at the federal level, the GOP is on the hook for delays and failures.


It’s hard to blame Republicans for the delay of the small business choice option: it’s not something that Republicans have focused on to any great degree, and the main reasons for the delay seems to be a the technical challenge of designing a multitude of plans that fit the exchange requirements and the administrative burden of having to design those plans while working on other exchange features in the law. Republican opposition doesn’t have anything to do with it.


Overall, Volsky makes a good try, but sorry, no: Democrats are to blame for the failures and problems of a law designed by Democrats, passed by Democrats, and implemented by Democrats. That it is not working now is the fault of the people who said it would work, decided to try making it work, and are now tasked with the responsibility to make it work. They are failing, and the law is failing because of them—not because of Republicans.


More generally, though, this offers a lesson in why it’s ill advised to pass major legislation on strict party lines that is supported by neither the opposition party nor the bulk of the public. Especially when the law is predicated on the assumption that the opposition will cheerfully help with implementation. That Democrats seem to have assumed that Republicans would give in and play ball suggests some mix of deep arrogance, wishful thinking, and willful ignorance of the national political dynamic. It’s just plain bad policy design: A law passed by Democrats that can only work if Republicans decline to oppose the law is a law that almost certainly will not work.


And sure enough, three years after passage, ObamaCare shows signs that it might not be quite as wonderful as promised. But ObamaCare’s supporters are so determined to avoid admitting that it might be a failure—or even just less functional than they insisted it would be—that they are refusing to take responsibility for the politically troubled bureaucratic mess they created.



http://reason.com/blog/2013/04/04/obamacare-was-designed-passed-and-implem

[red states rule]

Now even Dems are running away form Obama's "crowning achievement"





In effect admitting that it might have been a mistake to pass ObamaCare before reading it, Senator Jay Rockefeller has warned that matters could get even worse, thanks to the overwhelming complexity of the law. Paul Bedard reports in the Washington Examiner (http://washingtonexaminer.com/obamacare-architect-rockefeller-its-beyond-comprehension/article/2526681) that Sen Rockefeller:


...openly criticized program managers for not moving quickly enough to build the system, warning that if it gets off to a bumpy start it will just get worse.



Decrying the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as way too complex, he warned the acting Medicare director that Obamacare is "so complicated and if it isn't done right the first time, it will just simply get worse."



The retiring senator also told Marilyn Tavenner at her Senate Finance Committee confirmation hearing to be administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services that Obamacare rivals tax reform in its capacity to confuse Americans.



"I believe that the Affordable Care Act is probably the most complex piece of legislation ever passed by the United States Congress. Tax reform obviously has been huge too, but up to this point it is just beyond comprehension," said Rockefeller.

Rockefeller won't be running for office in 2014, but plenty of Democrats in Congress are starting to have a bad case of buyer's remorse as public anger builds. They were reassured by mental giants on the order of Nancy Pelosi that everything would be fine if they signed the contract without reading it. Apparently none of them have ever heard about people who attended a "free luncheon" in some resort destination and walked away having somehow purchased a time share condo, and on the hook for fees and payments that turned out to be more burdensome than they ever imagined.




The ObamaCare disaster will only deepen because they people in charge never thought through all the complexities and hubristically believed they could handle whatever complications would develop. That's what happens when people who have never run anything in their lives more complicated than their own mouths start organizing everyone else's lives.



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/04/architect_of_obamacare_admits_it_is_just_beyond_co mprehension.html#ixzz2QCVx8evA
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker) | AmericanThinker on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=dlia0Qbjyr4BNDacwqm_6l&u=AmericanThinker)

[KitchenKitten99]

The only reason Amy 'Klub n' Shower' is only working to get rid of that medical device sales tax is because the following medical device companies (which supply 80% of the global market, and employ a nice percentage of our market) are based here:

Medtronic
Boston Scientific
3M (yes, they make more than just post-its)
St. Jude
EV3

And they have the money to pay lobbyists. Not that I think this tax should go through but it's the fact that this is the only time I have read of her opposing taxes that affect major corporations.

Most everyone in this state knows at least one person, friend, relative, or acquaintance (if not themselves) who works for one of these companies. My ex-father-in-law works for Medtronic. He used to work for 3M. Not as a researcher or in manufacturing, but in the building HVAC/climate-control system operations. Not just for comfort, but the systems that also keep the clean-rooms at consistent temps, etc.

[red states rule]

Another talking point the liberal media is pushing when they do discuss Obamacare is that you are misinformed if you do not support Obama's "crowning achievement"





On taxpayer-subsidized NPR's All Things Considered on Saturday, host Laura Sullivan did a lengthy piece about the messaging of Obamacare. Despite running for eleven minutes, no one in the piece viewed Obamacare negatively.


Sullivan started out lamenting that the public was "confused" about Obamacare: "just 37 percent of people say they like the law." She then argued that people actually do like Obamacare, since they are in favor of certain provisions. Sullivan brought in health policy correspondent Julie Rovner to explain why the public was "confused": because "there has been a very commanding misinformation and disinformation campaign."


After Rovner described several of Obamacare's provisions, Sullivan described it as "good stuff" and "great." Rovner agreed: "absolutely."


Rovner characterized Obamacare as something "to improve the care patients get" and "to make care more efficient." Rovner then assured listeners that Obamacare was a "step towards solving our national health care problem."


Sullivan declared that states opting out of creating their own health care exchanges did so "mostly on ideological grounds." To further tilt a one-sided piece where Sullivan and Rovner were offering positive assessments of Obamacare, Sullivan then put on Texas-based Ron Cookston, director of a "health care advocacy group" called Gateway to Care. He expressed disappointment that the state of Texas is not promoting Obamacare. Sullivan insisted that as a result of Rick Perry's choice to not expand Medicaid, more than a million poor Texans would go without health insurance.


After offering up Texas as a poor example ("advocacy groups on shoestring budgets going church to church"), Sullivan pointed to California as an exemplary state that has fully opted in Obamacare and is using $900 million from federal taxpayers to promote Obamacare, complete with a "catchy name." To finish the piece off with additional imbalance, Sullivan spoke to the person in charge of California's effort to promote Obamacare, Peter Lee. Sullivan left unchallenged Lee's ludicrous description of federal taxpayer subsidies to get California's health care exchange off the ground--"venture capital funding."


This was yet an additional example of NPR's All Things Considered considering only the "correct" side.


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/john-williams/2013/04/04/npr-obamacare-great-public-so-confused-misinformation-and-disinformat#ixzz2QI9OkuOQ

[red states rule]

The only reason Amy 'Klub n' Shower' is only working to get rid of that medical device sales tax is because the following medical device companies (which supply 80% of the global market, and employ a nice percentage of our market) are based here:

Medtronic
Boston Scientific
3M (yes, they make more than just post-its)
St. Jude
EV3

And they have the money to pay lobbyists. Not that I think this tax should go through but it's the fact that this is the only time I have read of her opposing taxes that affect major corporations.

Most everyone in this state knows at least one person, friend, relative, or acquaintance (if not themselves) who works for one of these companies. My ex-father-in-law works for Medtronic. He used to work for 3M. Not as a researcher or in manufacturing, but in the building HVAC/climate-control system operations. Not just for comfort, but the systems that also keep the clean-rooms at consistent temps, etc.

Obamacare is nothing but a tax bill

No matter what your income level - you are getting slammed with new taxes. More the ONE TRILLION DOLLARS in new taxes (some call them fees BTW)

And of course Dems want more taxes to feed the massive bloated pig known as the Federal government