Quote of the Day

"Every so often, I read something written by other people that I wish I had written. For instance, Thomas Paine observed over two centuries ago: 'To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead.' In 21 words, Paine perfectly summed up the frustration faced by a conservative every time he attempts to debate an issue with a liberal." --columnist Burt Prelutsky

Quote of the Day

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

Only Fill out One

Americans are told that information gathered in the census will never be used against them and the House of Representatives, in a Census Awareness Month resolution passed March 3, proclaimed that "the data obtained from the census are protected under United States privacy laws." Unfortunately, thousands of Americans who trusted the Census Bureau in the past lost their freedom as a result.

In the 1940 Census, the Census Bureau loudly assured people that their responses would be kept confidential. Within four days of the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Census Bureau had produced a report listing the Japanese-American population in each county on the West Coast. The Census Bureau's report helped the US Army round up more than 100,000 Japanese-Americans for concentration camps (later renamed "internment centers").

In 2003-04, the Census Bureau provided the Department of Homeland Security with a massive cache of information on how many Arab Americans lived in each ZIP Code around the nation, and which country they originated from — information that could have made it far easier to carry out the type of mass roundup that some conservatives advocated.

Instead of viewing census critics as conspiracy theorists, the nation's political leaders should recognize how their policies have undermined public faith in government, all the census really needs to know is how many people live at each address. Citizens should refuse to answer any census question except for the number of residents.

A Letter from a Congressman

Dear Friends,

Following the House of Representatives vote on H.R. 3590, the Senate Health Care bill, I want to provide you with an update on this important issue facing our state and country. I support more centrist reforms to lower health care costs but oppose the Senate bill. I want to tell you why.

More Centrist Reforms Were Rejected

I strongly support reforms to lower the cost of health insurance and cover Americans with pre-existing conditions. That is why I authored the Medical Rights and Reform Act, H.R. 3790. Under our centrist Reform Act, we cover Americans with pre-existing conditions and advance three major reforms:

1. The Medical Rights Act: Under our bill, Congress shall make no law interfering with the personal decisions that you make with your doctor,
   
2. Lawsuit Reform: By applying the lawsuit reforms (recently eliminated in Illinois) similar to successful California reforms, we could reduce defensive medicine, saving over $200 billion annually, and
   
3. Granting Americans Interstate Rights: Our bill grants the right to all Americans to buy health coverage from any state in the union, especially if you find a plan that is less expensive or more flexible for your family or small business. This improves choice and competition for each American.

Unfortunately, the Congressional leadership did not permit a debate on our bill. Instead, the House was only allowed one vote on the health care bill adopted by the Senate. I opposed this bill but it passed by a vote of 219 to 212 and will shortly be signed into law by the President.

Senate Health Care Bill Overview

Under the Senate bill, the Congress will increase spending by $1.2 trillion, including $940 billion for new subsidies, $144 billion for new mandates, $70 billion to administer the bill and $41 billion in unrelated spending. To attempt to pay for the bill, Congress will raise taxes, cut Medicare and borrow a historic amount of money. To pass the Senate, the bill also included the “Louisiana Purchase”, “Cornhusker Kickback” and “Gatoraide” that advantaged Louisiana, Nebraska and Florida over the people of Illinois.

Raising Insurance Premiums on Illinois Families

While the American people overwhelmingly want to lower health insurance costs, the bill increases costs because it requires Americans to buy health insurance that include new mandates for coverage. According to the Administration, individual insurance premiums will increase by 10% for over 600,000 people in Illinois. On average, Illinois individuals currently pay $2,499 annually for insurance. Under the bill, costs will go up at least $150 a month to a level of $4,299 annually.

On March 4, the Chicago Tribune reported that for “more than half-million consumers in individual health plans, base rates will go up from 8.5 percent to more than 60 percent.” The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office reported that the bill’s provisions that double the tax on health insurers, drug makers and medical devices will all be passed on to patients in the form of higher health costs and rising insurance premiums.

Raising Taxes on Illinois Families

The bill imposes 12 new federal taxes, imposing over $500 billion in new payments to the government, including over $23 billion in taxes on the people of Illinois. Among the new taxes was a new “Individual Mandate Tax” (IMT) of $2,250 per household or 2% of household income. The bill increases the Medicare payroll tax and does not adjust this for inflation. Therefore, like the infamous Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), the new Medicare tax will soon reach most middle class families as inflation pushes more Americans into its bracket.

The bill also increases the capital gains tax. Most economists worry that too many businesses plan for the short-term, hurting long-term economic growth. That is why investments which are held for longer periods of time pay a lower capital gains tax. The Senate bill reverses this wise policy by imposing a new 3.8% tax on capital gains, raising the rate from 15% to 23.8% by 2013.

Raising Taxes on Illinois Small Business

Half of all people employed in Illinois work in a small business and over 80% of job losses during this Great Recession have been from small business employers. Nevertheless, this legislation requires the federal government to levy a new $52 billion tax on small businesses, even though unemployment now tops 12% in Illinois. The bill begins a new $2,000 tax on small business with over 50 employees. Over 21,600 small businesses in Illinois could be subject to this new tax. This tax applies to part-time as well as full-time workers. The follow-up Reconciliation Bill also includes an unprecedented extension of the Medicare tax to all non-wage income.

Putting Illinois Jobs at Risk

Both Americans for Tax Reform and the Heritage Foundation estimated that the new taxes and Medicare cuts in the bill would cost over 600,000 job opportunities per year or an estimated 26,042 fewer Illinois jobs. The bill also has a number of budget gimmicks to hide spending. Once the Social Security Trust Fund, long-term health care and student loan gimmicks are removed, the bill adds $755 billion to the federal deficit or $2,460 in new debt for each man, woman, and child.

Here is a look at the estimated national job losses under the bill:

Sector	Jobs
Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting	-5,441
Mining	-5,478
Construction	-43,316
Manufacturing	-105,229
Wholesale trade	-47,663
Retail trade	-84,339
Transportation and warehousing	-36,806
Utilities	-5,271
Information	-26,342
Financial Activities	-77,269
Professional and business services	-132,596
Educational services	-32,102
Leisure and hospitality	-49,682
Other services	-46,564
Total	-698,098

Cuts to Senior Health Care in Illinois under Medicare

The legislation stands for the principle that we should cut senior health care under Medicare to fund a new entitlement spending program. Over 40 million seniors depend on Medicare for their health care. Under the Senate bill, the federal government would cut over $500 billion from Medicare. This includes cutting over $200 billion from Medicare Advantage, cancelling the Medicare choice of over 120,000 Illinois seniors.

Here is a summary of the top Medicare cuts:

Medicare Advantage	-$202	Billion
Home Health	-$39	Billion
Medicare Part B	-$25	Billion
Hospital DSH Payments	-$25	Billion
Medicare Part D	-$10	Billion
Medical Imaging	-$1	Billion
Preventative Services	-$700	Million
Durable Medical Equipment	-$1	Billion
Power-Driven Wheelchairs	-$800	Million
Hospice	-$100	Million
Medicare Improvement Fund	-$20	Billion
Medigap	-$100	Million
Total Medicare Cuts	-$523	Billion

Increasing the Debt of Illinois

Under the federal Medicaid program for the poor, states must pay half of all costs. As you know, the State of Illinois has one of the highest deficits of any state, totaling over $12 billion. Spending on the Illinois Medicaid program rose 65% from $8 billion in 2001 to $13 billion in 2008 to now cover 2.4 million people. Under the Senate Health Care bill, Illinois would have to cover an additional 400,000 people, adding an additional $1 billion to the state’s deficit over five years.

Health care under Medicaid is already deteriorating. Over 9,000 doctors in Illinois refuse to accept Medicaid patients (28% nationwide), in part because it takes Illinois over 100 days to pay for services.

Expansion of the IRS

About the only jobs created by the legislation would be at the IRS. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the IRS would need to hire over 16,000 people – over 700 just in Illinois -- to audit the American people and impose the new taxes and mandates of the bill. New IRS agents would verify if you have acceptable authority, fine you up to 2% of your income for failure to prove that you have purchased “minimum essential coverage,” confiscate your tax refund and conduct audits. Under the bill, nearly half of the new individual mandate taxes will be paid by Americans earning less than $66,150 for a family of four

Conclusion

I voted against this legislation because it costs Illinois jobs, raises taxes and deepens the debt our children must one day pay. Unfortunately, the bill passed the House and is ready for the President’s signature into law. I wish that a more modest set of reforms could have been approved that did not have such harsh consequences for our economy.

In the coming days, I will outline policies and legislation that will reduce spending, lower the debt and prevent new taxes on the American people. While we did not prevail in this contest, I will continue to work and ensure a strong economy and bright future for every Illinois citizen.

Please feel free to forward this email along to other interested constituents or post it on your Facebook, Twitter, or MySpace pages. As always, do not hesitate to contact me at 847-940-0202 or via my Web site should issues of concern to you come before the Congress.

Very truly yours,

Mark Kirk
Member of Congress

Quote of the Day

"It's raining today...because our founding fathers are weeping." -- Rep. Tom Price from Georgia

Health is not a right

Health is not a right, it is a personal responsibility. Health care is not a right, it is a commodity. Health insurance is not a right, it is a financial risk management tool. Those who try to equate the Constitutional right of 'life' with health, heath care, health insurance have got it completely wrong. The Constitution does not guarantee that the federal government will provide you with life. Instead it guarantees that the federal government will not take life away from you. Unless the government has done something to your health that resulted in the loss of your life, then you have no claim against the government, or a right to its monies (which come from taxes). If you fail to take personal responsibility for your health (proper diet, exercise, life style, etc.), that isn't the government's fault. It's your fault and you should bear the burden. If, for some bizarre reason, you can find a Constitutional requirement for providing health insurance to every citizen of this nation, then haven't we been violating the Constitution for nearly the first 130+ years of its existence?

This deserves reposting ...

MY HEALTH CARE PLAN
by Ann Coulter
March 17, 2010
http://anncoulter.com/cgi-local/printer_friendly.cgi?article=359

Liberals keep complaining that Republicans don't have a plan for reforming health care in America. I have a plan!

It's a one-page bill creating a free market in health insurance. Let's all pause here for a moment so liberals can Google the term "free market."

Nearly every problem with health care in this country -- apart from trial lawyers and out-of-date magazines in doctors' waiting rooms -- would be solved by my plan.

In the first sentence, Congress will amend the McCarran-Ferguson Act to allow interstate competition in health insurance.

We can't have a free market in health insurance until Congress eliminates the antitrust exemption protecting health insurance companies from competition. If Democrats really wanted to punish insurance companies, which they manifestly do not, they'd make insurers compete.

The very next sentence of my bill provides that the exclusive regulator of insurance companies will be the state where the company's home office is. Every insurance company in the country would incorporate in the state with the fewest government mandates, just as most corporations are based in Delaware today.

That's the only way to bypass idiotic state mandates, requiring all insurance plans offered in the state to cover, for example, the Zone Diet, sex-change operations, and whatever it is that poor Heidi Montag has done to herself this week.

President Obama says we need national health care because Natoma Canfield of Ohio had to drop her insurance when she couldn't afford the $6,700 premiums, and now she's got cancer.

Much as I admire Obama's use of terminally ill human beings as political props, let me point out here that perhaps Natoma could have afforded insurance had she not been required by Ohio's state insurance mandates to purchase a plan that covers infertility treatments and unlimited ob/gyn visits, among other things.

It sounds like Natoma could have used a plan that covered only the basics -- you know, things like cancer.

The third sentence of my bill would prohibit the federal government from regulating insurance companies, except for normal laws and regulations that apply to all companies.

Freed from onerous state and federal mandates turning insurance companies into public utilities, insurers would be allowed to offer a whole smorgasbord of insurance plans, finally giving consumers a choice.

Instead of Harry Reid deciding whether your insurance plan covers Viagra, this decision would be made by you, the consumer. (I apologize for using the terms "Harry Reid" and "Viagra" in the same sentence. I promise that won't happen again.)

Instead of insurance companies jumping to the tune of politicians bought by health-care lobbyists, they would jump to the tune of hundreds of millions of Americans buying health insurance on the free market.

Hypochondriac liberals could still buy the aromatherapy plan and normal people would be able to buy plans that only cover things like major illness, accidents and disease. (Again -- things like Natoma Canfield's cancer.)

This would, in effect, transform medical insurance into ... a form of insurance!

My bill will solve nearly every problem allegedly addressed by ObamaCare -- and mine entails zero cost to the taxpayer. Indeed, a free market in health insurance would produce major tax savings as layers of government bureaucrats, unnecessary to medical service in America, get fired.

For example, in a free market, the government wouldn't need to prohibit insurance companies from excluding "pre-existing conditions."

Of course, an insurance company has to be able to refuse new customers with "pre-existing conditions." Otherwise, everyone would just wait to get sick to buy insurance. It's the same reason you can't buy fire insurance on a house that's already on fire.

That isn't an "insurance company"; it's what's known as a "Christian charity."

What Democrats are insinuating when they denounce exclusions of "pre-existing conditions" is an insurance company using the "pre-existing condition" ruse to deny coverage to a current policy holder -- someone who's been paying into the plan, year after year.

Any insurance company operating in the free market that pulled that trick wouldn't stay in business long.

If hotels were as heavily regulated as health insurance is, right now I'd be explaining to you why the government doesn't need to mandate that hotels offer rooms with beds. If they didn't, they'd go out of business.

I'm sure people who lived in the old Soviet Union thought it was crazy to leave groceries to the free market. ("But what if they don't stock the food we want?")

The market is a more powerful enforcement mechanism than indolent government bureaucrats. If you don't believe me, ask Toyota about six months from now.

Right now, insurance companies are protected by government regulations from having to honor their contracts. Violating contracts isn't so easy when competitors are lurking, ready to steal your customers.

In addition to saving taxpayer money and providing better health insurance, my plan also saves trees by being 2,199 pages shorter than the Democrats' plan.

Feel free to steal it, Republicans!

COPYRIGHT 2010 ANN COULTER
DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL UCLICK
1130 Walnut, Kansas City, MO 64106

Quote of the Day

"The more we come to rely on government, the fewer freedoms we will enjoy. Government will start dictating what we can own, eat and drive, how much of our money they will let us keep, how we run our businesses, how many -- if any -- guns we can own, and what we may and may not say. Oh, wait! They are already doing that. To preserve freedom we must fight for it." --columnist Cal Thomas

Quote of the Day

"Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust must be men of unexceptionable characters." --Samuel Adams

Quote of the Day

"[Barack Obama failed to sell a health care reform plan to American voters] because the utter implausibility of its central promise -- expanded coverage at lower cost -- led voters to conclude that it would lead ultimately to more government, more taxes and more debt." --columnist Charles Krauthammer