January 19, 2011
Jan 19 01:42 If They Aren't Afraid, They Should Be Jan 19 04:23 The Obama Of Old Is Back Jan 19 07:36 Chip's Response
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
If They Aren't Afraid, They Should Be
If Democrats aren't worried about Republicans' efforts to repeal O'Care, they should be. The CW says that the repeal vote Wednesday in the House is a) purely symbolic and b) is where the repeal O'Care movement ends. Predictably, the CW is terribly wrong. What's going to happen is that things will intensify following this vote.
This MPR article says that the DFL is actively participating in the national 'pushback':
Minnesota Democrats are waging an all out push back on efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which is also known as the health care law.
Gov. Dayton will participate in a 3pm White House Conference Call with HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to discuss the "impact that repealing the Affordable Care Act would have on the state's economy, residents and businesses."
DFL Rep. Keith Ellison also announced on his Twitter feed that he'll hold a conference call to discuss his opposition to repealing the law.
Meanwhile, the DFL Party is holding a news conference at noon today in Duluth to "highlight the benefits of the health-care reform law and urge Rep. Chip Cravaack to vote no in this week's House vote on repeal." Cravaack campaigned heavily against the health care law.
The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on the health care repeal this week. The measure is likely to pass but is unlikely to pass the Senate. President Obama also opposes efforts to repeal the law.
God bless the DFL for gift-wrapping this opportunity. The DFL is going on the offensive early because they understand that their road gets treacherous in February and March. That's when specific bills will be passed in the House and sent to the Senate, including a bill that kills each of the $670,000,000,000 worth of tax increases, another bill that would kill the individual mandate, another bill that kills the 100+ new agencies created by the O'Care bill.
Will the public think that O'Care is a great deal after those debates and votes? I'm betting they won't. I'm betting they'll think that we're paying too much money for a few things they like and a ton of things they wouldn't wish on their worst enemy. I wouldn't bet they'll think that spending $1,000,000,000,000 on O'Care isn't a good deal.
That's before talking about the popular things that will be featured in the House GOP's 'Replace Bill'. When people find out that they'll be able to buy insurance across state lines, that they'll get a tax credit for buying their own insurance, that this plan will remove tons of government bureaucrats from the health care equation, just to name a few features, I'll bet that O'Care will be as unpopular as ever.
Another factor that hasn't been talked about yet is that people are noticing that the majority of states have filed lawsuits challenging O'Care's constitutionality, including 2 Democratic AGs. As these lawsuits are ruled on, they'll attract more attention.
If I'm a Democrat senator running for re-election, I won't want that weight hanging around my neck. Pressure will increase to vote for repealing the individual mandate, the 100+ new agencies and the $670,000,000,000 worth of tax increases in the O'Care bill.
The other thing that's brilliant on the Republicans' behalf is that they won't combine these things into one bill. That'd allow Democrats to vote against the bill, then say they liked parts of the bill but not liking other parts.
What will happen is that eliminating the tax increases will be one bill. That will get sent to the Senate. Once that's been voted on, another bill will be passed to eliminate the individual mandate. Republicans will force a vote on that. Each of these bills will be spaced out so that each month the rest of the year, the Senate will be forced to vote on a health care repeal bill.
If the DFL wants to stick to the 'everyone knows that this bill isn't perfect' line, it's entitled to do so. That won't play well after the first week, though. People will wonder why Republicans weren't included in writing the final bill. They'll ask why Republicans were persona non grata in Harry Reid's and Nancy Pelosi's offices.
They'll wonder why Democrats insisted on calling Republicans the "Party of No" when it's House Republicans driving an appealing reform agenda. That line will be shoved back in Democrats' faces.
This is already shaping up to be another difficult cycle for the Democrats, especially with Kent Conrad and Joe Lieberman announcing their retirements and with more retirements surely on the way, possibly starting with Jim Webb.
Meanwhile, here in Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar will be asked why she promised not to raise taxes on Medtronic, only to have her vote to raise taxes on Medtronic the minute they needed her vote to pass O'Care. I don't know how much that'll hurt her but I'm betting she'd prefer not having to deal with that thorny issue.
Brian Melendez got shoved out of the DFL Chairman's job when Alida Messinger put the kibosh on his return. When the dust settles that first Tuesday in November, 2012, he might think Messinger did him a favor.
Posted Wednesday, January 19, 2011 1:42 AM
No comments.
The Obama Of Old Is Back
If there was any doubt that President Obama was back, his op-ed in the WSJ proved that the original version of President Obama is back. The Denver Post's David Harsanyi noticed in this column :
President Barack Obama penned a witty Wall Street Journal op-ed this week, titled "Toward a 21st-Century Regulatory System."
In it, he extolled the virtues of a free market system. And to prove that his admiration of capitalism has nothing to do with naked political expediency, Obama signed an executive order that will "root out regulations that conflict, that are not worth the cost, or that are just plain dumb."
Sounds rather subjective, though, don't you think? How do we gauge excessive regulation in the Age of Obama? I can't recall a single federal program, piece of legislation or proposal in the past two years that was initiated to ease the burden on consumers or businesses. (If you know of any, please send specifics to sorry@dowelooklikesuckers.com.)
President Obama's EO is meaningless because of its subjectivity. It isn't like we'll find more objectivity in the rest of the op-ed , either. Take this for example:
This order requires that federal agencies ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth. And it orders a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. It's a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades.
Mr. Harsanyi is right in asking if President Obama thinks we're suckers. Personally, I'd ask if President Obama thinks we're idiots but it's a matter of preference. I won't think that President Obama is serious because his administration's abuse of their regulatory power, whether it's abusing that authority to implement Card Check through the NLRB, whether it's attempting to implement Cap and Tax through the EPA, whether it's attempting to implement Net Neutrality through the FCC or whether it's attempting to implement the Fairness Doctrine.
President Obama's administration is littered with czars in his attempt to build a shadow cabinet. The crown jewel of President Obama's agenda is unconstitutional according to Judge Henry Hudson. Does this sound like someone who's serious about reigning in regulatory abuses that don't strike the right balance between job creation and protecting the public? (I'm just using President Obama's criteria.)
For instance, the FDA has long considered saccharin, the artificial sweetener, safe for people to consume. Yet for years, the EPA made companies treat saccharin like other dangerous chemicals. Well, if it goes in your coffee, it is not hazardous waste. The EPA wisely eliminated this rule last month.
This makes sense yet the EPA refuses to utilize the same logic with carbon dioxide. The EPA considers carbon dioxide as a cause of global warming. It's also what's produced when we exhale. Why would we regulate the thing we produce when we exhale?
Does this mean first thing Wednesday morning, President Obama will instruct the EPA to drop its plans to implement Cap and Tax through regulations? I'm betting that won't happen. I'm not surprised because President Obama has tried hard to implement the most radical parts of his agenda. He isn't about to tell the EPA to not attempt to get around the legislative process.
In the end, one thing's apparent: President Obama, at heart, is a spoiled brat. He wants what he wants when he wants it. If that means penning an op-ed that calms his political opponents' fears, that's what he'll do.
The only thing he won't do is abandon his radical agenda.
Posted Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:23 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-Jan-11 08:19 AM
We need to elect a President so the regulaters can be kicked out. In the mean time the hundred of thousands of jobs lost for example due to oil drilling ban by not giving out permits or retroactivity stripping a coal mine which spent something like $250 million to work the mine and work it out with Bush EPA to mine their work permits.
Yet he wants businesses to invest. One thing is for sure. Not only aren't the investing in jobs for us unless they're desperate they won't give Obama a cent in 2012.
Walter Hanson
Minneapols, MN
Chip's Response
Yesterday, outgoing DFL Chairman Brian Melendez spearheaded the DFL's offensive against the Republicans' attempt to repeal O'Care. This morning, the Duluth New-Tribune published Congressman Chip Cravaack's op-ed explaining why he'll vote to repeal O'Care:
The system we had in place before Obamacare passed was, by no means, perfect. But the 2,000-page, $1 trillion piece of legislation was a huge step in the wrong direction. Despite claims current law will reduce deficits and save taxpayer money, the new law is riddled with budget gimmicks that double-count savings. For example, it attempts to pay for the first six years of benefits with 10 years of tax increases. That is like being forced to make 10 years of payments on a car while only being able to drive it for six.
The Democrats' claim that repealing O'Care now will add $230,000,000,000 to the deficits over the next 3 years shouldn't surprise anyone since there are practically no expenditures that O'Care needs to pay for until 2014. In fact, the $230,000,000,000 figure should upset people because that's one-third of the new taxes that's included in O'Care.
What the Democrats are admitting is that hard-working Americans that are having difficulty making ends meet will get hit with $230,000,000,000 in additional taxes over the next 3 years. How many people reading this blog still think O'Care is still terrific? I'm betting that more than a few people think that thought it was a great plan still think it's a terrific plan.
Here's another tasty tidbit that likely won't sit well with America's job creators:
Obamacare includes more than $500 billion in tax increases and fines, as well as burdensome new IRS paperwork requirements. One example is the provision covering submission of 1099-MISC forms. The legislation requires employers to file a 1099 form with the IRS for each and every vendor with which they conduct business transactions of $600 or more.
Think of the burden regulations already impose on small businesses. Then think of the crushing additional burden this imposes on America's job creators. Then think, again, of the crushing additional burden those tax increases impose on employers.
It's worth reminding people that these additional taxes are imposed on some of Minnesota's biggest employers. For instance, the medical device manufacturing excise tax hits Medtronic hard. As a direct result of this O'Care tax increase, Medtronic is considering laying off 1,000 employees.
Let's summarize what we know thus far. We know that O'Care imposes substantial tax increases on medical device manufacturers, including the Twin Cities' Medtronic. We know that Medtronic might be forced into laying off 1,000 workers. We know that laying off people will add to Minnesota's already imposing deficit. We know that generating the 1099's will force businesses to hire accountants instead of expanding their businesses.
Still think O'Care is a great deal?
Despite spending more than $1 trillion, cutting Medicare by more than $500 billion and increasing taxes by another $500 billion, the current health-care law did nothing to lower health-care costs, which continue to rise unabated. In fact, the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that because of Obamacare total health-care costs will increase by $311 billion over the next decade. That's money we don't have and will be forced to borrow.
When the debate over health care started, one of the important goals of the legislation was to lower health care costs. I'm certain that more than a few people thought it should drive health insurance premiums down, too. None of those goals have been or ever will be achieved with the legislation as it's currently written.
Minnesotans deserve better than the loophole-filled, backdoor-negotiated, special-interest bill they got. Fortunately, a vote to repeal Obamacare is not the last vote I'm going to take regarding health care. By repealing Obamacare, we have a chance to start over and address the tough issues we all know need to be dealt with in a fiscally responsible manner.
I wrote earlier that there will be lots of votes on health care in the months to come. This is just the beginning. There will be committee hearings on various aspects of the bill. The House Ways and Means Committee will hold hearings on whether the $670,000,000,000 worth of tax increases should be repealed and on whether to repeal the 1099 provision.
The Energy and Commerce Committee will likely hold hearings on whether to repeal the individual mandate.
By the time Congress goes on their August recess, the American people will remember, vividly, why they viscerally hated O'Care.
Posted Wednesday, January 19, 2011 7:36 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-Jan-11 08:20 AM
Gary:
Too bad for us the main stream media won't work to show all these facts. Than basically every independent not to mention a large number of democrats will be begging to have it repealed.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by J. Ewing at 19-Jan-11 09:51 AM
What could go wrong? It reduces the number of doctors and providers, increases the number of patient visits, and raises costs for everybody. In short, it reduces the quality and quantity of care while increasing the cost. Sounds like the perfect government plan to me.January 19, 2011
Jan 19 01:42 If They Aren't Afraid, They Should Be Jan 19 04:23 The Obama Of Old Is Back Jan 19 07:36 Chip's Response
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
If They Aren't Afraid, They Should Be
If Democrats aren't worried about Republicans' efforts to repeal O'Care, they should be. The CW says that the repeal vote Wednesday in the House is a) purely symbolic and b) is where the repeal O'Care movement ends. Predictably, the CW is terribly wrong. What's going to happen is that things will intensify following this vote.
This MPR article says that the DFL is actively participating in the national 'pushback':
Minnesota Democrats are waging an all out push back on efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which is also known as the health care law.
Gov. Dayton will participate in a 3pm White House Conference Call with HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to discuss the "impact that repealing the Affordable Care Act would have on the state's economy, residents and businesses."
DFL Rep. Keith Ellison also announced on his Twitter feed that he'll hold a conference call to discuss his opposition to repealing the law.
Meanwhile, the DFL Party is holding a news conference at noon today in Duluth to "highlight the benefits of the health-care reform law and urge Rep. Chip Cravaack to vote no in this week's House vote on repeal." Cravaack campaigned heavily against the health care law.
The U.S. House is scheduled to vote on the health care repeal this week. The measure is likely to pass but is unlikely to pass the Senate. President Obama also opposes efforts to repeal the law.
God bless the DFL for gift-wrapping this opportunity. The DFL is going on the offensive early because they understand that their road gets treacherous in February and March. That's when specific bills will be passed in the House and sent to the Senate, including a bill that kills each of the $670,000,000,000 worth of tax increases, another bill that would kill the individual mandate, another bill that kills the 100+ new agencies created by the O'Care bill.
Will the public think that O'Care is a great deal after those debates and votes? I'm betting they won't. I'm betting they'll think that we're paying too much money for a few things they like and a ton of things they wouldn't wish on their worst enemy. I wouldn't bet they'll think that spending $1,000,000,000,000 on O'Care isn't a good deal.
That's before talking about the popular things that will be featured in the House GOP's 'Replace Bill'. When people find out that they'll be able to buy insurance across state lines, that they'll get a tax credit for buying their own insurance, that this plan will remove tons of government bureaucrats from the health care equation, just to name a few features, I'll bet that O'Care will be as unpopular as ever.
Another factor that hasn't been talked about yet is that people are noticing that the majority of states have filed lawsuits challenging O'Care's constitutionality, including 2 Democratic AGs. As these lawsuits are ruled on, they'll attract more attention.
If I'm a Democrat senator running for re-election, I won't want that weight hanging around my neck. Pressure will increase to vote for repealing the individual mandate, the 100+ new agencies and the $670,000,000,000 worth of tax increases in the O'Care bill.
The other thing that's brilliant on the Republicans' behalf is that they won't combine these things into one bill. That'd allow Democrats to vote against the bill, then say they liked parts of the bill but not liking other parts.
What will happen is that eliminating the tax increases will be one bill. That will get sent to the Senate. Once that's been voted on, another bill will be passed to eliminate the individual mandate. Republicans will force a vote on that. Each of these bills will be spaced out so that each month the rest of the year, the Senate will be forced to vote on a health care repeal bill.
If the DFL wants to stick to the 'everyone knows that this bill isn't perfect' line, it's entitled to do so. That won't play well after the first week, though. People will wonder why Republicans weren't included in writing the final bill. They'll ask why Republicans were persona non grata in Harry Reid's and Nancy Pelosi's offices.
They'll wonder why Democrats insisted on calling Republicans the "Party of No" when it's House Republicans driving an appealing reform agenda. That line will be shoved back in Democrats' faces.
This is already shaping up to be another difficult cycle for the Democrats, especially with Kent Conrad and Joe Lieberman announcing their retirements and with more retirements surely on the way, possibly starting with Jim Webb.
Meanwhile, here in Minnesota, Amy Klobuchar will be asked why she promised not to raise taxes on Medtronic, only to have her vote to raise taxes on Medtronic the minute they needed her vote to pass O'Care. I don't know how much that'll hurt her but I'm betting she'd prefer not having to deal with that thorny issue.
Brian Melendez got shoved out of the DFL Chairman's job when Alida Messinger put the kibosh on his return. When the dust settles that first Tuesday in November, 2012, he might think Messinger did him a favor.
Posted Wednesday, January 19, 2011 1:42 AM
No comments.
The Obama Of Old Is Back
If there was any doubt that President Obama was back, his op-ed in the WSJ proved that the original version of President Obama is back. The Denver Post's David Harsanyi noticed in this column :
President Barack Obama penned a witty Wall Street Journal op-ed this week, titled "Toward a 21st-Century Regulatory System."
In it, he extolled the virtues of a free market system. And to prove that his admiration of capitalism has nothing to do with naked political expediency, Obama signed an executive order that will "root out regulations that conflict, that are not worth the cost, or that are just plain dumb."
Sounds rather subjective, though, don't you think? How do we gauge excessive regulation in the Age of Obama? I can't recall a single federal program, piece of legislation or proposal in the past two years that was initiated to ease the burden on consumers or businesses. (If you know of any, please send specifics to sorry@dowelooklikesuckers.com.)
President Obama's EO is meaningless because of its subjectivity. It isn't like we'll find more objectivity in the rest of the op-ed , either. Take this for example:
This order requires that federal agencies ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth. And it orders a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. It's a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades.
Mr. Harsanyi is right in asking if President Obama thinks we're suckers. Personally, I'd ask if President Obama thinks we're idiots but it's a matter of preference. I won't think that President Obama is serious because his administration's abuse of their regulatory power, whether it's abusing that authority to implement Card Check through the NLRB, whether it's attempting to implement Cap and Tax through the EPA, whether it's attempting to implement Net Neutrality through the FCC or whether it's attempting to implement the Fairness Doctrine.
President Obama's administration is littered with czars in his attempt to build a shadow cabinet. The crown jewel of President Obama's agenda is unconstitutional according to Judge Henry Hudson. Does this sound like someone who's serious about reigning in regulatory abuses that don't strike the right balance between job creation and protecting the public? (I'm just using President Obama's criteria.)
For instance, the FDA has long considered saccharin, the artificial sweetener, safe for people to consume. Yet for years, the EPA made companies treat saccharin like other dangerous chemicals. Well, if it goes in your coffee, it is not hazardous waste. The EPA wisely eliminated this rule last month.
This makes sense yet the EPA refuses to utilize the same logic with carbon dioxide. The EPA considers carbon dioxide as a cause of global warming. It's also what's produced when we exhale. Why would we regulate the thing we produce when we exhale?
Does this mean first thing Wednesday morning, President Obama will instruct the EPA to drop its plans to implement Cap and Tax through regulations? I'm betting that won't happen. I'm not surprised because President Obama has tried hard to implement the most radical parts of his agenda. He isn't about to tell the EPA to not attempt to get around the legislative process.
In the end, one thing's apparent: President Obama, at heart, is a spoiled brat. He wants what he wants when he wants it. If that means penning an op-ed that calms his political opponents' fears, that's what he'll do.
The only thing he won't do is abandon his radical agenda.
Posted Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:23 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-Jan-11 08:19 AM
We need to elect a President so the regulaters can be kicked out. In the mean time the hundred of thousands of jobs lost for example due to oil drilling ban by not giving out permits or retroactivity stripping a coal mine which spent something like $250 million to work the mine and work it out with Bush EPA to mine their work permits.
Yet he wants businesses to invest. One thing is for sure. Not only aren't the investing in jobs for us unless they're desperate they won't give Obama a cent in 2012.
Walter Hanson
Minneapols, MN
Chip's Response
Yesterday, outgoing DFL Chairman Brian Melendez spearheaded the DFL's offensive against the Republicans' attempt to repeal O'Care. This morning, the Duluth New-Tribune published Congressman Chip Cravaack's op-ed explaining why he'll vote to repeal O'Care:
The system we had in place before Obamacare passed was, by no means, perfect. But the 2,000-page, $1 trillion piece of legislation was a huge step in the wrong direction. Despite claims current law will reduce deficits and save taxpayer money, the new law is riddled with budget gimmicks that double-count savings. For example, it attempts to pay for the first six years of benefits with 10 years of tax increases. That is like being forced to make 10 years of payments on a car while only being able to drive it for six.
The Democrats' claim that repealing O'Care now will add $230,000,000,000 to the deficits over the next 3 years shouldn't surprise anyone since there are practically no expenditures that O'Care needs to pay for until 2014. In fact, the $230,000,000,000 figure should upset people because that's one-third of the new taxes that's included in O'Care.
What the Democrats are admitting is that hard-working Americans that are having difficulty making ends meet will get hit with $230,000,000,000 in additional taxes over the next 3 years. How many people reading this blog still think O'Care is still terrific? I'm betting that more than a few people think that thought it was a great plan still think it's a terrific plan.
Here's another tasty tidbit that likely won't sit well with America's job creators:
Obamacare includes more than $500 billion in tax increases and fines, as well as burdensome new IRS paperwork requirements. One example is the provision covering submission of 1099-MISC forms. The legislation requires employers to file a 1099 form with the IRS for each and every vendor with which they conduct business transactions of $600 or more.
Think of the burden regulations already impose on small businesses. Then think of the crushing additional burden this imposes on America's job creators. Then think, again, of the crushing additional burden those tax increases impose on employers.
It's worth reminding people that these additional taxes are imposed on some of Minnesota's biggest employers. For instance, the medical device manufacturing excise tax hits Medtronic hard. As a direct result of this O'Care tax increase, Medtronic is considering laying off 1,000 employees.
Let's summarize what we know thus far. We know that O'Care imposes substantial tax increases on medical device manufacturers, including the Twin Cities' Medtronic. We know that Medtronic might be forced into laying off 1,000 workers. We know that laying off people will add to Minnesota's already imposing deficit. We know that generating the 1099's will force businesses to hire accountants instead of expanding their businesses.
Still think O'Care is a great deal?
Despite spending more than $1 trillion, cutting Medicare by more than $500 billion and increasing taxes by another $500 billion, the current health-care law did nothing to lower health-care costs, which continue to rise unabated. In fact, the chief actuary at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that because of Obamacare total health-care costs will increase by $311 billion over the next decade. That's money we don't have and will be forced to borrow.
When the debate over health care started, one of the important goals of the legislation was to lower health care costs. I'm certain that more than a few people thought it should drive health insurance premiums down, too. None of those goals have been or ever will be achieved with the legislation as it's currently written.
Minnesotans deserve better than the loophole-filled, backdoor-negotiated, special-interest bill they got. Fortunately, a vote to repeal Obamacare is not the last vote I'm going to take regarding health care. By repealing Obamacare, we have a chance to start over and address the tough issues we all know need to be dealt with in a fiscally responsible manner.
I wrote earlier that there will be lots of votes on health care in the months to come. This is just the beginning. There will be committee hearings on various aspects of the bill. The House Ways and Means Committee will hold hearings on whether the $670,000,000,000 worth of tax increases should be repealed and on whether to repeal the 1099 provision.
The Energy and Commerce Committee will likely hold hearings on whether to repeal the individual mandate.
By the time Congress goes on their August recess, the American people will remember, vividly, why they viscerally hated O'Care.
Posted Wednesday, January 19, 2011 7:36 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-Jan-11 08:20 AM
Gary:
Too bad for us the main stream media won't work to show all these facts. Than basically every independent not to mention a large number of democrats will be begging to have it repealed.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by J. Ewing at 19-Jan-11 09:51 AM
What could go wrong? It reduces the number of doctors and providers, increases the number of patient visits, and raises costs for everybody. In short, it reduces the quality and quantity of care while increasing the cost. Sounds like the perfect government plan to me.
