Restraining Order requested against Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in New Case Challenging the HHS Mandate

On Monday, December 23, 2013, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in its newest case challenging the HHS Mandate.  The case has been assigned to Federal District Judge Stephen J. Murphy, III.

TMLC attorney, Erin Mersino, filed the new case on December 20, 2013 on behalf of the Ave Maria Foundation, Ave Maria Communications, Domino’s Farms Petting Farm. Rhodora J. Donahue Academy Inc., and the Thomas More Law Center, all founded by Catholic philanthropist Tom Monaghan.  The Plaintiffs at first sought to be included in an HHS challenge that was already pending before Judge Lawrence Zatkoff. That request was denied on December 20, 2013, and hours later on that same day, Mersino filed TMLC’s newest case.  Due to the late date, Plaintiffs were forced to request injunctive relief on an emergency basis because the HHS Mandate will be enforced against them beginning January 1, 2014.

Click here to read TMLC’s Motion for TRO

The purpose of the lawsuit is to seek a court ruling that permanently blocks the implementation of the HHS Mandate requiring employers and individual to obtain insurance coverage for abortions and contraception on the grounds that it  imposes clear violations of conscience on Americans who morally object to abortion and contraception.

The lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the HHS Mandate under the First Amendment rights to the Free Exercise of Religion and Free Speech and the Establishment Clause.   It also claims that the HHS Mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Administrative Procedure Act enacted by Congress.

Named as Defendants in the lawsuit are Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of the of the Department of Health and Human Services; Thomas Perez, Secretary of the Department of Labor; Jack Lew, Secretary of the Department of  the Treasury; and their respective departments.

ABOUT THE THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER

TMLC Logo(1)The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life.  It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America.  The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities.  It does not charge for its services.  The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.  You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.

Americans get scrooged as Obamacare deadline shifts again

Ask most Americans what today is and they’ll reply the eve of Christmas Eve, and many are out completing their last minute shopping.

Today was supposed to be the deadline to sign up for Obamacare in order to make the January 1 cutoff. But you can chalk up today to yet another failure – as administration officials have quietly extended the deadline 24 hours to Christmas Eve, according to the Washington Post.

As reported by Fox News this morning:

A series of administration fixes and delays is turning the milestone into a day that for many Americans will underscore the uncertainty about the future of the law. The original plan was simple — that Americans who enrolled in Obamacare, online or otherwise, by Dec. 23 and paid in full would have insurance when coverage kicks in New Year’s Day. But the disastrous Oct. 1 start for the federal website and some state-run sites — marked by crashes and the dissemination of incorrect information — sent President Obama and other top administration officials scrambling to change the law in hopes of bolstering enrollment numbers.

Obamacare is fraught with fundamental problems — not just the website — but the overall premise, and even yesterday Democrat Senator Joe Manchin, whom I thoroughly respect, recommended this whole thing be delayed, particularly the individual mandate tax.

Many economic forecasters and market analysts agree we have yet to see the full impact of Americans losing their coverage. Next year could be even more horrific because of the employer mandate which was “unconstitutionally” delayed by President Obama.

Just last week, as we reported, Obama issued another change decree stating that those who had lost their insurance coverage — because of his own mandate — could retain their previously declared “substandard, junk plans” and not be subject to the individual mandate tax.

Obamacare is NOT a law. Let me state this again, Obamacare IS NOT A LAW. It is the whimsical design of deviant minds that will destabilize one-sixth of our economy for their own political and ideological gain.

Just yesterday, President Obama again evidenced his delusion as he restated his case that Obamacare is on the right track and urged those who had yet to enroll to do so by Monday. “The law is working,” he said in a statement. “If you don’t have health insurance, go to [the site] right now and sign up. If you do it before December 23rd, you can be covered on the first day of the New Year… I’m asking you to spread the word about getting covered.”

If the “law is working,” then why grant yet another exemption before he whisked off on vacation to Hawaii? Obama delivered yet another lie when he stated, “I completely get how upsetting this can be for a lot of Americans.”

The upsetting part is that these Americans were fine with their plans until his imperial excellency decided he knew what was best for them — and then proceeded to hose it all up.

Those Americans who lost their plans will not be able to restore comparable pricing, due to the administration’s upheaval of the industry and the ever expanding pool of high risk, elderly, and indigent onto the insurance rolls After all, someone has to subsume the costs and subsidize the system.

According to Fox, while enrollment is ticking upwards,

Several underlying problems persist, including the accuracy of the numbers and how many of those enrolled have in fact paid for their policies. Such problems could create far more serious consequences in the coming weeks should people who think they have insurance under ObamaCare go to a pharmacy or doctor’s office and find out otherwise.

But of course when that happens, the insidious blame game will kick in and the insurance companies will take the hit from President Obama. Robert Moffit, director of The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Health Policy Studies, spoke with FoxNews.com on Friday and explained it this way,

“The complexity of the law, including who is exempt from what, will continue to confuse Americans. This whole thing has turned into a rat’s nest of rules and regulations. Who would have thought Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius would grant so many hardships? … This administration is under the mindset of how America is supposed to work, which has nothing to do with how it really works.”

As esteemed author and conservative philosopher Thomas Sowell put it, “We have traded in that which works, for that which sounds good.”

Merry Christmas America from President Barack Hussein Obama. You get a lump of coal, and he is the one who’s been naughty.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on AllenBWest.com.

Legatus, Largest Catholic Business Organization Obtains Preliminary Injunction in HHS Mandate

ANN ARBOR, MI – Legatus, the Nation’s largest organization of top Catholic business CEOs and professional leaders, obtained a Preliminary Injunction against the Federal Government in its case challenging the HHS Mandate.  Federal District Judge Robert H. Cleland of the Eastern District of Michigan entered the Order granting the Thomas More Law Center’s motion for a preliminary injunction on Friday afternoon, December 20, 2013.

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed the lawsuit on behalf of Legatus on May 7, 2012.  “Legatus” is the Latin word for “ambassador”, and its members are called upon to become “ambassadors for Christ” in living and sharing their Catholic Faith in their business, professional and personal lives.  It was founded in 1987 by Catholic philanthropist Tom Monaghan, to bring together the three key areas of a Catholic business leader’s life – Faith, Family and Business.  Legatus currently has over 4,000 members in 31 states.

Erin Mersino, the TMLC’s lead attorney handling the Legatus case, has been spearheading the Law Center’s challenges to the HHS Mandate in eleven cases thus far.

When the lawsuit was originally filed Judge Cleland refused to enter an Injunction because Legatus was a non-profit organization and protected by the safe harbor provisions. Also, the Government represented that it was in the process of adopting rules that would accommodate organizations like Legatus.  The judge stated, however, that should the Government act in a way that was inimical to the rights of Legatus, it could again approach the Court.

The safe harbor provision protecting Legatus from the provisions of the HHS Mandate expires on January 1, 2014.  TMLC re-filed its motion for a Preliminary Injunction after the Government adopted its accommodation rules on the grounds those rules still required Legatus to facilitate insurance coverage for processes it feels are contrary to their sincerely held religious beliefs.

In granting TMLC’s motion for a Preliminary Injunction, the Court found that even with the new rules adopted by the Government concerning religious accommodations, Legatus will likely show at trial that the HHS Mandate “substantially burdens the observance of the tenets of Catholicism.”  Further, the Court found that there were many other ways to achieve the Government’s interest to increase free contraception without restricting the religious liberty of Legatus.  Accordingly, the Court found that the government has not made a convincing argument showing the HHS Mandate is advancing a compelling government interest by the least restrictive means.

The Court noted that it had hoped that the government would not “act . . . in a way inimical to the rights Legatus seeks to protect.”  The court commented that it had “been unduly hopeful.”

Click here to read Judge Cleland’s entire opinion

ABOUT LEGATUS

In the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, His Church and His Vicar on earth, Legatus is an international organization of practicing Catholic laymen and laywomen, comprised of CEOs, Presidents, Managing Partners and Business Owners, with their spouses, from the business community and professional enterprises. Legatus Mission: To study, live and spread the Catholic faith in our business, professional and personal lives.

ABOUT THE THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER

Renowned as a national nonprofit public interest law firm, based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Thomas More Law Center’s mission is to restore and defend America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, and to preserve a strong national defense, and a free and sovereign United States of America.  In courtrooms throughout our Nation, Law Center lawyers fight for the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, the sanctity of human life, and a strong national defense. The Law Center does not charge for its legal services, and relies on tax-deductible donations from concerned patriotic Americans and charitable foundations.

Government Largess is the Opiate of the People

I attended a round-table presentation given by a local doctor on expanding Medicare to cover ever more Americans. A member of the group during the discussion asked everyone around that table about their personal health care coverage. Everyone said the federal government was at least in part subsidizing their coverage.

I want to use the example of Social Security to explain how we have all become addicted to government largess. With our addiction government control over us has increased to the point that today many are dependent on federal largess to maintain their health, happiness and well being.

Karl Marx said, “Religion is the opiate of the people.” I submit to you that, “Government largess is the opiate of the people.”

Government is defined as a “system of ruling or controlling”. Largesse is defined as, “the liberal giving (as of money) to or as if to an inferior.” Therefore, government largess is ruling or controlling by the liberal giving to inferiors (the governed).

Let me provide a brief historical perspective on how we got here.

We the people began to learn about government largesse 104 years ago with the founding of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society in New York City on September 12, 1905 in Peck’s Restaurant. An organizational meeting was held and Jack London was elected President with Upton Sinclair as First Vice President. The ISS was established to, “throw light [in America] on the world-wide movement of industrial democracy known as socialism.” Their motto was “production for use, not for profit.”

Production for use, not for profit is the prime goal of government largess.

So how could socialists begin distributing government largesse? First they had to gain unfettered control of production.

On February 3, 1913 Congress passed and the states ratified the Sixteenth Amendment to our Constitution. Congress grabbed control of production via the federal income tax. We taxed our productivity by tapping every American’s wages. With the millions, then billions, and now trillions of dollars that Congress collected, they could entice or even force the strongest American to take the government largesse drug.

Then on April 8, 1913 Congress passed and the states ratified the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution which transferred U.S. Senator Selection from each state’s legislature to popular election by the people of each state.

These two events made it much easier to collect and distribute government largesse as now Senators were no longer loyal to their state legislatures or primarily concerned with state sovereignty. Now U.S. Senators, along with U.S. Representatives, saw the value of spreading the government largesse drug amongst the people in return for votes.

During the Great Depression Congress created the first opiate for the masses and named it Social Security. It was to be a social insurance program run by government, in other words guaranteed government largess for life.

The Social Security Act was signed into law in 1935 by President Franklin Roosevelt. He and Congress said this new drug would keep those unemployed, retirees and the poor financially secure. He called it the New Deal. All we needed to do was just pay in and all would be well.

In 1937 the United States Supreme Court in U.S. vs. Butler validated the Social Security Act and stated that, “Congress could, in its future discretion, spend that money [collected from the income tax] for whatever Congress then judged to be the general welfare of the country. The Court held that Congress has no constitutional power to earmark or segregate certain kinds of tax proceeds for certain purposes, whether the purposes be farm-price supports, foreign aid or social security payments.” All taxes went into the general fund.

Testifying before the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives in 1952, the chief actuary of the Social Security Administration said—“The present trust fund is not quite large enough to pay off the benefits of existing beneficiaries”—those already on the receiving end, in other words. In 1955 chief actuary believed that it would take $35 billion just to pay the people “now receiving benefits”.

In 1935 under the Social Security program the Congress included the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Act (AFDC).

During the late 1950s many states realized that this act, while created to help widows with children, was being used to subsidize women having children with men they were not married to. Louisiana alone took 23,000 women off the AFDC act rolls based upon their immoral behavior.

In 1960 Arthur Flemming, then head of the Department of Health and Human Services under President Dwight David Eisenhower and a key architect of Social Security, issued an administrative ruling that states could not deny eligibility for income assistance through the AFDC act on the grounds that a home was “unsuitable” because the woman’s children were illegitimate.

In 1968, the United States Supreme Court’s “Man-in-the-House” rule struck down the practice of states declaring a home unsuitable (i.e., an immoral environment) if there was a man in the house not married to the mother. Thus, out-of-wedlock births and cohabitation were legitimized. In very short order, the number of women on welfare tripled and child poverty climbed dramatically. The assault on the family was on and Congress and the Supreme Court were co-pushers of this new government largesse drug called AFDC.

In effect the federal government became the pimp, the homes of single mothers became the brothels and the fathers became the Johns. The children begotten by these women became the next generation of addicts. Just as a baby born to a mother doing crack is addicted to cocaine, so too are these children born with a lifetime addiction to the onerous and destructive drug – government largess.

Then Congress added a new ingredient to the powerful Social Security drug called Medicare on July 30, 1965.

Congress created Medicare as a single-payer health care system. Medicare was for those over 65 years old and was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson. President Johnson called it part of his Great Society program. Congress immediately got more addicts to begin taking this drug.

At the same time Congress added a second even more powerful ingredient to this drug called Medicaid. This new ingredient brought into being an entirely new distribution system – all of the states of the union. Even though this new program violated state sovereignty it was passed anyway, in no small part because Senators were no longer accountable to the State Legislatures but rather committed to pushing government largess.

The states were now helping pay for and distribute this powerful and expensive designer drug. The drug was offered to low-income parents, children, seniors, and people with disabilities. Congress now had more people on the Social Security drug than ever before. Congress had turned a corner – addiction to government largesse was now imbedded in our society.

But Congress was not finished for it kept looking for more clients until we now know that the estimated unfunded liabilities for these four drugs are:

Social Security – $10.7 trillion

Medicare Parts A and B – $68 trillion

Medicare Part D – $17.2 trillion (created in just 3 years)

Our addiction to government largess will cost our children and grandchildren an estimated $95.9 trillion dollars. Ladies and gentlemen, the gross domestic product of the entire world in 2007 was $61 trillion.

I repeat my premise that government largess is the true opiate of the people.

I close with the following quote from a May 26, 1955 Herald-Tribune News Service article:

“Seven Amish bishops appealed to Congress today to exempt members of their church from receiving any benefits of the Social Security program. They are willing to continue paying Social Security taxes, however . . . . The bishops made it clear that no elder of the church would think, today, of applying for Social Security or any other government benefits. They want the law changed, they said, to “remove temptation” from their children and grandchildren.”

Watch this video: Government Gone Wild Seminar: Cradle to Grave

FL Senator Rubio and Rep. Buchanan get Special Obamacare Subsidy

(CNSNews.com) – Under Obamacare — as it is being implemented under a regulation issued by the White House Office of Personnel Management (OPM) — a middle-aged member of Congress who earns an annual salary of $174,000 from the taxpayers, and who has a wife and children, will get a $10,000 subsidy from the taxpayers (over and above his $174,000 salary) to buy a health insurance plan that a regular citizen making almost $80,000 less than the congressman will not get.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA), popularly known as Obamacare, included language mandating that members of Congress and their staff buy their now-mandated health insurance plans through a government exchange.

The laws says: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are—(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or (II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).” (See Section 1312(d) of the law)

Americans in the private sector who buy health insurance through the Obamacare exchanges only get a federal subsidy (a tax credit) if their income/family situation is below 400% of poverty, the ceiling for which is $94,200 for a family of four.

If they surpass that 400% level, then no subsidy.  Theoretically, a family bringing in $174,000, like a member of Congress, would have to have 12 children dependents to even be eligible for a subsidy under the Obamacare rules. (See Federal Poverty Guidelines.pdf )

Read more.

Based on this ruling Florida Senator Marco Rubio and many of the Florida Congressional delegation members, led by Rep. Vern Buchanan and Alcee Hastings, will receive  this subsidy.

Large Gap Exists Between Lifetime Social Security and Medicare Benefits and Taxes

The American Enterprise Institute’s Jim Pethokoukis found this great chart (below) by the Urban Institute’s Eugene Steuerl. It shows the lifetime Social Security and Medicare taxes and benefits.

“Couples retiring today, with roughly the average earnings of workers in general, as well as average life expectancies, still receive about $1 million in lifetime benefits,” writes Steuerle. However, they will only pay $747,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes over that lifespan.

The gap between taxes and benefits has always been large. However, more people retiring and living longer–both great things–is causing the financial situation of both programs to get worse. As it stands now, Social Security won’t be able to pay full benefits starting in 2033, and Medicare Part A, which pays for hospital services, will go bankrupt in 13 years.

These programs must be reformed or the country will have to endure painful benefit cuts, crushing taxes, or both.

As U.S. Chamber Executive Vice President Bruce Josten said in June, “We need to make the responsible common-sense choices now, even if they are hard, to guarantee the promise of these programs to the next generation.”

Learn more at the U.S. Chamber’s “Ten Truths About America’s Entitlement Programs.”

The 6 Things You Need to Know About The Human Care Complex

This is the first in a series of columns on America’s human care system. With the Affordable Healthcare Act now the law of the land, it is time to understand six things: the who, what, where, when, why and how we got here.

In 1976, the great critic of 20th-century society, Ivan Illich, wrote: “Modern medicine is a negation of health. It isn’t organized to serve human health, but only itself, an institution. It makes more people sick than it heals.”

In 1961 President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned America about a growing government-industrial complex.

During his farewell speech Eisenhower warned, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” [Emphasis mine]

Since 1961 the military-industrial complex has been surpassed by the political power of the government/human care complex.

Eisenhower said, “The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.” [Emphasis mine]

The human care “scientific technological elite” is now in the hands of the National Institute of Health (NIH). The NIH human care system, in some cases, is not about improving health. The NIH human care system may ultimately result in increased cases of pain, suffering and death.

Since passage of the Affordable Healthcare Act, there has been a battle raging over the control of human care. The battle is between the producers and consumers of human care — or as Illich and others have described it: sickness or  illness care. There are a growing number of consumers being cared for by the Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid systems. Estimates are that ten thousand Americans daily are entering the federal human care system.

A growing number of doctors and think tanks are recognizing that the human care system is not designed to make people healthy; rather, it is designed to grow and be sustained by ever more illness care. This is accomplished via human care standards called “protocols.”  The illness care providers are ultimately responsible for human care medical guidelines becoming protocols.

The human care system has become a government/industrial complex controlling over 17% of America’s GDP. In comparison, the military is less than 4% of GDP.

Patients believe human care providers are acting in their best interests.

However, like any other producer of products or services, the human care system is focused on keeping competition down, increasing scarcity of services with the objective of keeping costs and thereby profits high. The human care system is by definition a cartel. A cartel is defined as, “A combination of independent business organizations formed to regulate production, pricing, and marketing of goods by the members.”

Add to the “human care cartel” government at every level and you have a powerful force, which few are willing to confront.

Dr. Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, looked at the human care system in her landmark study, “Is US health really the best in the world?”, published in the July 2000 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Dr. Starfield came to the following conclusions:

Every year in the US there are:

  • 12,000 deaths from unnecessary surgeries;
  • 7,000 deaths from medication errors in hospitals;
  • 20,000 deaths from other errors in hospitals;
  • 80,000 deaths from infections acquired in hospitals;
  • 106,000 deaths from FDA-approved correctly prescribed medicines.
  • The total of medically-caused deaths in the US every year is 225,000.

According to Dr. Starfield, “This makes the medical system the third leading cause of death in the US, behind heart disease and cancer.”

In 2010 Dr. G.R. Greenwell, MD, FACSM, began examining the US human care system. According to Dr. Greenwell, “Chronic noncontagious illnesses such as diabetes, arteriosclerosis  and hypertension have been continually increasing since the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (ODPHP) was established in 1976.”

“From 1976 to 1987 the number of diabetics in the United States increased by 25%. In 1995 the methodology for decreasing the incidence and severity of diabetes by more than 58% was demonstrated. Since that time the ODPHP has failed to require demonstrations and research projects to utilize that methodology in order to receive grants or funding. Consequently the percentage of people living in the USA suffering with diabetes has increased over 107% since 1995. The number of people in the United States with diabetes has increased 138% since 1995,” notes Dr. Greenwell.

Dr. Greenwell reports, “In 2006, approximately 65,700 non-traumatic lower-limb amputations were performed on people with diabetes. During the first 10 years of the War on Terror the total number of lower limb amputations of active-duty armed forces personnel was only 1,621.”

Dr. Greenwell points out, “The number of lower limb amputations due to diabetes and vascular disease during 2006 was 109,500. It’s been proven that if an optimum aerobic exercise program had been included in the treatment of these patients, approximately 80% of these amputations would have been precluded from becoming necessary (see page 8 of the 2011 National Diabetes Fact Sheet).”

The human care cartel is more dangerous than any other cartel because taken to its ultimate end it can contribute to the pain, suffering and deaths of those to whom it purports to serve.

Part II will look at the who and what is behind America’s human care system.

RELATED LINK: The National Council for Aging Care’s information regarding Health and Well Being

Small Business Health Plan Website Delayed Until November 2014

UPDATE: The process really won’t get better anytime soon. Politico reports that the federally-run SHOP Marketplace website will be delayed until November 2014:

“We’ve concluded that we can best serve small employers by continuing this offline process while we concentrate on both creating a smoothly functioning online experience in the SHOP Marketplace, and adding key new features, including an employee choice option and premium aggregation services, by November 2014,” according to an HHS notice issued a day before the long Thanksgiving weekend. Those features give workers more choice of health plans, rather than having the business owner choose it.

The administration originally delayed online enrollment in the federal-run small business exchanges just days before the failed Oct. 1 launch of HealthCare.gov. At the time, HHS said online enrollment would be available “sometime in November.” Weeks ago, administration officials said online enrollment would be ready by the end of this November.

In a blog post, the Department of Health and Human Services explains how small businesses can buy health plans for their employees without a functioning website:

For small businesses in states with a SHOP Marketplace that’s run by the federal government, we are making changes to make sure that you can take advantage of SHOP coverage and the tax credit as soon as  possible. Specifically, for 2014, small employers will enroll their employees in coverage through an agent, broker, or insurer that offers a certified SHOP plan and has agreed to conduct enrollment according to HHS standards.

This process, called “direct enrollment,” is similar to how most small employers get insurance today. You don’t need to apply for SHOP eligibility before enrolling, or to use HealthCare.gov, unless you’d like to see information on your plan options, including which insurance companies offer SHOP Qualified Health Plans in your area.

The post also notes that the enrollment period to begin coverage on January 1, 2014 has been extended to December 23.

Following up on yesterday’s post on the federal SHOP Marketplace exchange website being little help to small businesses who want to buy health plans, I mentioned that companies can apply by mail or fax. Bloomberg Businessweek’s John Tozzi described the cumbersome process:

Companies with up to 50 employees can browse plans on healthcare.gov, starting on this page. (The government also offers this rather cumbersome, embedded spreadsheet of approximately 45,000 health plans offered across the country—have at it, Excel jockies.) The quotes here are sample premiums for individuals (ages 27 or 50) or for different arrangements of family coverage. There’s no place—that I could find, anyway—to get a single quote that includes some employees on family plans and some on individual coverage.

Actually applying for small business coverage on healthcare.gov right now requires both online and offline steps. Employers must set up an online account, then download a PDF application. After filling out the application (possibly with the help of a broker), business owners must print it out and mail it to London, Ky., where the paperwork is being processed manually. After that, the Health and Human Services Department is supposed to contact employers and confirm that they’re eligible. Then the company can select plans and offer employees coverage. After workers decide whether or not to enroll, companies can finally submit their application online and pay for the first month of their policies. Got it?

Tozzi doesn’t expect this to get better anytime soon:

“We are exploring options to ensure that small businesses have access to coverage in the SHOP marketplace. We are continuing to do an assessment of that work, and we’ll have a process in place by the end of this month,” HHS spokeswoman Julie Bataille said on a conference call with reporters Monday, according to a transcript provided by the agency. She wouldn’t comment on when online enrollment would be working, but she said details on an “enhanced process” would be coming “soon.”

Warning: Your doctor can’t protect your privacy or your medical records

There is a growing concern by Americans that their personal and private information is being collected and shared without their knowledge and consent.

For example, in Florida teachers, parents, administrators and students are voicing concern over the data mining component of Common Core, which will give access to every public school students’ private information to those outside the classroom or school house. WDW – FL reported recently on how the iBloom website was compromised in New York, allowing hackers to post public school students’ medical information and grades on the internet.

Recent scandals about government spying on individuals pales in comparison to the revelation that HealthCare.gov was recently hacked. Cyber security experts are warning about efforts by foreign governments, such as Russia and China, to compromise medical databases. But this is just the tip of the iceberg according to Florida doctors.

As health records are digitized they become more sharable and more vulnerable to privacy violations.

The more individual information is placed on large centralized databases the more that information may be accessed, without the knowledge and consent of  the individual. Doctors in Florida are raising privacy concerns as they fully implement the “electronic health record” (EHR) mandate for their patient’s records. Doctors worry about their loss of control over their patients’ records and their ability to limit those who access them. They worry about the growing the risks and liability of a privacy violation.

The US Department of Health and Human Services website states, “With the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), an environment has been created that requires the adoption of Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) by 2014 for seventy percent of the primary care provider population.” See an overview of the Recovery Act.

HHS warns, “ARRA authorizes the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to provide a reimbursement incentive for physician and hospital providers who are successful in becoming ‘meaningful users’ of an electronic health record (EHR). These incentive payments begin in 2011 and gradually phase down. Starting in 2015, providers are expected to have adopted and be actively utilizing an EHR in compliance with the ‘meaningful use’ definition or they will be subject to financial penalties under Medicare.”

Florida’s doctors are scrambling to implement the AARA mandate, at the risk of violating the HIPPA mandate.

Doctors can no longer guarantee that a patients medical records are safe and secure from prying eyes. Yet, Florida’s doctors according to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) must, “[R]equire that healthcare providers (Covered Entities) and Business Associates apply appropriate administrative, technical, and physical safeguards to ensure the privacy of Protected Health Information (PHI). Additionally, the HITECH Act requires that they implement policies, procedures and technical controls to ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic PHI data. The Act also tightened breach notification requirements, increased financial liability amounts and established that covered entities are liable for their business associates.” The doctor does not have total control of the patient record, but the doctor is liable for a breach, according to the law.

This is a medical Catch-22. Doctors no longer control their patients privacy but are required by law to protect their patient’s records.

This reminds us of the Capital One credit card commercial that asks: What’s in your wallet? Florida doctors are now asking: Who’s in my medical records?

Florida set to accept Medicaid expansion money? But at what price?

Section 2001 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act expands eligibility for Medicaid. Florida is one of the twenty-five states opting not to expand Medicaid as President Obama wanted and the Affordable Care Act originally envisaged. The supreme court upheld the personal mandate, the most controversial aspect of the healthcare reform bill, but ruled that states could not be required to expand Medicaid. However, that may all change.

Sarah Boseley writing for The Guardian reports, “Secret conversations are taking place in Florida between healthcare stakeholders and the legislature that will most likely lead to the Republican-controlled state accepting Medicaid expansion money, according to senior figures in the health industry.”

Boseley quotes Patrick Geraghty, President and CEO of Florida Blue, who has been involved in discussions in the state and nationally, “We believe strongly that we ought to be taking that funding. The money should be used to support change and innovation in healthcare systems. For our state it’s $51 [billion] over 10 years. That’s a lot of investment in transformation.”

“States can access the federal funds either if they expand the public Medicaid programme or, as permitted under the legislation, if they come up with an alternative way to fund expanded coverage. To qualify for Medicaid expansion money, however, an alternative system must be granted a waiver by federal authorities. Geraghty said she believed Florida would ‘do the right thing’ and undertake an expansion,” notes Boseley.

Donna Shalala, secretary for health and human services under Bill Clinton and now president of the University of Miami, said, “Governor Rick Scott has already said he would take the Medicaid expansion money for three years. I think the senate has some people that are prepared to play and are prepared to shape some kind of a framework for taking the Medicaid money.”

Whenever a state takes federal funding there are always strings attached and questions about program sustainability. Tarren Bragdon from the Heritage Foundation notes, “The old Rick Scott knew why Medicaid expansion is a dangerous idea: an already bankrupt federal government couldn’t possibly keep its funding promise to cover states’ expansion costs, Medicaid is already failing patients and taxpayers and expanding it would stretch the safety net even more, and the states that previously expanded Medicaid are now facing nightmarish consequences.”

According to Florida Legal Services, Inc., “Currently, the federal government covers approximately 58% of all Medicaid costs in Florida. This percentage is referred to as the federal matching rate or “FMAP.” In contrast to 58% FMAP for the current Medicaid population, the PPACA requires the federal government to cover 100% of costs associated with the newly eligible Medicaid Expansion population from 2014 to 2016. The FMAP for the expansion population gradually tapers down to 90% in 2020 and remains at 90% FMAP thereafter.5 These federal matching rates are mandated by federal law and cannot be altered without an Act of Congress. Further, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have clarified that states can withdraw from covering the expansion population at any time.”

Bragdon states, “Obamacare Medicaid expansion in Florida is projected to cost taxpayers anywhere from $3.7 billion to $19.5 billion annually, FHCP [Florida Health Care Plans] will cost Florida just $237 million a year to provide coverage for an estimated 115,000 uninsured Floridians.” Do the math.

Any expansion of Medicaid will, in the long term, increase the costs to all Florida taxpayers. Proponents of expanding Medicaid in Florida cite “caring for the needy” and a “take the money” to make up for state budget shortfalls. If Medicaid is expanded in Florida it would add one million new enrollees to those already on Medicaid. That would be up to one out of 17 Floridians would become dependent on federal and state Medicaid funds.

So why the big push now? Well, after all 2014 is an election year in Florida and that is potentially one million votes for the party in power, or is it?

Bragdon warns, “When Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) gave Medicaid expansion a metaphorical bear hug last February, he flip-flopped on a years-long record of opposition to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Many argue that the grassroots army he built during his national anti-Obamacare tour in 2009 provided him the jolt of support he needed to win a close race for governor in 2010. But with his expansion flip-flop, it’s unlikely that army will fight passionately for him again.

RELATED COLUMNS:

Health Care Report from the States: Florida Medicaid Expansion

Ignore the rumors: No deals on Medicaid

Reforming Florida’s Medicaid Drug Program

Florida: Rubio warns taxpayers on the hook to bail out insurance companies for Obamacare enrollees

Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL)

As of November 2nd, 2013, Florida has the highest number of enrollees in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act with 3,571 having selected a plan. Florida is one of thirty-six states with a fully or partially run federal insurance exchange. In Florida 123,870 submitted complete applications with 93,456 eligible to enroll in a plan. Texas is second with 108,410 applicants, 80,960 eligible and 2,991 who selected a plan.

But there is a problem with who will pay for the coverage.

In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) writes, “Buried deep in the Department of Health and Human Services’ press release that accompanied the president’s Nov. 14 speech was this sentence: ‘Though this transitional policy was not anticipated by health insurance issuers when setting rates for 2014, the risk corridor program should help ameliorate unanticipated changes in premium revenue. We intend to explore ways to modify the risk corridor program final rules to provide additional assistance.’”

“Risk corridors are generally used to mitigate an insurer’s pricing risk. Under ObamaCare, risk corridors were established for the law’s first three years as a safety-net for insurers who experience financial losses. While risk corridors can protect taxpayers when they are budget-neutral, ObamaCare’s risk corridors are designed in such an open-ended manner that the president’s action now exposes taxpayers to a bailout of the health-insurance industry if and when the law fails,” notes Rubio.

Rubio raises a red flag noting, “Subsequent regulatory rulings have made [it] clear that the administration views this risk-corridor authority as a blank check, requiring no further consultation or approval by Congress. A final rule handed down in March by HHS and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services states: ‘Regardless of the balance of payments and receipts, HHS will remit payments as required under section 1342 of the Affordable Care Act.’”

On November 14th, the American Academy of Actuaries issued a press release saying that President Obama’s plan to reverse health-insurance cancellations “could lead to negative consequences for consumers, health insurers, and the federal government.” More specifically, the academy said, “Costs to the federal government could increase as higher-than-expected average medical claims are more likely to trigger risk corridor payments.”

Rubio concludes with, “It is a damning indictment of ObamaCare’s viability when the president’s only response to people losing their health insurance plans entails putting them on the hook for bailing out insurance companies. The American people are already being directly hurt by ObamaCare’s early failures, and it is unconscionable that they be expected to bail out companies when more failures emerge.”

RELATED COLUMNS:

Jessica Sanford, one of Barack Obama’s obamacare ‘success stories,’ will have no insurance

Healthcare.gov site advertising SQL injection attacks

Americans Don’t Think Health Care is Government Responsibility

No. 2 House Dem: Obamacare Attempt to Change ‘Value System in Our Country’ (+video)

Senator Rubio supports the House plan to defund Obamacare

defundrallycruz

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) at Defund Obamacare rally.

The Washington Post reports, “House Republican leaders announced Wednesday morning that they would take a risky double-barreled attack on President Obama’s health-care law, making it the cornerstone fight over government funding due to expire Sept. 30 and the effort to lift the Treasury’s borrowing authority.

Paul Kane, Ed O’Keefe and Zachary A. Goldfarb from the WP state, “Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), flanked by his leadership team, told reporters that the stopgap government funding bill that they will advance Friday would yield to conservative demands of including a rider to block funding for the law commonly known as Obamacare.”

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) issued the following statement regarding the announcement:

“The American people have made clear they want Washington to keep the government open but also need protection from ObamaCare’s harmful effects. Today’s announcement would accomplish what the American people have been asking of Congress.

“A solution is within sight in order to avert another crisis of Washington’s creation. President Obama and his allies in Congress should abandon their threats of shutting down the government and instead work with Republicans to pass this proposal that would keep government open while preventing taxpayer dollars from being used to inflict ObamaCare’s damage on people’s jobs, incomes, current health plans and doctor relationships.”

As previously reported on WDW – FL, this plan has been pushed by conservative groups like Heritage Action. Jim DeMint, President of the Heritage Foundation, said at a defund Obamacare event it Tampa that Republicans took the House of Representatives in 2010 and retained the majority in 2012 on the promise of repealing Obamacare. Either Republicans keep their promise or go home and explain why they lied.

DeMint noted that repealing Obamacare is not enough. The House has had numerous votes to repeal the law, but the chances of statutorily repealing the law decreased once President Obama won a second term. Those who oppose Obamacare, he said, cannot wait another three and a half years to “begin dismantling Obamacare; they need to leverage current opportunities to defund using ‘must-pass’ spending bills.”

DeMint said time and again, it is now or never. Apparently the people’s House is listening.

Rubio noted, “The president’s basically looking for a political win and I guess his political people have told him that this is a political win: shut down the government and blame the Republicans. The problem is that’s not the Republican position.”

EDITORS NOTE: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) can be defunded by attaching a legislative rider to a “must pass” bill (e.g. debt limit, annual spending bill or continuing resolution to fund the government) that:

  1. Prohibits any funds from being spent on any activities to implement or enforce Obamacare;
  2. Rescinds any unspent balances that have already been appropriated for implementation; and
  3. Turns off the exchange subsidy and new Medicaid spending that are on auto-pilot.

FL Middle school quiz asks – “What Kind Of Party Animal Are You?”

Dr. Fran Adams, Superintendent of Indian River County School District

“I was contacted tonight by a group of parents wanting answers. This quiz (survey) below was given to Ms. [Megan] Kendrick’s 7th grade Pre-AP Civics class last week at Storm Grove Middle School in Indian River County,” writes Laura Zorc, SE FL State Coordinator for Florida Parents Against Common Core (FPACC).

The What Kind of Party Animal Are You? quiz states: “Take this quiz to get a sense of which party, the Republican or the Democrat, is the better fit for you. Remember, you do not have to pick a party – you may remain Independent. You may also change your party.”

Question #1: “I would support a government increase of my taxes if the money were used to pay for expanded health and social programs.”

Question #2: “I think the government should impose stricter limits on access to guns.”

Question #3: “I believe organized prayer should be kept out of schools. Having students pray is a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

Question #4: “I would support drilling for oil in a wildlife refuge to help reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil.”

Question #5: “I believe that looking out for U.S. interests abroad must come first, even if that means the U.S. takes action without the approval of the United Nations or our allies.”

Question #6: “I believe if you have nothing to hide, theres no reason to worry about government surveillance. It would not bother me if my government listened in on my personal phone calls as long as the surveillance was helping to catch terrorists.”

Question #7: “I believe the government should relax regulations on immigration and find a way for law-abiding illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. legally and pay taxes.”

NOTE: The answer choices for each question are – Agree (one point), Not Sure (two points), Disagree (three points).

According to Jennifer Idlette-Williams, Principal of Storm Grove Middle School, “The survey What Kind of Party Animal Are You? came from page 14 of the Junior Scholastic Magazine, which is a state approved resource for Florida’s mandatory Civics state curriculum. All three of the Civics teachers at Storm Grove use the survey, and other Indian River middle schools have used it. No grades were attached to the survey and no names were linked to the survey. There was no parental opt out for taking the survey as it is part of the state approved curricula.” Principal Idette-Williams noted, “Students could create their own political party animal. One student created a frog, which can live in the water or on land. This student would be comfortable with both parties.”

What kind of a party animal are you

Quiz used in Civics class. For a larger view click on the image.

According to Zorc, “The students were told that they could not take this Quiz/Survey home, they had to complete [it] at school. One student felt that they must consult with ‘his or her’ parent and did not feel comfortable filling it out. In other words the student had to ‘smuggle it out’ as described to me. (NOTE: Child is afraid of getting in trouble and we will can not disclose identity of child)”

Zorc states, “After you read this quiz/survey, as a parent you will be appalled by material being taught. Parents are outraged at the way the questions are presented.” See teacher’s weekly agenda to notice that this assignment is Common Core State Standards aligned.

“Parents want an explanation to why a ‘civics’ (a study of the theoretical practical aspects of citizenship, its rights and duties…) curriculum aligned to Common Core State Standards is being taught? The FL DOE had been emphatic that CCSS is only going to be taught in English Language Arts and Math only. Secondly, parents want to know ‘who’ approved this curriculum material being taught?” asks Zorc. According to the school principal the FLDOE approved the use of this material.

Parents, concerned citizens and members of FPACC plan to attend the September 24th Indian River County School Board meeting to ask that this material be removed from the public school district curriculum.

EDITORS NOTE: WDW – FL has calls into the school district and school board requesting information including who authorized the use of this quiz, what other schools have used it and how is the data from the quiz used. We are awaiting a reply and will post an update.

Florida considering adoption of national “sexuality” education standards

To download a copy of the National Sexuality Education Standards click on the image.

Governor Scott and interim Commissioner of Education Pam Stewart just finished hosting a summit on education in Clearwater, FL. Governor Scott called the summit but did not attend it. According to NorthEscambia.com, “The discussions largely focused on high-level ideas and few specific recommendations, such as whether the state should bail out of a consortium of states developing new tests for the nationwide “common core” standards now being implemented in Florida classrooms.”

One of the Common Core standards not discussed was the “National Sexuality Education Standards – Core Content and Skills, K-12“.

Even the birds and the bees will now have national standards under Common Core. “Sexuality” is code for “gender identity”.

Here are some quotes from the National Sexuality Education Standards:

On page 12: “By the end of 2nd grade, students should be able to: Use proper names for body parts, including male and female anatomy.”

On page 14: “By the end of 5th grade, students should be able to: Describe male and female reproductive systems including body parts and their functions. Identify medically-accurate information about female and male reproductive anatomy. Define sexual orientation as the romantic attraction of an individual to someone of the same gender or a different gender.”

Page 9 under “Guiding Values and Principles”:

“Instruction by qualified sexuality education teachers is essential for student achievement … Students need opportunities to engage in cooperative and active learning strategies, and sufficient time must be allocated for students to practice skills relating to sexuality education.”

To highlight this principle: Students need “multiple opportunities and a variety of assessment strategies” to determine their achievement of the sexuality education standards and performance.

Will public school children be graded on their sexual performance? It appears this requirement is necessary to measure the “practice of skills relating to sexuality education”.

According to Cheryl Etters, Press Secretary for the Florida Department of Education, “The Florida State Board of Education voluntarily adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in July 2010. The Florida Department of Education strongly supports the full implementation of CCSS in the 2014-15 school year and is focused on providing local districts the support needed for a successful transition to Common Core.”

South Dakotans Against Common Core reports:

And before you say it is not a part of Common Core, because it is “A Special Publication of the Journal of School Health,” please go to page 6 where it says, “The National Sexuality Education Standards were further informed by the work of the CDC’s Health Education Curriculum Analysis Tool (HECAT)3; existing state and international education standards that include sexual health content; the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Kindergarten – 12th Grade; and the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Mathematics, recently adopted by most states.”

And before you say, “We won’t allow it in our schools. We will go to the school board.” Local control is gone. On page 6, “Specifically, the National Sexuality Education Standards were developed to address the inconsistent implementation of sexuality education nationwide and the limited time allocated to teaching the topic.” The whole idea behind Common Core is to create universal standards.

SDACC looked at who was on the advisory committee that developed these sexuality education standards. They found members included:

Robert McGarry, Ed.D., Director of Training and Curriculum Development Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). To learn more about GLSEN click here.

Nora Gelperin, recipient of the national 2010 Mary Lee Tatum Award from the Association of Planned Parenthood Leaders in Education.

Deb Hauser from Advocates for Youth who speaks nationally and internationally about young people’s rights to “honest sexual health information, confidential sexual health services and equitable social and economic opportunities.”

Cynthia Lam, Teen Editorial Staff for Sex, Etc. According to Lam’s bio, “She has written many interesting articles, but her favorite was “It Won’t Fall Off,” a story that debunks myths about masturbation.”

The education summit has been characterized as providing political cover for Governor Scott to adopt Common Core State Standards for Florida. These standards will include the sexualization of our youngest and most vulnerable.

As Milton Friedman wrote, “One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.” What will be results of nationalizing sexuality?

RELATED:

At Scott’s Education Summit, A Common Core Counter-Revolt At Table 1

Support for Common Core Standards Continues to Crumble in RPOF

EDITORS NOTE: WDW – FL received the below email from Chrissy Blevio, Florida Stop Common Core Coalition:

While appreciative that Governor Scott convened this summit on critical education issues and hopeful that some meaningful discussion and airing of concerns about the Common Core standards system would ensue, The Florida Stop Common Core Coalition (FSCCC) is deeply disappointed in the results.

“The outcome on the issue of the Common Core standards themselves was pre-determined,” said Dr. Karen Effrem, president of Education Liberty Watch and co-founder of FSCCC.  “Continued implementation of the standards was assumed.  No meaningful discussion of the merits or lack thereof of the standards themselves was allowed to take place. Any attempt to discuss concerns about rigor, content of the federally funded and supervised model curriculum and text examples aligned with these standards, psychological manipulation and testing as described in federal documents, or any other concern was immediately shut down.  Lacking the ability or desire to meaningfully and respectfully discuss and work towards solutions to these critical concerns, prominent officials at this summit resorted to ad hominem attacks calling the citizens and taxpayers of this state with concerns ‘crazies’  and  ‘radicals.’  Sadly this whole exercise was a massive waste of time and taxpayer funds.”

A more detailed list of concerns will be forthcoming. Our recommendations for dealing with this issue are available here.

RELATED:

Obama: Sex Ed for Kindergartners ‘Is the Right Thing to Do’ | CNS News

CPS Mandates Sexual, Health Education For Kindergarten – CBS Chicago

Conservatives keep turning up the heat on Common Core in Florida

4th Grade Students Taught: “Government Is Like Your Family”, Provides For You

Message to “defund Obamacare” resonated with Florida grassroots

Jim DeMint speaks at the “Defund Obamacare” town hall tour in Tampa on August 21, 2013. Photo courtesy of Eve Edelheit, Tampa Bay Times staff.

Heritage Foundation President and former Senator Jim DeMint and Raphael Cruz, father of Senator Ted Cruz, came to Tampa, Florida to bring their message that now is the time to defund the Affordable Care Act. The Heritage Action for America sponsored event was over booked. Tampa was the third stop on a nine city tour. Over 850 signed up for the event, with only 550 seats available.

Raphael Cruz gave the invocation and was greeted with a standing ovation when he was introduced by Karen Jaroch, Tampa Regional Coordinator for Heritage Action, as the father of Senator Ted Cruz. Cruz ended the event with a stirring call to action.

Senator DeMint then took the stage to a standing ovation. DeMint looked over a packed house of diverse concerned citizens, who traveled from across the state of Florida. DeMint then said in his soft southern voice, “We had you wait in line to get into this event so you can get used to standing in line to get medical care under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. With the over 550 people jammed into this hall you now know what your doctor’s waiting room will look like very soon.” These comments were like throwing raw meat to the grassroots activists in the audience.

Senator DeMint then went into detail on how the Affordable Care Act can be defunded. DeMint explained defunding Obamacare means attaching a legislative rider to a “must pass” bill (e.g. debt limit, annual spending bill or continuing resolution to fund the government) that 1) prohibits any funds from being spent on any activities to implement or enforce Obamacare; 2) rescinds any unspent balances that have already been appropriated for implementation; and 3) turns off the exchange subsidy and new Medicaid spending that are on auto-pilot.

DeMint was then joined by Mike Needham, Chief Executive Officer for Heritage Action for America, to answer questions. The issue of what is the urgency to defund Obama care now was raised. According to DeMint and Needham on January 1, 2014, Obamacare’s new main entitlements – the Medicaid expansion and the exchange subsidies – are scheduled to take effect. Open enrollment for both programs begins on October 1, 2013, at the start of the new fiscal year. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the federal government will spend $48 billion in 2014 and nearly $1.8 trillion through 2023 on these new entitlement programs. Also on January 1, Americans will be forced by their government to buy a product, health insurance, for the first time in history. Individuals and families who don’t comply will be penalized by tax penalties administered through the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

One Floridian asked Senator DeMint isn’t is mean to not provide the funding for healthcare. Senator DeMint replied that it is mean for the President to promise Americans that they can keep their current insurance and doctors under Obamacare. It is mean for the President to say that health insurance premiums will go down $2,000 when in fact they will go up over $2,000 or more in some states. It is mean for the President to say everyone will receive better health care when we know from the experiences of Canada and England that socialized medicine leads to rationing and poor care, even to patients dying for lack of attention..

The question of some House Republicans supporting the repeal of Obamacare but not defunding it came up.

DeMint noted that some fear if they take a stand on Obamacare it will hurt them in the 2014 elections. He then pointed out that same tactic of “first do no harm” lost Republicans the US Senate and White House twice. DeMint noted that when he was in the Senate, and since he has become President of the Heritage Foundation, he experienced a Republican leadership that will “cut the legs out from under any who oppose them”.

DeMint said that Republicans took the House of Representatives in 2010 and retained the majority in 2012 on the promise of repealing Obamacare. Either Republicans keep their promise or go home and explain why they lied. DeMint noted that repealing Obamacare is not enough. The House has had numerous votes to repeal the law, but the chances of statutorily repealing the law decreased once President Obama won a second term. Those who oppose Obamacare, he said, cannot wait another three and a half years to ” begin dismantling Obamacare; they need to leverage current opportunities to defund using ‘must-pass’ spending bills.” DeMint said time and again, it is now or never.

The Tampa Bay Times PolitiFact blog took exception to four of the things Senator DeMint said during his presentation. However, DeMint’s message clearly resonated with the audience. The devil is always in the details.

ABOUT HERITAGE ACTION FOR AMERICA:

RELATED:

Congressman Mark Meadows : Letter Encouraging House Leadership to Defund Obamacare

Should We Delay or Defund Obamacare?