Well, What Do You Think About This Obama’s Birth Certificate?

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Wait, you did ask a short question, right? Well, here’s my not so short answer: I could expound on this as most conservatives would, but I will say that I think that we are on a train where the conductor, the brakeman, and the engineer (you could use the analogy of these as the three branches of our government) are all in agreement to run the train (our country) completely off the track (our Constitution).

These are the same people that claim the Constitution is a “living document” that can and should be changed at will (theirs), and they are determined to design and implement one to suit their agenda. They do not believe in truth as an absolute – or for that matter, period! Truth is only a perception…. Depends on what the definition of “is” is! So it’s no wonder that they believe a Hawaiian hospital certificate of live birth should suffice as “proof of birth”. Yeah, Hawaii, we all know he was born… the question is WHERE. Our Constitution has a restriction in that regard.


Through ignorance or design, those who agree with the agenda proposed by the Obama Campaign, and now Obama Administration, have succeeded in achieving part of the extreme liberals’ agenda by getting a man elected who refuses to be “transparent” not only about his birth or about his education – but anything about his personal history for that matter.

His offshore birthplace would obviously set a precedent that one does not need to be born in the US to “rule the US”, and is, in essence, the first step in re-writing the Constitution. Breaking down the foundational principles of the Constitution, like this very thing, is what is necessary to begin the total transformation of the United States of America (the only campaign promise Obama really intends to keep). I believe that the “shady way” that this topic has been dealt with is akin to acknowledgement of the fact that he was not born in the US. Further, I believe that a lie or at least a half-truth is being perpetrated, and with that lie they are forcing a perception of what is true for this situation. (I feel a blog article topic of situational ethics coming on! ) Because of bogus “legalities” and roadblocks (read Holder), though, there is no way that there is going to be any serious action taken to clear up the matter until it is too late and the precedent is fully established. And you know what? The entrenched GOP is just as guilty as the Dems, because they run around paying verbal homage to the “birther” concerns and liberal agenda issues, but they don’t really and genuinely care.

It certainly doesn’t stop with where Obama was born. Taking over corporations, banks, and regulating Wall Street make up Step Two, and a big move toward Wealth Distribution. Then Obamacare, Socialized Medicine, is Step Three and takes the US into a Social State….. and so on and so on. So, now we are coming quickly to the end of the track… Nov 2, 2010! The results of the mid-term elections will determine whether we have the same nation that was founded in 1776, in my humble opinion.

Got on my soapbox a little.  Sorry.  Short answer: I know that I can recreate a document like the one in the picture with Photoshop and a typewriter, plus a couple other tools. The ONLY way to verify its authenticity is to compare Obama’s footprint to that one on the certificate, which he will gladly do to clear up the matter – when Arabs kiss a pig.


Revisited: Stimulus, TARP, Clean Energy Act, etc. Now VAT

Sunday, October 18, 2009

This a repost because it has once again become timely.   Let me add my voice to that of others.  PAY ATTENTION!  THIS IS NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR THE INCOME TAX.  IT’S AN ADDITIONAL TAX.  THIS IS A TAX ON GOODS THAT WE PURCHASE… AND IT’S A COMPOUNDED TAX AS THE PRODUCT ADVANCES THROUGH PRODUCTION STAGES!  That will increase the cost up to 20%. 

Now, please read on.

So, you think what you don’t know won’t hurt you?  That’s what the far-left legislators want you to believe as they “fundamentally change America”.

The American people are being treated like lambs led to the slaughter – or rather, the American way of life is being pushed and shoved toward the slaughter.  And in preparation for the finality of it all, everything that has made the United States unique as a nation is being quickly and systematically stripped from it.   Concerned citizens are organizing Tea Parties, some are writing blogs, some are talking to their neighbors and friends, and all are expressing their opinions under the same rights that PETA, an ultra far-left organization, uses against the poultry and beef industries – only without smearing fake blood or red paint on things and scaring small children who only want their Happy Meals. 

Conservative Americans, both morally and fiscally, are beginning to express their concern over the future of America.  They’re holding peaceful rallies of protest, carrying banners and handmade signs, and they’re contacting their representatives about their concerns on the issues that are reshaping or restructured our country toward the leftist’s position.  These citizens are voicing  their objections to the unethical practices of their own elected officials in Washington.   Those unethical actions include, in part, pushing huge  laws (literally and conceptually) through the legislative process in the most obscure and unprecedented ways possible, and often under the cloak of darkness, with the full intent of keeping the American people ignorant while this takes place.   What happened to the very detailed promise of transparency of the Obama Administration? 

Even the majority of the legislators don’t know exactly what are in the bills because most of them refuse to read them.  For example, a bill may be called a stimulus package, but within that bill are many amendments or sections that do not pertain to stimulating economy in any way, shape, or form.  And sometimes those inserted amendments have restrictions on certain freedoms we  have enjoyed or they may impose a new tax or cost to the taxpayer, or they may send millions of tax dollars to a particular lawmaker’s state or district for special projects to garner votes and political support.

Let’s take the $787 Billion Economic Stimulus Package.  In it was money for Sen. John Murtha’s (D-PA) airport renovation, which is an abomination!  The airport was given $800,000 of stimulus money for a new cross-wind runway.  (Three passengers a day!  And all to Washington DC!   How many new jobs did that create, and just who does that benefit?)   That’s just one example of the waste and little political favors payoffs that occur!  It’s our tax money and as taxpayers we should have a say on where our money goes; after all, that’s what our representatives and senators are for – to protect our interests.   

We, the people, have sent our representatives to Washington to look out for our interests.  However, they have forgotten their campaign promises and are no longer representing their constituency.  Instead they put party interests, pet projects, political favors, and partisan politics above the best interest of the American people and do not consider themselves accountable even to the people who elected them.   They have their own personal crusade to gain power, influence, and wealth as they continue  the “Washington as usual” politics and the American Democracy is falling down around our ears.

America is at an important crossroad at this point in its history.  It’s reputation is being quickly dissolved in the opinion of other nations because there is no integrity and  no honor in our President’s words any more.  If we do nothing to change what’s happening in Washington, the great nation of the United States will be unrecognizable before the passing of  this generation.   The jury is still out until November 2010 during which time we will see if the recent voices of the American people at the town hall meetings and at Tea Party rallies have been heard.  But the pressure on our representatives needs to be maintained, because there’s still a lot of time for more wholesale slaughter between now and then  — just look at what has happened over the past year.  Think about these things:

»  The House energy and global warming bill HR2454 was passed June 26, 2009. It consisted of more than 1,400 pages and was available online only 15 hours before being vote upon.  This bill is presently before the Senate and is projected to cost taxpayers up to $200 million per year.

»  The $789 billion stimulus bill was passed Feb. 14, 2009 and had over 400 pages.  It was available online only 13 hours before debate.

»  $700 billion financial sector rescue package, known as TARP 1, was passed Oct. 3, 2008.  It has 169 pages and was available online only 29 hours before voting took place.

»  The Baucus Bill on health care reform is reported to impose  nearly $2,000 per family annually just to cover the mandated cost.  And if you don’t take out insurance, you’ll pay nearly that amount in an imposed penalty.  It is presently being re-worked to include a version of public option – and this is being done BEHIND CLOSED DOORS!  So, we won’t even see what they come up with before it goes to the House.

So, if you’re not sure how those bills that were passed in such a rush earlier this year will impact your life, you need to become aware – fully aware!  Even if the rich and the not so rich ponied up all their wealth, they wouldn’t have enough money to pay for those bills that have already passed.  And we’re still awaiting the outcome of the Clean Energy/Global Warming bill in the Senate and the Healthcare Reform Act to pass. 

If that wasn’t enough, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has gone on record as saying that a new tax is on the table to help America address these fiscal responsibilities.  (She is assuming that the healthcare bill will pass and that manufacturers will be required to include healthcare in their operating costs.)  Her proposal is  “a tax” called a VAT, a value added tax, to foreign manufacturing to level the playing field.   Only it doesn’t really.  The value added tax is a tax put on manufacturers at each stage of production and is based upon the amount of value another producer may add to a product.  Think about this:  most of what the US consumes is imported these days – produced elsewhere.  So those taxes on foreign companies will have costs that are directly passed on to you and to me.  The VAT on manufacturing and services will only drive up the costs on all consumer goods. Critics of VAT say that this tax disproportionately affects the middle- and low-income customers.  Whoa!  No taxes on middle class?  What happened to that promise?

Just so you know, it’s politi-speak.  That’s how they’re going to end up taking money out of your pocket even if you’re not among those who make more than $250,000.  No, it won’t be a straight forward “tax” on the individuals of the middle class, but by such taxes and restrictions on the manufacturing and producer of goods (and services) they take money straight out of your pocket at the consumer end.  It will also give the government more regulatory control over the manufacturers.

So, get ready.  You’re going to have to spend a whole lot more for goods and services – and real soon!

Cadillac Insurance Could Apply to Anyone Who Presently Has Insurance

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Okay, I’m being facetious, but as I discussed before, a Cadillac insurance plan is usually described as a high premium policy. Generally speaking, that means an insurance plan that is expensive coverage, usually defined by the total cost of the insurance premiums, rather than what coverage the patient actually gets. Let’s say some poor Joe was able to get healthcare coverage even with a pre-existing and had astronomically high premiums. Voila! He’d be in the Cadillac insurance category! How fair is that?

I have heard one individual say that it depended upon what type of coverage you had; in other words, if you had insurance that covered dental and vision, that could be considered a Cadillac insurance plan.

When I was younger, I had insurance coverage based upon what I could afford to pay out of pocket in premiums, co-pays and deductibles. And it was sort of a balancing act between out of pocket expenses and how much coverage I could get. Just getting started in life, I didn’t have a much extra cash on hand to pay for the occasional drugs and doctor visits and I certainly didn’t have anything that I could save since I was just starting out. So, I had to have low deductibles and co-pays. I could also opt for a policy that would pay a higher percentage of the healthcare cost in the event of hospital visits, etc. – if I could afford it in the additional premium cost. Of course, all that meant was my payroll deducted premium would be somewhat higher than average. So, I guess I had a “Cadillac” policy and didn’t know it.

So, just who is it that have these Cadillac plans in the government’s estimation? Getting a straight and definitive answer is about the same as asking them if they can say with certainty what is and what is not included in the healthcare bills from the House and Senate… all five versions apparently say different things. And who the heck really knows since they’re not reading the darn things???

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the Finance Committee, had set the threshold for most people at $8,000 in annual premiums for an individual and $21,000 for a family. However, the estimate is that only 2 or 3 percent of covered workers and families would hit that benchmark, so there are clearly not going to be enough people to “rob from” through taxes to cover the 40-some-odd million people who supposedly don’t have any coverage. In fact, the Baucus plan still leaves about 15 million without coverage.

So, besides taxing the very tiny percentage of people who fall into the rich category and robbing $500B from the old folks’ Medicare Advantage plan (for which they pay extra to have!), there hasn’t been any other revelation as to how this healthcare reform is going to be (1) deficit neutral and (2) not increase taxes on the middle and lower income people.

That presents a major problem. So, just how will the politicians decide what constitutes a Cadillac insurance plan? Oh, that’s easy. They’re going to review the majority of the plans that the 90% of Americans have now. They’re going to determine the average coverage and then determine that anything above that average will be considered the “Cadillac”.

As mentioned before, the BaucuSCARE bill isn’t going to cover everyone. They’re still saying that 15 million or more will not be covered. So, the arbitrary number of the 47 million, which had dropped down to something in the high 30 millions (you can just pick any huge number) only about half of them will be covered under his plan. How is that so much better than what we have now? We will still have the lawyers skinning doctors and drug companies alive. We will still have drug companies gouging US citizens while practically giving drugs to other countries for pennies on the dollar. We will still have the Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse…. all of which will remain under HR3200 AND the Baucus’ bill  AND the Reid bill, as well as any of the others, I’m sure. So, ALL of the problems that exist with our current US healthcare system we’ll just carry over to the next healthcare system, and for the switch we’ll have less quality care, increased taxes and insurance premiums, but add 15 million “to the rolls” who are basically getting free medical care now…. just check any hospital emergency room!

The other thing of great concern is the fact that when the new healthcare reform act is passed and signed by the president, the changes will not take effect immediately. Paying for the plan will begin immediately, but the actual plan itself will not be implemented until 2013. That means that we will be paying for a healthcare plan over three years before we can utilize its benefits. (Why don’t I go buy a real Cadillac right now on a ten-year loan and wait for them to deliver it to me in three years. How smart is that?)

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released a report last week which claimed the Baucus bill would not add to the national deficit. This was the “plain speak” version not the “political-speak” one with all the confusion – I mean – all the details, either! But this report assumes that those employers who had previously provided healthcare coverage for their employers and who might drop employee coverage in favor of the less costly non-coverage tax penalty as provided under the Baucus bill would increase their worker paychecks by an equal amount which they spent on the insurance coverage. (I’m not sure if this would be less the penalty the employers would have to pay!) This practice will take a nontaxable event for the employer (the health care provision) and replace it with a taxable one (employee wages). Proponents of the bill say this will produce $83 billion in government revenues. If this revenue doesn’t come into the coffers, then the Baucus bill will add billions of dollars to the federal deficit in the next ten years.

So I’m asking, why would a company drop employee coverage just so it could pay more (in fines, taxes, and wages) than it did before? Seems more likely they’d just drop the expensive insurance, pay the fine, and let the insurance part go! Sounds more logical, doesn’t it?

Overall, it would be much more effective and much less expensive if politicians would just address the problems that presently exist in our current healthcare system rather than building a whole new system around those problems. It’s like building a new house on a crumbling foundation. And that is exactly what the American people are trying to tell Congress – only they’re not listening.

All I can say is any Democrat who supports any final bill of this type should be and will be held responsible for this healthcare mess when premiums rise, taxes increase, deficits skyrocket, and Big Government’s power grab reaches farther and farther into the American’s wallets and way of life.

Social Security Sucks You Into Gov’t Healthcare

Monday, October 5, 2009

Brian Hall is a senior citizen. He is suing the government over its current mandatory healthcare practices.

Huh?! We don’t have a national healthcare bill passed yet, but he’s got problems with government-run healthcare already? You betcha!

When Brian turned 65, even though he had private healthcare insurance he wanted to keep, he was forced by the government to enroll in Medicare. That meant he would have to give up his private health insurance which he believed was better than what Medicare offered. He contacted the Department of Health and Human Services and the Social Security Administration and was told he could not opt out of Medicare.

Actually, what the Social Security Administration said was that even though he paid into Social Security for his entire working career, he cannot opt out of Medicare without giving up his Social Security. So, he consulted with his own attorneys and he’s now suing the government for what he rightfully deserves – his Social Security check…. without the strings of Medicare attached.

We know that Medicare and Social Security are virtually financially broke or soon will be. Actually, Social Security will pay out more in 2010 than they take in. Medicare will be bankrupt within five years. So why are these government’s entitlement programs forcing seniors into their healthcare program?

If seniors have the ability to pay for their own hospitalization coverage through private insurance, from a financial standpoint, doesn’t it make better sense to let them do it and get them out of the money pit of Medicare? Why won’t the government allow seniors to opt out of their most costly portion of their program, Medicare Part A which covers hospital insurance?

The answer is because with each person who opted out of Medicare, it would require the government to give up a small piece of power, and that would put a crack in their universal healthcare plan. They do not want anyone to be able to exercise their legal right to pay for private insurance if that’s what the people prefer. So, if you ignorant enough to think that your private insurance will survive if a public option (of any version) gets into healthcare reform, think again!

Just so we’re clear, there is no law that says any Social Security recipient must subscribe to Medicare, but some “backdoor” administrative measures which were adopted back about 16 years ago by these entitlement programs are what they are using to push seniors into enrolling in Medicare Part A — under the threat of losing their Social Security. This current policy is a violation of the individual’s right to make their own healthcare choices; and further, it violates both the Social Security and Medicare laws.

So, if this is a foreshadowing of what is to come under the ObamaCare or BaucuSCARE, then even if a “private option” remains on the table along with the “public option”, policies have already been put into place that can be adopted across the board which will eventually eliminate the option to chose private insurance or to opt out of Medicare, thereby forcing you out of your private insurance coverage into a governmental plan for health care coverage.

This slight of hand, this political mumbo-jumbo (is it a public option or is it a co-op?), these scare tactics cannot be allowed any longer. Call it what it is. And if you talk to people about the issue, point out the deceptions.

 People must be allowed their basic life and health choices rights without governmental blackmail. Go get them Brian Hall!

Obama and Congress Preaching to the Choir on ObamaCare

Monday, October 5, 2009

Apparently, our President has a habit of not listening to the citizens of the U.S.  In fact, he would rather “preach to the choir”.  And this practice applies equally to both parties in Congress as to the President.  Here are some examples of what I mean.

When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi walks up to a podium to speak (other than her press conferences), she has some of her entourage/ puppet-congressmen standing behind her, as well as staff members to the side and left-leaning media in front of her.  So, no matter what she says, she has a pro-message audience to preach her propaganda to.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid does the same thing with his cronies, staff, and media, as does John Boehner and most, if not all, of the others.  It’s a modus operandi in Washington to surround yourself with “yes” people and even to plant some in the audience for Q&A so you can get at least a few questions to answer to promote your agenda.  Obama did the same thing during the campaign, and since he’s still campaigning (because that’s all he really knows how do to), he’s is continuing that practice as of today when, as an example, he invited 150 doctors to the White House to discuss healthcare reform.  Well, it was reported that these doctors were handpicked, so it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that these physicians are mostly likely pro-Obamacare.  Otherwise, if history teaches us anything, their voices would be ignored.

He did the same thing with some nurses’ association representatives not long ago.  Well, most healthcare providers, those who are practicing, do not support the ObamaCare plan.  And as we’re learned last week, NY medical caregivers, primarily doctors and nurses as opposed the mandatory inoculation – just as their peers in other states do as well.  So, logically, we can assume that AMA (which represents only a small minority of doctors, and most of whom do not practice medicine) and ANA (American Nurse Association) do not represent these medical professions as a whole.   In fact, polls show the opposite – just ask your doctor and nurse.

So, if this meeting Obama has planned today with the doctors is for “show and tell”, it’s obviously another ruse.  If he brought them to the White House truly not knowing where they stood on the issue and is really seeking to listen to their input,  then count this as one of the campaign promises he made that he’s really adhering to – and that is to listen to serious debate.   Even so,m I wonder what he constitutes as “serious” debate.  The American people have been trying to debate his issues for months now and he’s done his best to not hear what they’re saying.

The problem with the issue of preaching healthcare to the choir  is that if the preacher turns to preach to the choir, it’s obvious that he has his back turned to the congregation.  Look for Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Baucus, as well as others, to continue to preach to the choir over the next couple of weeks…. but the choir isn’t the congregation.  They’ve stopped listening to a message where cost numbers don’t add up, where answers about maintaining quality of care are not direct – much less honest, and discussion on issues that would give incremental reform without trashing everything that works are evaded.  There is no open and honest debate from The One who is preaching to the choir!

Obamacare – Penalties for Non-insured – UPDATED!

Friday, September 25, 2009

Tom Barthold is Chief of Staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation.  On Thursday, he sent Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) a handwritten note on JCT letterhead which confirmed that those who fail to comply with the mandatory healthcare coverage would face a penalty of up to $1,900.   He noted that anyone who chooses not to purchase health insurance under the Obamacare plan could also be charged with a misdemeanor and face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty.  Barthold signed his note “Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold.”  How sweet – not!

Update!!   Watch Senator John Thune (R-SD) at a townhall meeting address this issue:


Any small businesses that doesn’t offer health insurance to its employes becomes a victim of a “pay or play” mandate that requires a penalty of up to 8% of its payroll tax to be paid to the government.  A small business who files on an  individual income tax return, will be charged a 5.4% surtax added to their top marginal tax rate.  Further, an individual who doesn’t buy insurance under this mandate will be assessed a 2.5% tax as a penalty.

Question:  This healthcare reform will not increase your taxes one dime – where have we heard those words?  Can you say, “You lie”?

In other words, you’re about to get hammered, and you won’t be able to continue running your own life and making your own choices as free Americans have done for over 200 years.  You know, the freedom to choose your own healthcare or even have it.  I always thought that if I didn’t have insurance, then any expenses I incurred would be my responsibility – no one else’s.  If I choose not to be insured, then I must be prepared for the consequences.  That’s because I believe in freedom, not a free ride.  How about you? 

The  freedom of choice,  as the example of this government healthcare reform confirms, will be just an illusion.  Mandated coverage for everyone is Socialism Step One.  Socialism Step Two – beware!

Let Congress hear your outrage!

“Cadillac” Healthcare Under Attack

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

There was a time when the Cadillac was the automobile of choice among the wealthy and influential.  In this healthcare debate the term “Cadillac” has been applied to some current healthcare plans.  At first, it seemed the term was used primarily to refer to the healthcare plan that is only available to our Congress, the President, and fat-cats on Wall Street and offered the ultimate coverage possible with no out of pocket expenses.  However, as the debate has continued, the so-called “Cadillac” plans appeared to change to pertain to expensive policies that some people have – which it turns out are blue-collar workers.  It’s these plans are under threat of being taxed at a high rate some have estimated at 30%.  

Since it was getting confusing, I wanted some clarity as to what a “Cadillac healthcare plan” was and did my own research to see what I could find out.

A “Cadillac” healthcare plan, sometimes called a “gold-plated” insurance plan, is one that can have expensive coverage where the insured may might have low deductibles and high benefits and even provide coverage for the most expensive treatments, but more often it is defined by the total cost of those premiums rather than what it might cost the insured for healthcare. Premiums for the “Cadillac” plan can be high for reasons other than cost of benefits.  Some of these factors include the age, gender, and overall health status of the individual as well as regional healthcare costs.

In my research, I found that in employer-sponsored healthcare plans, the premiums paid by employees are based on the pooled risk.  Risk means that there are older employees, or many employees who may have chronic illnesses, or a predominantly female workforce, or the company could be located in a region where healthcare costs are just more expensive.  In these “risky” cases, people might pay “Cadillac” rates but have “clunker” coverage.  So, some people are paying higher premiums for their health insurance simply because of where they live or who they work with. 

Washington’s answer (as it is with most issues) is to impose a tax on the premiums of healthcare coverage.  But that would hurt millions of people:  small businesses, those who work in small businesses, and those who are self-employed.  If healthcare premiums are taxed, the working class, the majority of whom already live modestly, would be hit the hardest. 

These proposed taxes on premiums is supposed to penalize the insurers, but as everyone knows insurers will likely “trickle down” those taxes to consumers in the way of higher deductibles or less coverage or a combination of both in order to recover the additional taxes they are required to pay.  But taxing premiums is only one option being discussed.  Some lawmakers are pushing to tax benefits, and a few are wanting to tax both.  And should you wonder why – those healthcare taxes would raise billions upon billions of dollars for the government.

As healthcare costs have risen over the last several years, of course people have had to pay higher deductibles and higher premiums.  The Kaiser Family Foundation says that this year, the total cost of the policy for an average family of four offered by employers was $13,375 annually.

As an example, let’s consider a blue-collar employee who has the opportunity to have healthcare coverage through an employer-sponsored plan for the employee and spouse only.  The employee could choose a plan with low co-pays and low deductibles if they wanted to, but because their health is very good and the premiums among the lowest offered, they opted for a high deductible plan.  That means that prescriptions and doctor visits will be paid out of pocket until a maximum out of pocket amount is reached … so basically, the policy covers “catastrophic” needs… at an annual cost of $12,168. This is certainly no “Cadillac” version.

However, under Senator Baucus’ bill which sets the minimum threshold for taxing premiums at $8000 annually, assuming the “trickle down” theory comes into play, this couple would have to not only “absorb” the out of pocket expenses for prescriptions and doctor visits until their maximum out of pocket threshold is met, but as provided under the Baucus plan, they would incur an additional out of pocket expense of more than $1,400 annually in the taxes conveyed into increased deductibles or less coverage – or premium costs – oh, no!  So, how will this help the working class?  (The assumption here is that the approximately 1/3 of amount which exceeded the $8,000 minimum for the above example will be due in taxes and that will be passed on to insured.) 

Companies who “self-insure” would be required to pay an “excise tax” which means they would most likely have to pass that tax on to their workers in the form of either higher premiums or lower wages.  Employers who presently pay or contribute to “Cadillac” premiums and who have a sicker workforce may see costs go down since all of the proposals in Baucus’ bill prohibit insurers from charging higher rates based on health status of the workforce.  But I wouldn’t count on that!  More than likely regardless of “Cadillac” or “clunker” policy, it’s going to cost the working class more so that those who aren’t working can be covered.  How’s that helping the majority of the population, the working middle class?

The goal of the Senator Baucus’ plan is twofold.  One is to generate revenue to help pay for covering the uninsured (that would be those who aren’t working?) and the other is to make the more expensive plans less desirable. The minimum tax thresholds would increase as inflation rates goes up. Historically, health insurance costs generally increase faster than inflation.  So, more plans, not just the “Cadillac” versions, but modest healthcare plans as well could end up being taxed. Again, how does this help the working class?

I haven’t taken up Obama’s policy of penalizing those who do not get and keep health insurance coverage.  I’ll leave that for another time because that’s a huge can of worms.  But I will say that after researching this healthcare reform issue, I am wondering about by one thing:  the term “Cadillac” in reference to healthcare reform that our elected officials are using.  Does this mean that the governmental plans for reform in healthcare will go the way of the reform in the automotive industry?