One of the many reasons President Barack Obama and Democrats have used to justify implementing government-run health care is a cost savings benefit to the consumer and to the taxpayer.
According to Jeffrey Young over at The Hill, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) find ObamaCare would increase insurance premiums “by 27 percent to 30 percent for individuals and up to 3 percent for those enrolled in small-business insurance plans.”
“‘Average premiums per policy in the nongroup market in 2016 would be roughly $5,800 for single policies and $15,200 for family policies under the proposal, compared with roughly $5,500 for single policies and $13,100 for family policies under current law,’ the report says.”
Sound like a savings to you while your taxes also go up?
Members of Congress detail how they spend public money. The expenditures are compiled into quarterly reports by the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives. The books detail how much taxpayer money is used to pay for staff salaries and travel expenses for flights back to the Representative’s districts. Members also detail how they spend money on other things, like flowers, donuts, bottled water and other so-called office expenses. What’s the point? It’s an outrage. My money, your money, our money, being used for fluff. As Jake Sherman and Meredith Shiner from Politico note, “while the bulk of congressional office spending goes to salaries and routine office expenses, some of the line items offer a window into the personalities and priorities of each congressional office.”
The unemployment rate sits at a 26-year high of 10.2%. President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress are spending money at a pace that eclipses both President Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. The national debt stands at over $12 trillion. The ability to protect Americans by tracking and investigating terrorists is in jeopardy by year’s end. Iran is marching towards building nuclear weapons, vowing to build 10 new nuclear enrichment facilities in the face of Obama’s negotiation policy. I could go on and on. Obviously trouble abounds at every turn, whether domestic or foreign.
Representative John Larson (D-CT) was on CNN this morning pushing a “war tax.” We’ve seen several Democrats propose various tax increases lately to pay for a surge in troops for Afghanistan. Earlier we covered Senator Carl Levin’s (D-MI) proposal to increase the income tax on “folks earning more than $200,000 or $250,000” a year.
Without getting into the merits of any one proposal over another, doesn’t it strike you as odd that Larson would propose a tax increase that won't go into effect until December 2010 to pay for a troop surge that will start in December 2009?
Back in late October, we posted this bit of news regarding a tentative deal for Iran to “temporarily” export “75% of its known stockpile of low-grade nuclear fuel to Russia for additional enrichment.”
We questioned then what the benefit of this deal would be:
"Other than President Obama taking credit for “accomplishing” something through engagement with Iran, what would this deal actually achieve, other than buy Iran more time? Notice the key words in the deal… “temporary,” “if” and “known stockpile?” In other words, Iran will ship 75% of its low-grade nuclear fuel that is known about and will only do so temporarily. And so what do we get in return?"
That question was partially answered days later when Iran refused the deal the country had previously agreed to. Now we’re finding out more of what the repercussions are:
A new USA Today/Gallup poll finds nearly 50% “would urge their member of Congress to vote against” ObamaCare.
“49% Overall Said They Would Urge Their Member Of Congress To Vote Against A Bill; 44% Would Urge A Vote For It.” (Susan Page, “Opposition To Health Care Legislation Lingers,” USA Today, 11/25/09)
The USA Today/Gallup poll is not an anomaly. Poll after poll shows opposition to government-run health care. In fact, a Rasmussen poll on Tuesday found 56% of voters oppose ObamaCare:
“Just 38% Of Voters Now Favor The Health Care Plan Proposed By President Obama And Congressional Democrats.” (“Support For Health Care Reform Falls To New Low,” Rasmussen Reports, 11/23/09)
When Islamic Fascists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11, the “War on Terror” began. America was united in an effort to dispose of terrorists and their State sponsors. More than eight years later Americans have grown weary. In the latest Rasmussen poll, 45% of Americans say they want U.S. troops “home from Afghanistan either right away or within a year.”
Complacency has set in. Americans have forgotten the reason we are in Afghanistan and why, as President Barack Obama says, it is a “war of necessity.” Afghanistan is where Osama Bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and Al Qaeda planned the attacks of 9/11. They did so with the aid and comfort of the Taliban and its leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar. To come away from Afghanistan with anything other than completing the mission’s objectives – routing out Al Qaeda and the Taliban – would be to invite more 9/11s. Unfortunately, it may not matter.
Only “27% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President.”
“Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -15.”
“Among those not affiliated with either major political party, just 16% Strongly Approve and 51% Strongly Disapprove.””
“Among all voters, 54% now disapprove.”
In a move sure to infuriate the Left in his own Party, President Barack Obama appears set to announce that he will send 34,000 more troops to Afghanistan in a “war of necessity.”
“President Barack Obama Met Monday Evening With His National Security Team To Finalize A Plan To Dispatch Some 34,000 Additional U.S. Troops Over The Next Year To What He's Called ‘A War Of Necessity’ In Afghanistan.” (Jonathan S. Landay, John Walcott and Nancy A. Youssef, “Obama Plans To Send 34,000 More Troops To Afghanistan,” McClatchy, 11/23/09)
Obama’s decision will surely set up a war within the President’s own party. On the Left you have two factions opposed to sending more troops, Members of Congress and MoveOn.
In Congress, Members on the Left are calling for a “war tax” to pay for any increase in troops:
To liberals, education isn’t simply about making sure kids can add, subtract, multiply, read, write and understand the world around them. No, to liberals, education is a means to an end: indoctrinate the youth with an ideological disposition that will compel them to labor in a collective effort to further the cause as adults. This is a process that goes on and on until the U.S. is homogenized into like-minded automatons, all moving about for one common purpose. Kinda like Communism.
What am I ranting about? An effort by the University of Minnesota, specifically the “Race, Culture, Class and Gender Task Group” of the “Teacher Education Redesign Initiative,” to “redesign” the education of teachers.
If that doesn’t sound nefarious enough as it is, follow along. . .