No Religious Freedoms for Businesses?

In a recent Op-Ed, Mr. Leonard Pitts, Jr. tried to make the case that violating someone’s 1st Amendment rights is the same as the idea that one’s personal liberty ends where the next person’s begins.

Let me also use a quote to make my point. “Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under a just God, can not long retain it.” A direct quote correctly attributed to President Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Henry L. Pierce, April, 1859. In this letter, he was declining an invitation to speak at an event in Boston, honoring Thomas Jefferson’s birthday. Lincoln explained that Jefferson gave us, as a nation, a great gift which was the idea that all men are created equal in the eyes of their Creator. He said that Jefferson, “had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times, and so to embalm it there, that to-day, and in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the very harbingers of re-appearing tyranny and oppression.”
Hobby LobbyHobby Lobby

That is precisely what those who propose that Hobby Lobby and other businesses forgo their 1st Amendment right to freedom of religion due to the onerous regulations of the Affordable Care Act are asking.

Mr. Pitts says that the “crazy part” is that under the ACA, those businesses can just opt out of offering their employees any insurance at all. So in his eyes, and in the eyes of many on the left, it is either kowtow to our wishes or just stop offering health benefits to your workers.

I say the “crazy part” is just what Lincoln said, that “those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves,” and this is exactly what the government is asking the Supreme Court to do. Uncle Sam wants the court to take away Hobby Lobby’s freedom of religion, yet what happened to Mr. Pitts’ quote about swinging your fist, but not hitting my nose?

Just saying that “If a Hobby Lobby executive has no interest in contraceptive care, good for her,” is on the face of it a rather crass statement and not germane at all to the discussion. The case before the court has nothing to do with personal preferences. That is why his argument that this creates a slippery slope where some future company can decide, for religious purposes not to hire women or persons of a particular faith, etc… doesn’t fly. The idea that adhering to the Constitution will lead to violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1965 is a straw man argument, at best.

If I were to obtain a job at the store of a Hasidic gem merchant, should I be upset that there’s no bacon in the cafeteria?

If I am a Mormon and there is tea and coffee in the break room, do I have the right to demand my employer removes them because in my faith, I abstain from those beverages?

Hobby Lobby’various birth control methodss owners believe that life begins at conception and that adhering to the regulations in the ACA violates their religious beliefs or forces them to either pay millions of dollars in fines or stop offering health benefits entirely.

various birth control methodsThe ironic part of this story is that Hobby Lobby offers SIXTEEN other forms of birth control listed in Obamacare.

While Mr. Pitts is absolutely entitled to his opinion, he damages his credibility when he calls Hobby Lobby’s desire to remain true to their religious tenets, “faintly Talibanesque,” and that allowing them to decline to cover certain contraceptives and abortifacients is “anathema to our ideals of individual liberty and yes, religious freedom.”

Really? So telling a business what they can and cannot do as it relates to their 1st Amendment rights is “faintly Talibanesque,” yet allowing the wishes of a few employees to be forced upon all businesses upholds the ideals of religious freedom?

Let us not forget that the right to swing a fist ending where someone else’s nose begins is a two way street.

 

To read Mr. Pitts’ full article, click here.

I Promise!! Barack Obama’s Great Deception on Obamacare Premiums

Remember way back to the 2008 Presidential campaign? Then Senator Obama made a promise, one he repeated over and over for the next few years. Here’s a reminder of what he said:

money stethescope“If you’ve got insurance through your employer, you can keep your insurance. We estimate we can cut the average family’s premium by about $2,500 per year. If you don’t have health insurance, then we’re going to provide you the option of buying into the same kind of federal pool that both Sen. McCain and I enjoy as federal employees. We’re going to make sure insurance companies can’t discriminate on the basis of pre-existing conditions. We’ll negotiate with the drug companies for the cheapest available prices. We are going to invest in information technology to eliminate bureaucracy and make the system more efficient. We’ve got to put more money into preventive care.” – Senator Barack Obama, 2008

This figure that Obama kept spouting ad nauseum was derived from a memo by three Harvard professors that were unpaid advisers to the Obama campaign. Their memo cites their “best guess” of annual savings of $200 billion. They then divided that by the U.S. population, multiplied out to represent a family of four, then they rounded down to get to the $2500 figure.
However, we ultimately got confirmation of something that just about every logical thinking American knew for the truth – that Obamacare would not drive costs down, but it would have the opposite effect and inflate healthcare costs across the board.

“During his first run for president, Barack Obama made one very specific promise to voters: He would cut health insurance premiums for families by $2,500, and do so in his first term.
But it turns out that family premiums have increased by more than $3,000 since Obama’s vow, according to the latest annual Kaiser Family Foundation employee health benefits survey.
Premiums for employer-provided family coverage rose $3,065 — 24% — from 2008 to 2012, the Kaiser survey found. Even if you start counting in 2009, premiums have climbed $2,370.
What’s more, premiums climbed faster in Obama’s four years than they did in the previous four under President Bush, the survey data show.” – SOURCE

Now fast forward to today and what does Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius have to say about Obamacare?

“These folks will be moving into a really fully insured product for the first time, and so there may be a higher cost associated with getting into that market,” she said. “But we feel pretty strongly that with subsidies available to a lot of that population that they are really going to see much better benefit for the money that they’re spending.”
Ms. Sebelius added that those customers currently pay more for their health care if their plans have high out-of-pocket costs, high deductibles or exclude particular types of coverage, such as mental health treatment. She also said that some men and younger customers could see their rates increase while women and older customers could see their rates drop because the law restricts insurers’ ability to set rates based on age and gender.” – SOURCE

Now that the election is over, and Mr. Obama is safely ensconsed as President Obama for a second term, and as we are starting to see the mal effects of Obama’s policies more and more of the undeniable truth is being revealed.
But it isn’t only individual and family insurance costs that are costing more, the states are on the hook for billions more healthcare costs, as well.

“The additional cost to employers in states that do not expand Medicaid has been estimated as $1.3 billion a year. Of course, if Medicaid is expanded, that’s another fleecing for we, the taxpaying sheep.  If we’re going to get our pockets picked anyway, subsidizing businesses sounds like it would be cheaper.  And that’s what waiving the notorious “individual mandate” or business maandates amounts to, because the purpose of those mandates is to force every American to buy health insurance right away, rather than waiting until they get sick and invoking that “must cover pre-existing conditions” mandate.
Governor Rick Perry of Texas, which is resisting Medicaid expansion, made this point through a spokeswoman: “This is not free money from the federal government – it’s either being borrowed from China or taken out of taxpayers’ pockets.  The state and federal government can’t afford the current Medicaid program as is, and it’s financially irresponsible to continue expanding a program that we know to be broken.”  – SOURCE

Thank you President Obama, you’ve made sure you were the U.S. President who ushered in socialized medicine, regardless of whether it actually helps anyone…

Obamacare summed up in ONE sentence.

Dr. Barbara Bellar Candidate for Illinois State Senate, District 18 sums up Obamacare in one sentence. She says:

I am a candidate running against the Chicago Machine and I could use your help! With the national attention I am receiving from this video you know that the Chicago Machine will be even more motivated to defeat me. So if you could please go to website http://electbellar.com and click the donate button. If you could please send me a donation of any size it would be greatly appreciated. And know that your donation will go to defeat the Chicago Machine.

Checks can be sent to Citizens to Elect Barbara Bellar – PO Box 557766, Chicago, IL 60655.

To view my complete speech go to
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnAP0xnfjB8&feature=share&list=UUBzUlz…

Follow my mobile campaign by texting “Bellar” to 90210.

I wish I could vote for this lady, she is exactly the type of citizen politician our Founding Fathers envisioned.

God Blessed Texas

God blessed Texas in many ways; wide open spaces, beautiful landscapes, a rich history and most of all a people with an independent streak that runs deep. That independent streak has shown itself recently in a bill that was prefiled to be introduced in the 2011 Texas state legislative session. It sets up penalties of up to $5,000 in fines and up to five years in jail for anyone guilty of the “felony” of attempting to “enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation” pertaining to Obamacare. It is sponsored by state Representative Leo Berman (R-Tyler) and if it becomes state law, then it will for all practical purposes render Obamacare “null and void and of no effect”.

The bill says the federal Act (Obamacare):

  • is invalid in this state;
  • is not recognized by this state;
  • is specifically rejected by this state; and
  • is null and void and of no effect in this state.

It further states that any “person who is an official, agent, or employee of the United States or an employee of a corporation providing services to the United States commits an offense if the person enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the United States in violation of this chapter.” And it lays out how Obamacare is opposite to individual liberty and the freedoms put forth in our founding documents by saying that the “assumption of power by the federal government in enacting the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590; Pub. L. No. 111-148) as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872; Pub. L. No. 111-152) interferes with the right of the people of this state to regulate health care as they determine is appropriate, and makes a mockery of James Madison’s assurance in Federalist Paper Number 45 that the powers delegated to the federal government are ‘few and defined’ while those that remain in the state governments are ‘numerous and indefinite.’”

Michael Maharrey of the Tenth Amendment Center says that there is already nationwide dissatisfaction with the onerous mandates of Obamacare.

“The passage of the health care act opened the eyes of many previously apathetic citizens, making them aware of the rapidly expanding scope and influence of the federal government and its intrusiveness into their everyday lives,” he explained.

“They intuitively understand that requiring them to purchase health insurance falls far beyond the powers granted to Congress by the Constitution. Suddenly awake and alarmed by the fact that the federal government has grown so far out of control, and frustrated by what they see as the lack of responsiveness by politicians in D.C., many Americans find themselves looking for answers,” he said.

Maharrey went on to note that 14 states have already sued to block the implementation of Obamacare, along with more than a dozen private lawsuits by others as well. But Texas is taking this “a step further.”

“While some might call this legislation radical, it rests squarely within the scope of state power as understood by the framers of the Constitution. James Madison wrote in the Virginia Resolution of 1798 that states not only have a right, but a duty to step in when the federal government oversteps its authority,” Maharrey wrote.

He quoted Madison’s work (emphasis mine):

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

Michael Boldin, who founded the Tenth Amendment Center says that this isn’t anything new.

“One state, as Wyoming did with its Firearms Freedom Act, may decide that penalties on federal agents is the rightful response. Another, such as California with medical marijuana, may choose to create an environment conducive to non-compliance by masses of people. Either way – or somewhere in between – that’s the beauty of the American system. We can have widely varying actions, responses and viewpoints in different states while all living together in peace. One-size-fits-all solutions are actually the problem, and state-by-state decision-making is the natural response.

The Center goes on to say in a report, that 10 other states are considering similar legislation.

Whether this makes it into law or not, it is a landmark proposal that ought to make the powers that be in Washington D. C. sit up and take notice.

Obama’s CMS Nominee Loves the NHS

Chairman, err I Mean President Obama has struck again. He has dipped into the Marxist pool and pulled out yet another nominee to be placed in a position of power; this time over elderly and disabled Americans who rely on Medicare and Medicaid for their healthcare. This man is named Donald Berwick and he is an Ivy League academic who has three degrees from Harvard. He founded a think-tank based in Cambridge called the Institute for Health Care Improvement, or IHI. His favorite health care governing body seems to be the NHS (National Health Service) in the UK. He even worked on the NHS under Tony Blair and now, if confirmed by the Senate, he gets to implement ideas garnered in his experiences there.

Now before anyone starts throwing bricks at me for calling this learned man a Marxist, let me just point you to what it says in Wikipedia about him:

“Berwick, a Marxist, graduated with a B.A. from Harvard College, and received …”

Source

He said the following in a speech in 2009:

Any health care funding plan that is just equitable civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent healthcare is by definition redistributional.

-and-

NICE is extremely effective and a conscientious, valuable, and — importantly — knowledge-building system [which has] developed very good and very disciplined, scientifically grounded, policy-connected models for the evaluation of medical treatments from which we ought to learn.

-and-

I am romantic about the NHS; I love it. All I need to do to rediscover the romance is to look at health care in my own country.

Full Speech – (click on the link entitled: “Speech Don Berwick”)

We all know enough about the horror stories of government run health care and the rationing that goes along with it to be very afraid of someone with this mentality to be in charge of my healthcare.

Now to be fair, it appears that Mr. Berwick has a reputation as someone who has been able to improve the quality of healthcare at some hospitals around the country. In 2007, he won the Purpose Prize for “enlisting wide-scale cooperation and scientifically-proven protocols to help hospitals improve care and save more than 100,000 lives.”

Source

That being said, he may have improved the quality of health providers within our healthcare industry, but that doesn’t mean he is a good choice to run our healthcare industry.

This is just another one of Obama’s radical associates who has been hand picked to push his radical agenda. So if you are against having a Marxist in charge of Medicare and Medicaid, please contact your Senator.

Find your Senator