The Wrecking Ball Known as ObamaCare

[bonnie]

The Wrecking Ball Known as ObamaCare

By Eileen F. Toplansky

It is mindboggling that so many people are totally unaware of ObamaCare, have no interest in discussing it, and are dismissive and rude if someone attempts to have a rational conversation about a law that will drastically change the landscape of this country.

This deliberate ignorance continues to beget denial. Consequently, we find America on the verge of a system that apparently only African and Eastern European acquaintances of mine instantly understand, since they ran away from the very draconian worldview that we will all face in a matter of days if ObamaCare is not stopped dead in its tracks.

Daily, one learns that ObamaCare is a job destroyer. The graph here shows that deep cuts to jobs will continue as "ObamaCare kills off at least two percent of the U.S. full-time workforce." The list of companies cutting hours for workers continues to grow. Employers seek to keep staff below the 30-hour threshold set by the not-so Affordable Care Act.

Thus, "according to an April survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), 41% of 603 small business owners" are delaying hiring. In fact, "one in five [have] already cut hours, while 20% have reduced payroll."

Reduction of workers' hours is now a direct result of ObamaCare. In the retail and hospitality industries, 20% of employers will cut part-time hours.

Trader Joe's is dropping health benefits for part-time workers. The upshot of this is that greater health care costs will be borne by taxpayers via the ObamaCare insurance exchanges. In fact, quite ironically, companies that are shedding health care costs, early retiree coverage, and spousal benefits will surely be saving money. The net result is that ObamaCare's price tag will climb even higher with the burden falling onto the middle class.

SeaWorld Entertainment is capping hours for part-timers to 23 from 32 hours.

Wal-Mart is only hiring temporary employees, a policy change that is not generally done during the upcoming holiday season.

Land's End has cut employee hours to no more than 29 hours a week.

Regal Entertainment, via an internal memo, blamed ObamaCare requirements for their capping hours below the 30-hour threshold.

New England Motor Freight implemented an hourly cap for abut 400 part-time employees.

Emory Health Care Company in Georgia has confirmed that "more than 100 Emory health care employees are going to lose their jobs in part because of the Affordable Health Care Act."

At least 34 universities and colleges have cut the hours of part-time and adjunct faculty.

In 2012, Michelle Malkin wrote about the layoff disclosures of Consol Energy, Murray Energy, and Dana Holding Corporation because of the cost of ObamaCare.

As of September 9, 2013, Investor's Business Daily had compiled a list of 258 companies "that have shed work hours, jobs or taken other steps to avoid [the] costs" of [ObamaCare]. This following list dated September 18, 2013 shows "strong proof that ObamaCare's employer mandate is behind [the] cuts to work hours or staffing levels." In only nine days, the list has now increased to include 301 employers. The cuts are staggering when one contemplates the hardships families will incur. These cuts are occurring all across the nation.

But, of course, Congress is exempt from ObamaCare! Speak about a double standard and an unjust law. Heck, even the IRS head, who will be responsible for enforcing ObamaCare, stated that he "would prefer to stay with the current policy that [he is] pleased with rather than go through a change he didn't need to go through." How long will we continue to genuflect to these people?

As of a year ago, more than 2,200 hospitals were aware that they would face penalties under the ObamaCare provisions which reduces reimbursements to hospitals with high 30-day readmissions. This means that the sickest among us will be hurt the most. Additionally, the very population that Obama claims to want to assist -- the poorest who have limited access to primary and follow-up care, will also suffer. Get used to euphemisms run amok in the ObamaCare law when these readmission measures are called "risk-adjusted measures." In fact, "among patients with heart failure, hospitals that have higher readmission rates actually have lower mortality rates." But now with ObamaCare governmental interference based on punishing hospitals, how can one still have difficulty understanding the death panel mentality of ObamaCare? Paul Krugman can backpedal all he wants but when he stated that

...we're also going to have to make decisions about health care, doc pay for health care that has no demonstrated medical benefits. So the snarky version... which I shouldn't even say because it will get me in trouble is death panels and sales taxes is how we do this...

he finally admitted what is becoming clearer by the day.

John Merline notes that "young people making as little as $20,394 won't be eligible for any ObamaCare subsidies" thus negatively affecting their ability to assist in the success of ObamaCare health exchanges -- yet another financial disaster in the making.

And what's with subsidies, anyhow? Advocates of ObamaCare maintain that even if premiums are high, many people will get subsidies through an exchange. But a middle-class family earning just one more dollar than permitted by ObamaCare could face paying thousands of dollars more for health insurance.

Doctor shortages will now become more evident. In California alone, there aren't enough doctors to "treat a crush of newly insured patients." Moreover, it is predicted that "fewer than 40 percent of physicians will own a practice at the end of 2013, with nearly 90% citing business expenses a top concern" according to a survey cited here.

When you finally do get to see a doctor, be prepared for interrogations about sexual history. If you refuse, "doctors and hospitals that don't comply with the federal government's electronic health records requirements forgo incentive payments now and [will] face financial penalties from Medicare and Medicaid starting in 2015." Given that the ObamaCare data hub does not have in place foolproof security measures to protect private information, do I hear anyone shouting coercion and invasion of privacy?

Consequently, doctors will soon be "required to betray their patients to an IRS that promises confidentiality, even while it admits to targeting those with whom it differs politically." What impact will this have on people who seek psychological medical treatment? Who will be accountable to whom?

Thus, "[c]hanges in health care delivery threaten the values of professionalism and are tempting physicians to reject their commitment to the 'primacy of patient welfare.'" HIPAA was bad enough; now ObamaCare reaches new heights of deceptive temptation. One needs to ask is "health information technology (HIT) for the government, or for the patient?" And if not the latter, have we not entered a totalitarian state?

In fact, the baldest lies of all have now seen the light of day as Americans will not be able to keep their health care plan nor will they be able to keep their own doctor of choice. Thus, depending on the type of policy one is forced to purchase, networks may not include the health care provider of choice. Then with insurance companies opting out of state-run health insurance exchanges, individuals are left with fewer options. Also, "Democratic staffers have admitted that under the law as written 'insurers still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem.'"

And while insurance companies were once spared by Obama's prevarications, now major health insurance companies such as Blue Cross, Aetna, United, and Humana have decided "not to participate in various states in the ObamaCare health insurance exchanges." Thus, Americans will not have the freedom to purchase health insurance policies that would fit their respective needs. This will eventually result in the single-payer health care system that Obama has craved from the beginning.

Top hospitals are reducing staff. Cleveland Clinic, the world-renowned medical center and the region's largest employer, issued the following statement concerning its reduction of employees:

To prepare for healthcare reform, Cleveland Clinic is transforming the way care is delivered to patients. Over the past several years, we have had an ongoing focus on driving efficiencies, lowering costs, reducing duplication in services and enhancing quality to make healthcare affordable to patients.

Packaged thus smoothly, it will result in less care, plain and simple. Disingenuous Nancy Pelosi "seems to have missed the irony of her statement equating the spirit of our founders with the government mandate which requires all Americans to purchase their own insurance or get it through the government or face penalties." How much can the American people be taxed as a result of ObamaCare? Already the cost is "most apparent in lost wages." Further the ObamaCare costs "reduces middle and low income families wages just as surely as an income tax hike would."

Remember when Pelosi waxed eloquently about "an economy where people could be an artist or a photographer or a writer without worrying about keeping their day job in order to have health insurance." Surprise, surprise, the fine print in ObamaCare has mandated that "catastrophic healthcare coverage previously available to the College Art Association is no longer an option for associations whose members reside in different states." Put bluntly, entertainers and other creative Americans will lose health insurance programs that used to work just fine!

Obama, once hailed as the messiah and overwhelmingly supported by Black Americans, has yet to face up to the fact that "ObamaCare Will Hurt Blacks and Hispanics." In fact, ObamaCare is "projected to leave more people uninsured than it actually helps gain coverage." If 31 million Americans are still left uninsured, what was the point of this major overhaul which is destroying jobs, invading people's privacies, lessening health care, instituting onerous regulations, burdening people financially, making a mockery of constitutional law, punishing health providers, and threatening the liberty of all Americans?

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/the_wrecking_ball_known_as_obamacare.html#ixzz2frDycwX7

[Ted Oplinger]

But most people won't like the change they get. Already, those who know what is coming down the pike are petitioning for exemptions - including Congress and its staff.

I say remove the exemptions. Make them illegal. If it was so good to pass into law, then why are they running and squealing like stuck pigs to get out from under it? Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court all need to lead by example on this, and trade their gold-plated health-care plans they now have, and live with what they are foisting on America. If it's that good for America, it's that good for them as well.

Why should the inside the Beltway crowd (the truly 1% of America) be treated different than those sending them?

Food for thought...

[phkrause]

But Ted, politicians have always been exempt from any HC, be it Obamacare, Bushcare, etc., they have there own Federal Healthcare, all Federal workers have there own insurance coverage. From what I've always been told, most if not all politicians are under this.

Here's an interesting article:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/06/25/120625fa_fact_klein

[bonnie]

But Ted, politicians have always been exempt from any HC, be it Obamacare, Bushcare, etc., they have there own Federal Healthcare, all Federal workers have there own insurance coverage. From what I've always been told, most if not all politicians are under this.

Here's an interesting article:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/06/25/120625fa_fact_klein

That really isn't the issue. This is a law that was rammed down everyone's throat telling everyone how great it was and then exempted themselves from following same

[Ted Oplinger]

Yes, PK, I've known about their healthcare package for quite some time.

I figure that if Obamacare is SOOOOOOO good enough to bump me out of and away from the package I desire to participate in, then it should be just as well good for them to give up THEIR package, and be lumped in with the rest of us.

The truth is, Congress regularly exempts itself from obeying ANY of the laws they pass. They truly think themselves above the laws we are to obey without question. That policy is not a matter of party affiliation, either - if one or the other were the "good guys", that party would strip away such privilege immediately upon attaining majority control...but NEITHER has made such a move...

Sad...

[Tom Wetmore]

Let's focus on what this is really about, rather than pulling our party hats down over our ears and eyes before we go charging into the fray.

The broad intent is to make sure everyone has healthcare coverage. As it stands, employers that have coverage for their employees do not need to change what they are doing. The Federal Government as an employer already has a clearly compliant healthcare plan covering its employees. It does not need to do anything to change that. Really, what would the need be for the government to do anything differently from what it has been doing for decades regarding healthcare?

The way the extremists are going on the defund ObamaCare bandwagon, they should be saying defund Medicare, Medicaid, and the government employees healthcare. Why don't we just get rid of all the rules. Let the free market prevail and let insurance companies and employers do whatever they please. Let people figure out for themselves how they are going to pay for their next hospital stay out of their own pocket. Who really cares.

[phkrause]

And not only that, here in Mass it basically doesn't change anything! Because here we already had what Romney and the republicans wanted in HC. Obamacare is basically a continue on what Romney had here, just tweeked & improved since the new governor has taken over.

[OzarkWoman]

The broad intent is to make sure everyone has healthcare coverage.

It is NOT!!!! It is and always was all about CONTROL. Obama and the rest of the idiot politicians don't care one whit if people have healthcare or not.

I think it is you and a couple others here that needs to look at the real facts and stop spouting the party lines and you do.

[bonnie]

It is NOT!!!! It is and always was all about CONTROL. Obama and the rest of the idiot politicians don't care one whit if people have healthcare or not.

I think it is you and a couple others here that needs to look at the real facts and stop spouting the party lines and you do.

Obama as president is to execute the laws. Not make them and change them.

If this was so great no requests for waivers or granting them would have been necessary. A president is not to wave his magic wand and determine who must abide by a universal law and who doesn't have to.

The unions and small businesses don't seem to agree with Tom.

Businesses would not be shortening work hours to avoid it,especially since most of them already offered insurance

[Tom Wetmore]

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

The broad intent is to make sure everyone has healthcare coverage.

It is NOT!!!! It is and always was all about CONTROL. Obama and thOk,e rest of the idiot politicians don't care one whit if people have healthcare or not.

I think it is you and a couple others here that needs to looat the real facts and stop spouting the party lines and you do.

Ok, I'm quelling to look at your evidence regarding"control"... Show me what you got.....