Friday, December 27, 2013

Government steals your home under "Free Obamacare"

Fine print: State can seize your assets to pay for care after you’re forced into Medicaid by Obamacare

My, this is an unpleasant consequence of Obamacare. I’m not going to call it unintended because in its current form, it potentially earns a bunch of money for states, so I’m pretty sure that’s intentional. What I think is unintentional is anyone noticing this is what they’re up to.

But the Seattle Times noticed:

It wasn’t the moonlight, holiday-season euphoria or family pressure that made Sophia Prins and Gary Balhorn, both 62, suddenly decide to get married.

It was the fine print.

As fine print is wont to do, it had buried itself in a long form — Balhorn’s application for free health insurance through the expanded state Medicaid program. As the paperwork lay on the dining-room table in Port Townsend, Prins began reading.

She was shocked: If you’re 55 or over, Medicaid can come back after you’re dead and bill your estate for ordinary health-care expenses.

The way Prins saw it, that meant health insurance via Medicaid is hardly “free” for Washington residents 55 or older. It’s a loan, one whose payback requirements aren’t well advertised. And it penalizes people who, despite having a low income, have managed to keep a home or some savings they hope to pass to heirs, Prins said.
So, here’s the deal. There used to be a provision whereby the state could recuperate funds spent on a Medicaid patient post-55 years old from whatever assets he owned. So, a low-income individual in nursing home care after age 55 might pass away and his kids would find out the family home or car of whatever he had to his name had to be bought back from the state if they wanted it. It’s called estate recovery, and sounds pretty shady if it’s not boldly advertised as the terms for Medicaid enrollment, which is most definitely is not.

Before the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion, there weren’t that many people in Medicaid who had much in the way of assets for seizing. But now that Medicaid enrollment requirements have been relaxed, more people with assets but low income are joining the program or being forced into it. For instance, a couple in their 50s who, say, retired early after losing jobs in the bad economy may have assets but show a very low income. Under Obamacare, if their income is low enough to qualify for Medicaid, they must enroll in Medicaid unless they want to buy totally unsubsidized coverage in the now-inflated individual market. As teh Times notes, this is no small difference:

People cannot receive a tax credit to subsidize their purchase of a private health plan if their income qualifies them for Medicaid, said Bethany Frey, spokeswoman for the Washington Health Benefit Exchange.

But they could buy a health plan without a tax credit, she added.

For someone age 55 to 64 at the Medicaid-income level — below $15,856 a year — it’s quite a jump from free Medicaid health insurance to an unsubsidized individual plan. Premiums in King County for an age 60 non-tobacco user for the most modest plan run from $451 to $859 per month.
The couple in the Times story was able to marry, combine their incomes, and get out of the Medicaid trap. Others will not be so lucky, and may not even read the fine print:

Prins, an artist, and Balhorn, a retired fisherman-turned-tango instructor, separately qualified for health insurance through Medicaid based on their sole incomes.

But if they were married, they calculated, they could “just squeak by” with enough income to qualify for a subsidized health plan — and avoid any encumbrance on the home they hope to leave to Prins’ two sons.
For no one else in the world is it a-okay to give low-income people a loan that might endanger their family’s assets and not even clearly inform them they’re getting a loan.

This Daily Kos diarist has a nice write-up (I know) on the toll this could take on lower and middle-class people looking for relief and getting what amounts to a surprise predatory loan instead:

We haven’t had lots of people younger than 65 on Medicaid, because in most states simply earning less than the Federal Poverty Level did not qualify one for Medicaid.

And we haven’t had many people with lots of assets on Medicaid, because in most places you have to have less than around $2400 to your name before Medicaid will cover you. You can keep your house and your car, but Medicaid reserves the right to put liens on them and take them when you die.

But now we have the Affordable Care Act, and its expectation that everyone in the lower tier of income will end up in the Medicaid system. To accomplish this, they have dropped the asset test. So now we will have lots of people ages 55-64, who have assets but not a lot of income right now, for whatever reason, on Medicaid.

The kicker of it is, if you make the right amount to qualify for a subsidized health insurance plan, your costs are going to be shared and subsidized by the government. But if you go on Medicaid, you owe the entire amount that Medicaid spends on you from the day you turn 55…

How will this play out? No one knows, as far as I can tell. But it is easy to see how this could become a real problem. If someone is low income and goes on Medicaid, will Medicaid put a lien on their house? If they need to sell their house and move, will they then lose all their equity in paying off the lien? Will people get hit with bills and liens for many thousands of dollars, even if they were healthy and hardly ever went to the doctor?
The fact that this is being treated with seriousness at Kos is an indication of how large a liability it could be for this government program. Washington is scrambling to change the law. No doubt other states will start looking at their implementation of this part of Obamacare. But there will be people caught unaware that their houses effectively belong to the government because the government forced them into Medicaid coverage. You’re welcome!

Thursday, December 26, 2013

A must read!

Professor Laura Hollis of Notre Dame ... A MUST READ!

Laura Hollis is a professor at the University of Notre Dame

November 20, 2013/10:42 AM

The unveiling of the dictatorial debacle that is Obamacare absolutely flabbergasts me. It is stunning on so many levels, but the most shocking aspect of it for me is watching millions of free Americans stand idly by while this man, his minions in Congress and his cheerleaders in the press systematically dismantle our Constitution, steal our money, and crush our freedoms.
The President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid (with no small help from Justice John Roberts) take away our health care, and we allow it. They take away our insurance, and we allow it. They take away our doctors, and we allow it. They charge us thousands of dollars more a year, and we allow it. They make legal products illegal, and we allow it. They cripple our businesses, and we allow it. They announce by fiat that we must ignore our most deeply held beliefs – and we allow it.

Where is your spine, America?

Yes, I know people are complaining. I read the news on the internet. I read blogs. I have a Twitter feed. So what? People in the Soviet Union complained. People in Cuba complain. People in China complain (quietly). Complaining isn't the same thing as doing anything about it. In fact, much of the complaining that we hear sounds like resignation: Wow. This sucks. Oh well, this is the way things are. Too bad.

Perhaps you need reminding of a few important facts. Here goes:

1. The President is not a king. Barack Obama does not behave like a President, an elected official, someone who realizes that he works for us. He behaves like a king, a dictator – someone who believes that his own pronouncements have the force of law, and who thinks he can dispense with the law's enforcement when he deigns to do so. And those of us who object? How dare we? Racists!

And while he moves steadily "forward" with his plans to "fundamentally transform" the greatest country in human history, he distracts people with cheap, meaningless trivialities, like "free birth control pills"! (In fact, let's face it: this administration's odd obsession with sex in general - Birth control! Abortion! Sterilization! Gay guys who play basketball! -- is just plain weird. Since when did the leader of the free world care so much about how people have sex, who they have it with, and what meds they use when they have it? Does he have nothing more important to concern himself with?)

2. It isn't just a failed software program; it is a failed philosophy. People are marveling that was such a spectacular failure. Well, if one is only interested in it as a product launch, I've explained some of the reasons for that here. But the larger point is that it isn't a software failure, or even a product failure; it is a philosophy failure.

I have said this before: Obama is not a centrist; he is a central planner. And this – all of it: the disastrous computer program, the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, the lies, the manipulation of public opinion, the theft of the public's money and property, and freedom (read insurance, and premiums, and doctors) -- IS what central planning looks like.

The central premise of central planning is that a handful of wunderkinds with your best interests at heart (yeah, right) know better than you what's good for you. The failure of such a premise and the misery it causes have been clear from the dawn of humanity. Kings and congressmen, dictators and Dear Leaders, potentates, princes and presidents can all fall prey to the same imperial impulses: "we know what is good the 'the people.'

And they are always wrong.

There is a reason that the only times communism has really been tried have been after wars, revolutions, or coups d'état. You have to have complete chaos for people to be willing to accept the garbage that centralized planning produces. Take the Soviet Union , for example. After two wars, famine, and the collapse of the Romanov dynasty, why wouldn't people wait in line for hours to buy size 10 shoes? Or settle for the gray matter that passed for meat in the grocery stores?

But communism's watered-down cousin, socialism, isn't much better. Ask the Venezuelans who cannot get toilet paper. Toilet paper. ¡Viva la Revolución!

Contrary to what so many who believe in a "living Constitution" say, the Founding Fathers absolutely understood this. That is why the Constitution was set up to limit government power. (Memo to the President: the drafters of the Constitution deliberately didn't say "what government had to do on your behalf.") They understood that that was the path to folly, fear, and famine.)

3. Obama is deceitful. Just as the collapse of the computer program should not surprise anyone, neither should we be shocked that the President lied about his healthcare plan. Have any of you been paying attention over the past few years? Obama has made no secret of his motivations or his methods. The philosophies which inspire him espouse deceit and other vicious tactics. (Don' t take my word for it: read Saul Alinsky.) Obama infamously told reporter Richard Wolffe, "You know, I actually believe my own bullshit." He has refused to be forthcoming about his past (where are his academic records?). His own pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, told author Ed Klein, that Obama said to him, "You know what your problem is? You have to tell the truth."

Did Obama lie when he said dozens of times, "If you like you plan, you can keep it. Period!"? Of course he did. That's what he does.

4. The media is responsible. And had the media been doing their jobs, we would have known a lot of this much, much h earlier.

The press is charged with the sacred responsibility of protecting the people from the excesses of government. Our press has been complicit, incompetent, or corrupt. Had they vetted this man in 2008, as they would have a Republican candidate, we would have known far more about him than we do, even now. Had they pressed for more details about Obamacare, Congress' feet would have been held to the fire. Had they done their jobs about Eric Holder, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS scandal, NSA spying - or any of the other myriad betrayals of the public trust that this administration has committed, Obama would likely have lost his 2012 reelection campaign. (A fact that even The Washington Post has tacitly acknowledged. Well done, fellas! Happy now?)

Instead, they turned a blind eye, even when they knew he was lying, abusing power, disregarding the limits of the Constitution. It was only when he began to spy on them, and when the lies were so blatant that the lowest of low-information voters could figure it out that they realized they had to report on it. (Even in the face of blatant, deliberate and repeated lies, The New York Times has the audacity to tell us that the President "misspoke.") They have betrayed us, abandoned us, and deceived us.

5. Ted Cruz was right. So was Sarah Palin. The computer program is a disaster. The insurance exchanges are a disaster. What's left? The healthcare system itself. and this, of necessity, will be a disaster, too.

Millions of people have lost their individual insurance plans. In 2015, millions more will lose their employer-provided coverage (a fact which the Obama administration also knew, and admitted elsewhere).

The exorbitant additional costs that Obamacare has foisted on unsuspecting Americans are all part of a plan of wealth confiscation and redistribution. That is bad enough. But it will not end there. When the numbers of people into the system and the corresponding demand for care vastly exceed the cost projections (and they will, make no mistake), then the rationing will start. Not only choice at that point, but quality and care itself will go down the tubes. And then will come the decisions made by the Independent Payment Advisory Board about what care will be covered (read "paid for") and what will not.

That's just a death panel, put politely. In fact, progressives are already greasing the wheels for acceptance of that miserable reality as well. They're spreading the lie that it will be about the ability of the dying to refuse unwanted or unhelpful care. Don't fall for that one, either. It will be about the deaths that inevitably result from decisions made by people other than the patients, their families, and their physicians. (Perhaps it's helpful to think of their assurances this way: "If you like your end-of-life care, you can keep your end-of-life-care.")

6. We are not SUBJECTS. (Or, Nice Try, the Tea Party isn’t Going Away). We have tolerated these incursions into our lives and livelihoods too long already. There is no end to the insatiable demand "progressives" have to remake us in their image. Today it is our insurance, our businesses, our doctors, our health care. Tomorrow some new crusade will be announced that enables them to take over other aspects of our formerly free lives.

I will say it again: WE ARE NOT SUBJECTS. Not only is the Tea Party right on the fiscal issues, but it appears that they are more relevant than ever. We fought a war once to prove we did not want to be the subjects of a king, and the Boston Tea Party was just a taste of the larger conflict to come. If some people missed that lesson in history class, we can give them a refresher.

The 2014 elections are a good place to start. Call your representative, your senator, your candidate and tell them: "We are not subjects. You work for us. And if the word "REPEAL" isn't front and center in your campaign, we won't vote for you. Period."

Laura Hollis is an attorney and teaches entrepreneurship and business law at the University of Notre Dame

And this comes from Notre Dame.  What a powerful and true letter!

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Hillary for President?

The Anadolu Agency interviewed wife of Morsi, the ousted president who belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood. She is known as Om Ahmad 'Mother of Ahmed".

Interviewer: Do you have ties with Barak Obama?
Om Ahmad: It was the Muslim Brotherhood who helped Barak Obama to win twice.

Interviewer: What about Hillary Clinton?
Om Ahmad: Hillary Clinton relies on us to help her win the presidential election.

Interviewer: Do you stay in touch with Hillary Clinton?
Om Ahmad: Our communications never stopped. She always uses official and non-official brothers and sisters of the Muslim Brotherhood to help her solve problems with the Middle East issues.

Interviewer: Who leads the jihadest (fighters) after the arrest of the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood?
Om Ahmad: Their wives.

The whole text of the interview in Arabic:

فى حوار لها مع "وكالة انباء الاناضول"، ادلت السيدة الاولى زوجة الرئيس المصرى "محمد مرسى" بتصريحات هامة، و طلبت ان نناديها باسم ابنها البكر "ام احمد". 
تربطك صداقة عائلية مع ميسز "هيلارى كلينتون"، فهل لا تزال صديقة لك، بعد "الانقلاب العسكرى" ضد زوجك؟! 
"ام احمد": زوجى مختطف منذ شهور، و سيعود من الاختطاف، و يمارس مهامه الشرعية كرئيس للبلاد، قريبا جدا، و اقرب مما تتصورون، و سيدفع الانقلابيون ثمنا باهظا للخيانة، اما ميسز "كلينتون" فتربطنا بها منذ سنوات طويلة، صداقة عائلية، فقد عشنا فى الولايات المتحدة الامريكية، و تعلم ابنائى هناك، و توطدت اكثر بعد ان اصبح زوجى رئيسا شرعيا منتخبا للبلاد. 
هل تراجعت تلك الصداقة بينكما فى الاشهر الاخيرة؟ 
"ام احمد": العكس هو الصحيح، فاتصالاتنا لم تنقطع، و جميعها مسجلة، و هى تستعين باخوة و اخوات من الجماعة، بصورة رسمية و غير رسمية، لمساعدتها فى ادارة الازمات الخاصة بمنطقة "الشرق الاوسط"، بالاضافة الى بعض البيزنيس المشترك، و هى تعتمد علينا بدرجة كبيرة، فى انجاحها فى الانتخابات الرئاسية القادمة، مثلما فعلنا مرتين مع الرئيس الامريكى "باراك اوباما". 
و ماذا عن علاقتك بالسيدة الاولى "ميشيل اوباما"؟ 
"ام احمد": علاقتنا طيبة، لكنها لم ترتقى الى درجة الصداقة. 
"هوما عابدين"، هل هى قريبة لك؟! 
"ام احمد": ارفض التعرض لاسماء بعينها، لكنكم تعلمون ان لنا ابناء و بنات فى "البيت الابيض"، و بعض الاجهزة الحساسة، فى الولايات المتحدة الامريكية، و اكثر من سبعين دولة حول العالم، و املك بين اصابع يدىّ خزينة اسرارهم، و لهذا يخشون غضبتى. 
هل هناك ما يمنع من قيادة النساء للمجاهدين من الرجال؟! 
"ام احمد": على العكس، و انا حاليا اقود المجاهدين، و معى زوجات فضليات من نساء الجماعة، و بعضهن لازواج مختطفين ايضا، و اقول لهن ان الصبر على الحرمان من حقوقهن الشرعية له عظيم الاجر، و لو استشهد ازواجهن، سنزوجهن بمجرد انتهاء فترة العدّة، و سننفق على ابنائهن، كما ان سلطات "الاحتلال"، تخشى التعرض للنساء. 
هل اموال الجماعة على هذا القدر من الضخامة اذن؟ 
"ام احمد": نحن فى حالة حرب و جهاد، و لنا الغنائم، وفقا لشرع المولى عز و جلّ، و ننفق بسخاء لاجل اعلاء كلمة الله و راية الاسلام. 
هل سنرى راية الاسلام ترفرف فى الدول الغربية قريبا؟ 
"ام احمد": ان شاء الله. ان شاء الله. بمجرد ان نطبق الحدود على الكافرين هنا. 
هل تقلقك الحملة الاعلامية الشرسة ضد جماعة الاخوان، ووصفها بالارهاب، و محاولة تشويه صورتها امام العالم؟! 
"ام احمد": مطلقا. فرجالنا يعلمون تماما ما يجب عمله، و لا يدخرون جهدا و لا مالا و لا ابتكارا، و لست اخاف من ان اعلن اننا نعد "لانقلاب ضد الانقلاب"، كما اننا فى حالة حرب و جهاد، و لدينا المام بكل ادوات الحرب، القديم منها و الحديث، و احتفظ لنفسى بالتفاصيل، لان الحرب خدعة، و لن يهدأ بالى الا بتعليق الخونة جميعهم على المشانق

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

He's not just ruthless. He's without scruples and honor.

America has had some great presidents, many mediocre ones and a few bad ones. But we've never had one like Barack Obama. 

He's the first who thinks the job is beneath him.

He's the first who turns political give-and-take into a crisis by refusing to
negotiate with Congress.

He's the first who thinks the way to more power is to inflict pain on ordinary
The move to barricade the World War II memorial reveals the mentality of a tin-pot
dictator. The limited government shutdown did not need to affect the memorial because
it is open 24 hours, without gates and often without guards. 
But to turn public opinion in his favor, Obama's goons trucked in barricades to keep out World War II vets and other visitors. By one estimate, the barricades and workers cost $100,000.

The same punish-the-people attitude led to shutdowns of other parks and historic
sites that get no federal funding.
"We've been told to make life as difficult for people as we can. It's disgusting," a Park Service ranger told The Washington Times.
The ranger cited the order to close the parking lot at George Washington's home in Mount Vernon so visitors couldn't use it. The cheap trick captured the contrast between a revered
president and the current one.

I've been saying for a while that there is no bottom to Obama. He's not just ruthless. He's without scruples and honor.
Now the shutdown has ended, it will bring only a temporary respite from the crisis
atmosphere in Washington.
When it comes to his countrymen, Obama always chooses conflict over cooperation.

Meanwhile, Jimmy Carter can rest easy. We have a new worst president.

Sunday, December 1, 2013

Barack Obama Identified

DID GEORGE WASHINGTON PREDICT AMERICA’S FALL? Barack Obama Identified in 1st president’s Farewell Address.

by: Benjamin Franklin
george washington snow
(Matt Barber, WND)  America’s reluctant first chief executive sought to forestall the predictably devastating consequences of a national break from America’s Judeo-Christian moorings.
In fact, during his Farewell Address, Washington spoke of exactly the kind of subversive, anti-theist provocateurs who make up the aforementioned ACLU, FFRF, et al. He called them unpatriotic. He underscored the critical role religion and morality play to our national survival and, though he did not specifically identify them as such, warned of secular-”progressives” like Barack Obama – a man who, exposed as a serial liar, would later bring great shame upon the noble office Washington first held.
“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity,” declared Washington, “Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of Men and Citizens. … [R]eason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
Regrettably, Washington’s parting words exemplify, to a great extent, the current state of affairs in the very government he helped to bring about.
“Let it simply be asked,” he warned, “‘where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?”
Where indeed? Not only have our courts of justice abandoned any “sense of religious obligation,” they increasingly seek to subvert “we the people’s” very freedom to exercise such obligation.
Is it any wonder, then, that, with a government that weaponizes the IRS, brushes off the gross moral failings of our public servants and facilitates the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of its most vulnerable citizens – security for property, reputation and life has disappeared?
Continued Washington: “It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule indeed extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?”
That “necessary spring” of “virtue and morality” has run dry. A “constitutional right” for sodomy-based “marriage”? – a sin both Washington and the criminal codes called an “infamous crime”? Seriously? A government mandate that Christians fund your abortion homicide, despite a non-negotiable biblical command to do no such thing? Are you kidding?
The foundation has fractured. The fabric has frayed.
In 1788, eight years prior to his Farewell Address, Washington wrote: “[T]he [federal] government … can never be in danger of degenerating into a monarchy, an oligarchy, an aristocracy, or any other despotic or oppressive form so long as there shall remain any virtue in the body of the people.”
We are in danger. As our national virtue melts away, it strains credulity to deny that we are entering, as Washington warned, a dark era of American despotism. Like water to the gulch, such despotism pervades in the absence of religion and morality.
And as history has shown, the despotic nation is not long for the world. Read the full articleby Matt Barber via WND…

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

UN Troops Ordered To Kill All Americans Who Do Not Turn In Guns

Take a look at this video and then pass this blog site to all your friends!
This information is crazy because it is so well documented and backed up with interviews.

Is this why so many high ranking military leaders are being ran off by the Obama administration? 

Saturday, November 16, 2013

How Obamacare will effect Oregons health care

Rep. Richardson's Newsletter

November 15, 2013

Cover Oregon and the Obamacare Crisis

Richardson in CommitteeThe Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is the much debated federal health insurance law signed by President Obama in 2010.  Obamacare has two major components—the expansion of Medicaid, which in Oregon is known as the Oregon Health Plan (OHP), and the requirement in all states to provide access for individual or small group health insurance plans via a health insurance policy exchange, which Oregon calls “Cover Oregon.”  
There was wide concern about American citizens losing their right to retain their chosen health insurance policies and physicians when Obamacare was being debated. 
To allay such fears, President Obama promised the American public,
      " matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health-care plan, you'll be able to keep your health-care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what." Click here
Just last year (2012) President Obama reiterated the promise when he stated,

      “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.” Click here

Oregon’s own Senator Jeff Merkley likewise assured Oregonians with this statement on his website:
      "If you like your current health insurance, you will be able to keep it. And you will be able to continue seeing your current doctor. Health care reform would simply give you the choice to change insurance providers if you so choose." Click here
Even Governor John Kitzhaber joined the chorus of promises to Oregonians who were concerned
about the consequences of the federal health care law and its implementation in Oregon.  Governor Kitzhaber said, 
      "We all felt from the beginning that it was important for the state to implement and operate its own exchange rather than default to the feds. It is going to be a central contributor to the success of our larger health care reform effort, by setting the standards for plans that they reduce cost, that they maintain quality and that everyone has access to the kind of coverage that they need and deserve in this state." Click here
It has now become clear: the truth about Obamacare is substantially different from the promises our politicians repeatedly made. 
Effective January 1, 2014, provisions of Obamacare require most private insurance policies to include a list of medical care benefits that have never been covered in many existing policies.  As a result of being out-of-compliance with the federal law’s mandated health coverage requirements, approximately 145,000 Oregonians are having their present insurance policies cancelled.  The vast majority of these Oregon policies will be cancelled effective December 31, 2013. Just today the Oregon Insurance Commissioner has reversed her position and joined with the President in granting Oregon health insurance companies the power to extend current policies for another year—to December 31, 2014.
Such a pronouncement is political theater, a partisan maneuver intended to transfer blame from the administration to health insurance companies if they do not retract their cancellation notices and reinstate existing policies. In reality, insurance companies have spent two years calculating policy provisions and  premiums to enact Obamacare effective January 1, 2014.  The cancellation notices have already been sent and the federal law sets the effective date for January 1, 2014.  A Presidential Executive Order or a directive from a state’s insurance commissioner cannot change the course of this out-of-control health care train.
Many of the policies being cancelled can be replaced by new and more expensive policies issued by the same health insurance company.  But others, such as the 11,000 Oregonians who previously have been covered in the Oregon Medical Insurance Pool (OMIP), are scheduled to lose their benefits on December 31, 2013.  OMIP is a special pool of chronically ill, special risk patients whose medical costs are shared by all the health insurance companies providing health policies in Oregon. 
Betrayed are those OMIP patients and other Oregonians who cannot afford to pay substantial Cover Oregon policy premium increases and who are ineligible to receive government subsidies or do not want to accept them.  The success of Obamacare and Cover Oregon depends on citizen acceptance of government subsidies to justify the governmental intrusion into the private health care decisions of all Oregonians.   
To avoid gaps in health care insurance coverage, resulting from the cancellation of current policies on December 31st, new Obamacare compliant health care insurance policies must be issued effective January 1st.  To do so, more than 100,000 Oregon applicants for the new policies must accomplish the following four steps by the cut-off date of December 15, 2013:  
1.     Complete a complex 20 page application;
2.     Determine eligibility for government subsidies of health insurance premiums;
3.     Select a policy from multiple options, at premiums that often will be substantially higher
than those paid for present health policies that are being replaced; and,
4.     Obtain the insurance coverage from a qualified health insurance company.
It was intended that effective October 1, 2013, all four of these steps were to be completed smoothly, quickly and seamlessly on the website.  Unfortunately, the goal exceeded Cover Oregon’s ability to deliver. The facts clearly show Oregon’s insurance exchange was not ready to be implemented.  Cover Oregon’s regular Quality Assurance reports and monthly status reports repeatedly showed major inadequacies in the project.  Political pressure forced the Cover Oregon technicians to go on-line when they knew or should have known the system was not ready. 
The Cover Oregon train wreck was not unforeseen. I sounded an early alarm in a warning sent to the Governor and my legislative colleagues in September 2012.
Thus, Cover Oregon’s inadequacies were identified regularly and its catastrophic failure was fully anticipated.  With proper leadership, planning and execution Oregon’s expensive Obamacare disaster could have been avoided. 
Nevertheless, to chart a better course for the future, Oregon citizens deserve answers to the following questions:
Why was Cover Oregon allowed to go on-line when it was known it was not ready?
Why were the additional staff not added and trained before October 1, 2013, when it was known the system would not be able to process the applications on-line?
What has been spent so far on Cover Oregon?
How much will it cost to make Cover Oregon’s fully functional?
Where will the money come from to pay for system completion, corrections and manual processing of applications in the weeks and months to come?
How will coverage be provided for those who are uninsured as of December 31, 2013? 
Today, only 19,000 written applications have been received, and each of them must be manually processed.  In order to process all these applications—which must be completed by December 15th to provide insurance coverage effective on January 1, 2014—between 200 and 400 new employees are frantically being hired and trained.
Not a single Cover Oregon applicant has completed Oregon’s Obamacare health insurance enrollment process. Click here
There has been some confusion in news reports and statements made by various officials about thousands of Oregonians who used to be uninsured and are now being  signed up for the Oregon Health Plan/Medicaid. In addition to the private and small group health policies made available through Cover Oregon, Obamacare also allows Oregon to enroll more low-income people onto the Oregon Health Plan/Medicaid program. An estimated 250,000 Oregonians might qualify to now get such Medicaid health coverage.
While Cover Oregon struggles to correct the technical glitches and to hire and train hundreds of temporary employees who will process health care insurance applications manually for individuals and small business groups, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) has already signed up 70,000 additional low income Oregonians onto the Oregon Health Plan/Medicaid program.  
Conclusion.  As one of the leaders on the legislature’s budget committee, for more than two years I have been monitoring the various Quality Assurance and progress reports for Cover Oregon. Repeatedly, questions have been raised about the QA’s warnings, and repeatedly assurances were given by the Cover Oregon staff.  Those providing legislative oversight repeatedly pointed out the risks of catastrophic failure, but to no avail.  In government, as in life, outcomes are what count, not well-intended promises. 
We should continue to hold the Governor and the Cover Oregon staff accountable as the Obamacare fiasco unfolds. Oregonians were told this was going to be an effective transition to the new health care law. The process at this point has been a disaster, and I predict the worse is yet to come.  
Representative Dennis Richardson Signature
Dennis Richardson
State Representative
P.S.  In all fairness, to help correct the flawed roll-out of Obamacare in Oregon, Cover Oregon will host a series of “Application Fairs” in communities across Oregon. If your health insurance coverage depends on enrolling through Cover Oregon, I highly recommend you gather the suggested materials and attend one of the Application Fairs.

Monday, November 11, 2013


Take the time to view the video and then call your congressman, Impeach Obama!

Monday, November 4, 2013

Please, use a little common sense and not just misplaced emotions.

Cuts of horsemeat are displayed in a shop window at the horse butchery near Paris.REUTERS
The slaughter of horses for human consumption could legally resume in the United States as early as this week following a decision by a New Mexico judge who dismissed a push by animal rights groups to stop the practice. (It should never have stopped)
U.S. District Judge Christina Armijo in New Mexico threw out a lawsuit Friday by The Humane Society of the United States (This is a name only, they do much more harm than good but that is another story) and other animal protection groups that alleged the Department of Agriculture failed to conduct environmental studies when it issued permits to Valley Meat Co. in Roswell, N.M., and an Iowa company to slaughter horses for human consumption.
It was a last-ditch effort that failed for animal rights groups. Instead, the court’s ruling ends – for now at least - a two-year battle by Valley Meat to open its slaughterhouse.
The practice of slaughtering horses for human consumption was legal and fairly common in the United States for many years.(yes, and fed to our military also!) 
In 2005, Congress voted to withhold funding for USDA inspections of horsemeat. It was a way to stop the slaughters because meat for human consumption at the time had to be inspected. (This was a vote based on emotion and not what was good for the horses, or for the horse industry as a whole. It was a vote to appease city folks that have no idea about the reality of owning and caring for animals.)
However, the USDA gave the OK for slaughterhouses to pay for their own inspections. Congress voted to end the practice in 2007.  (While all other inspections are subsidized)
The measure to stop the slaughters lapsed in 2011 and now U.S. companies are clamoring to get back into the game. (Because of the outcry from horse owners that want a fair and humane means to dispose of unwanted animals. This is a reality, not something that you wish on old trigger but a reality born from the day of birth.)
Across the country, businesses have been applying for permits with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. They want to ship horsemeat to countries where it is eaten by humans or used as animal feed. (This should never have been stopped. I have eaten horse meat in Italy and it is very tasty besides being very healthy! I would buy it here in America if it was offered)
Retail purchase of horsemeat for human consumption in the U.S. is not yet approved but the possibility could be coming. 
In a statement following Friday’s dismissal, The Humane Society pledged that it would “not only appeal the decision, but also work with the states to block the plants from opening in Iowa, Missouri and New Mexico and step up its efforts in Congress to stop the slaughter of American horses.” (I know this is their right, but their disinformation and out right lies are a form of environmental terrorism)
"With today's court ruling and the very real prospect of plants resuming barbaric killing of horses for their meat in the states, we expect the American public to recognize the urgency of the situation and to demand that Congress take action," Humane Society President Wayne Pacelle said in a statement. (His statement proves his ignorance. Horses right now are being shipped unnecessary miles across USA borders to be killed in plants in other country's.  Horses have been turned lose to die of starvation on our forest and BLM grounds. Indian reservations are flooded with these horses and they die a horrible death at the hands of the wild stallion) "Court fights and state legislative battles have been important, but this is an issue of national importance and scale, and Congress should have an up-or-down vote on the subject." (Yes, and they should uphold the right of animal owners)
The idea of killing horses for food has triggered strong reaction among people on both sides of the issue.
Several animal rights organizations have linked legalizing the practice to horrific abuses and animal cruelty that they claim could lead to unsafe meat. (Yep, they try to scare those who have no idea of the truth)  They call the slaughters themselves a “brutal and terrifying end for horses.” (Sorry but in 99% of all cases, this is the best and most humane way to end their life. Old horses need to be used for dog food and younger ones that are dangerous should be fattened and use for human consumption. That is the truth, no spin)
“Horses are shipped for more than 24 hours at a time without food, water or rest in crowded trucks,” the Humane Society says. “They are often seriously injured or killed in transit.” (Yes it happens and the longer they have to travel to a plant, the higher the risk! Each owner should have a plant that is within a short drive)
Once at the slaughterhouse, the horses are stunned, the Humane Society claims, adding that because they are skittish animals by nature, the horses often “endure repeated blows and sometimes remain conscious during dismemberment.” (In Mexico we have no idea and no control over their kill methods. This is why we need plants here in the USA where we can control and ensure that horse are put down in the quickest and surest method available.)
Supporters, though, say that claims of cruelty are overblown and that while there is some risk in transporting any animal to slaughter, it is not a common occurrence.  (True, its simple, to the hauler and plant it is business and losing animals means losing profit.) 
Supporters also say that horse slaughtering facilities in the U.S. will provide a humane alternative for aging, starving or abandoned horses by owners who can no longer afford to take care of them. (This is just a fact. Does not matter if it offends you or not, this is a FACT!)
A 2011 report from the federal Government Accountability Office that shows horse abuse and abandonment have been increasing since Congress effectively banned horse slaughter by cutting funding for federal inspection programs in 2007. They say the ban on domestic slaughter has led to tens of thousands of horses being shipped to inhumane slaughterhouses in Mexico. (Again, a fact that backs up my view. I do not wish to seem callous in anyway but meat plants in the USA are the very best way we have to take care of our older or unwanted horses. Keeping them alive in a government support pen until they get injured and die is not a humane living for an animal I love. Put them down quickly)
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, more than 166,000 horses were sent to Canada and Mexico last year for slaughter. (Fact, so what has the Humane Society done with its efforts? They have hurt our horses by causing them to travel farther and suffer because of no USA oversight) 
Supporters also take issue with the taboo of eating horsemeat and say the animal is consumed in countries all over the world and could be extremely profitable to American companies interested in the industry. They also argue that horses should be treated no differently than pigs, chickens and cows. (Sorry but this is true and a fact also. Ask any 4 H or FFA person, they grow, raise, care for and at times, love the animal that they raise for your dinner plate. Why would a horse be different from a pet rabbit or lamb?)
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), China is one of the largest consumers of horsemeat. In France, the meat is considered to be a delicacy, sold in the same vein as veal in the U.S. (What they don't tell you is that none are raised for that purpose, not like cattle, sheep, chicken or pigs. They, just as we should...use animals that no longer have a use for anything else.)
About eight miles outside of Roswell, N.M., Valley Meat, a shuttered cattle farm is almost ready to reopen its doors.
Plant owner Rick De Los Santos and his attorney, Blair Dunn, told USA Today they were surprised when they ruling came down, hours after a temporary restraining order that barred the companies from opening in August had expired.
"If I were a betting man, I probably would have lost a lot of money on this," Dunn said. "I thought the court was headed in a different direction on this since she had issued the TRO. ... I am very, very happy to be wrong."
De Los Santos estimated it would be seven to 10 days before he was up and running.
Over in Gallatin, Mo., Rains Natural Meats could open as early as today.
Lets hope that we will again, have plants that we can control here in the USA.
I will add one more point and that is my freedom to eat what I wish. The USDA made it illegal to eat horse meat. I can eat snails, worms, bunny's  baby lambs, snakes, alligators and unborn chickens but not a horse? Come on, there is no common sense in this. If you don't want to eat horse meat then just don't buy it.   

Saturday, November 2, 2013

Did Obama abandon the US Ambassador in Benghazi, causing his death?

Last week there was a very telling CBS 60 Minutes segment by Lara Logan on Benghazi. Anyone believing this is a ‘phony scandal’ is part of the incredible cover-up being promoted.
It has been over a year and we still have no idea about the truth behind what occurred at the US Libyan consulate. Matter of fact, we do not even know of the whereabouts of President Obama that evening. His last directive, as he has stated, was to ensure those at the embassy got all the resources they needed, but for some reason that never happened.
Now, House Committee Chairmen Issa and Royce are seeking new hearings for questions that still remain. My recommendation would be to support Virginia Congressman Frank Wolf’s H.Res 36 to appoint a select committee to investigate Benghazi. The measure has over 175 signatures. I would humbly ask that you contact your Representatives and ask if they have signed onto this resolution. The victims and the American people deserve the truth.
How can we idly sit by and believe that the new normal is to allow a US Ambassador and other Americans to be abandoned during a terrorist attack? Libya, especially eastern Libya, has become a sanctuary for Islamic terrorists aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda. Ansar al-Sharia, who claimed responsibility for the attack, has a GITMO-released individual as one of its primary leaders.
We’ve witnessed plenty of discussion this week about the credibility of President Obama regarding the issue of Americans keeping their healthcare coverage. Clearly, this lack of credibility is a chronic issue for him.Two weeks after the Benghazi terrorist attack, President Obama was still promoting a lie about a crude video being the impetus behind the attack. From the recent 60 Minutes interview, we certainly know that not to be the case, nor was this spontaneous. Simple Obama is lying to us to cover up somethingm something very bad!
I fully support Senator Lindsay Graham’s filibuster of the Federal Reserve (an entity for which there should also be a select committee by the way) and Homeland Security nominees, Yanet Yellin and Jeh Johnson in order to get the administration to tell the truth.
Why was Ambassador Chris Stevens in eastern Libya on 9-11? What are the questions you’d if you sat on a House Select Committee on Benghazi. Mind you, Harry Reid does not care for you to know the truth.
The Constitution provides that the President shall be removed from office only upon “Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”
What do you think? Does Benghazi bring President Obama — as Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn intoned – “dangerously close?