Obama Administration Tramples On First Amendment: Issues Gag Order To Insurance Companies

I got laid off from my job last Wednesday and have been busy doing things like getting doctor appointments for my family before my medical benefits run out at the end of the month as well as trying to find a new job with benefits so that I don't have to come up with a way of paying off a $1200/month COBRA payment on limited income.

Anyway, I know I've missed a few pretty big news stories since then, but I will try to get them in here as soon as possible.

Right now, I'd like to look at the latest action by the Obama administration. As I recall, Obama said he wanted a good debate about health care reform. If so, then why is he trying to silence those who want to get good infomation out to the people that will be most affected by it?

From the Washington Post:

The federal government has ordered health insurers to stop telling Medicare beneficiaries that proposed health reform legislation could hurt seniors and jeopardize their benefits. The government might take enforcement action against insurers that have tried to mobilize opposition to the legislation by sending their enrollees "misleading and confusing" messages, a senior official of the Department of Health and Human Services said in a memo Monday.

The "messages" in question very correctly note that under HR3200, Medicare benefits to seniors will be reduced. Obama and the Democrats have already publically admitted this in their attempt to show that socialized medicine will not add to the defecit.

So, why the gag order? Why worry about the insuarance companies repeating exactly what Obama and the Democrats have already said?

Proposed health reform legislation would sharply reduce funding for Medicare Advantage plans, and the insurance industry has been battling to prevent that from happening. The bill unveiled last week by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, would directly cut payments to Medicare Advantage plans by an estimated $123 billion over 10 years, and it would indirectly reduce funding for those plans by another $15.6 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

And Obama does not want people to know about this? This leads to an even bigger question. Why stifle the debate? Why suppress the very same information that Obama and the Dems have publically acknowledged?

Unless the ultimate goal is to control the debate by controlling the information, nothing else makes sense.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Insurers Criticize Administration 'Gag Order'
David S. Hilzenrath
Washington Post
September 22, 2009

Latest Idea To Raise Your Taxes: Tax Your Employer Provided Health Benefits

If the Democrats are trying to paint themselves as the party of fiscal responsibility, they are failing miserably. The porkulus/spendulus bill was the major indicator that the Dems have absolutely no intention of ever bringing spending under control. Now, they have to look at ways of paying for that pork-laden legislation as well as paying for all the other pork-laden political hand-out bills they are proposing.

Thus, they once again prove that they have not had an original idea since Franklin Delano Roosevelt and have proposed a new tax for you to pay. But not just any tax. This time, it is a tax on your health care benefits, the same benefits you need to take care of your family's medical needs.

According to the Washington Post:

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the tax-writing Finance Committee, has repeatedly advocated changing tax laws to include employer benefits, arguing that it makes sense to fund the health-care changes by sucking cash out of the existing system.

This proposal highlights two things:

1) It means that the Dems lied when they said they only wanted to tax "the rich" since this tax would extend all the way down the income scale and affect every worker that recieves health benefits from their employer.

2) It is an attempt to make private health care artificially more expensive so that the Dems can use it as an excuse to impose a disastrous nationalized health care system on us.

And this little lie from Ron Wyden:

"I think it's extremely important from a credibility standpoint to show the American people that you're making savings in the enormous sums now being spent on health care before you go out and ask them for billions of dollars more," said Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), one of the sponsors of that proposal. "And I don't think I'm the only senator who feels that way."

Savings? What savings? By imposing more taxes, Congress would be artificially inflating the price of health care. There is absolutely no "savings" in that at all. Why did Wyden utter such a lie?

Taxing the American people is not the answer. No nation has ever taxed itself into prosperity and socialized health care has been a disaster everywhere it has been implemented.

We don't need socialism. We need free market capitalism, including in the health care markets.

You can access the original article on-line here:

Workers' Health Benefits Eyed For Taxation
Lori Montgomery
Washington Post
March 12, 2009