December 14, 2018
By Matthew Pedis
Republicans (click here) have controlled the legislative and executive branches of the Federal government for nearly two years. The mid-term election gave control of the house to the Democrats, but one goal the Republicans have had is to repeal the affordable care act.
By Matthew Pedis
Republicans (click here) have controlled the legislative and executive branches of the Federal government for nearly two years. The mid-term election gave control of the house to the Democrats, but one goal the Republicans have had is to repeal the affordable care act.
So what kind of shape is the affordable care act in right now? Funding’s been cut for navigators to help people get insurance, so what does that mean for people signing up? And what kind of coverage can they get from the plans on offer?
90.7’s Brendan Byrne joins WUSF’s Julio Ochoa, the editor of Health News Florida, Cynthia Cox with the Kaiser Family Foundation and Anne Packham, a healthcare navigator in Orlando to wade through some of the complexity of the Affordable Care Act as the open enrollment period comes to an end....
This issue spans the legislative branch of the USA government in a way that creates an illusion of legislative dependency within the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
The issues surrounding anti-American Congress really begins with the wayward approach to power by the GOP, instead of governance. The GOP obtains and holds power through corrupt measures such as gerrymandering, the ill conceived Electoral College and Citizen's United. Included in the corruptible and corruption paradigm are institutions masked by political non-profit status such as the Federalist Society and it's judges. If a system is corrupt and acts against the best interest of it's democracy because of a shadow government supported by wealth it is the duty of the citizenry to move against such a shadow government and return it's democracy in full strength.
In the case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act the actions by the GOP has been to focus on the Robert's Court Decision AND FIND THE WORDS that will dismantle the very heart of a democracy, the health of it's' people. Is health a national security issue and indeed it is. The place to look for health as a national security issue is the "Selective Service Classifications."
To begin, this is the Director of the Selective Service Commission:
Senator Don Benton (click here) was appointed by President Donald J. Trump to be the 13th Director of the U.S. Selective Service System on April 11, 2017. He was sworn in by Justice Samuel Alito at the Supreme Court on April 13, 2017.
Prior to his appointment as Director of the Selective Service System, President Trump named Benton as a Senior White House Advisor to lead the transition team at the Environmental Protection Agency.
Benton is the son of a WWII Retired Naval Officer and the brother of two Vietnam combat veterans. Following high school, he enlisted in the U.S. Army under the Guaranteed Enlistment Program, later receiving an Honorable Discharge.
Benton brings over 30 years of public service experience to Selective Service. He was a Washington state senator for 20 years. He was elected Chairman of the Washington State Republican Party. Benton served in the state House of Representatives for two years.
Don Benton and his wife of 36 years, Mary, have four children....
But, the Director is the least of the statement regarding health as seen by the primary National Security instrument, the USA Military.
Classification (click here) is the process of determining who is available for military service and who is deferred or exempted. Classifications are based on each individual registrant's circumstances and beliefs. A classification program would go into effect when Congress and the President decide to resume a draft. Then, men who are qualified for induction would have the opportunity to file a claim for exemptions, deferments, and postponements from military service.
The highest ranking for military service is A-1 when it comes to fitness. If there is an understanding as to what "Available for military service," means, then there is an understanding as to what is not available for military service.
1-A - Available for military service.
1-AM - Medical specialist available for military service
1-A-OM - Medical specialist conscientious objector available for noncombatant military service.
1-OM - Medical specialist conscientious objector available for civilian work contributing to the national health, safety or interest.
2-AM - Medical specialist deferred because of critical community need involving patient care.
2-M - Registrant deferred for medical study.
4-F - Registrant not qualified for military service.
4-FM - Medical specialist not qualified for military service.
In everyone of those classifications the word medical appears except for 1-A and 4-F. I propose those two classifications are the polar opposite in definition and hence the clear understanding that there are fit and unfit Americans for military service. The USA military cannot be compromised by unfit Americans or volunteer immigrants looking for American citizenship, because, that would create a grossly inferior defense force. The USA military always had a very ready and competent military.
But, to return to the idea that health is important as a national security directive, these classifications dictate the fitness of the military measured through mental and physical health. If the USA is to continue to have a ready and competent military that means the wellness of it's citizens is a part of that competency. If there is not a pool of men and women ready and willing to be a part of an all volunteer force, the USA is about to lose it's competency in the very basic idea of national defense.
So, to simply state the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional is nonsense. It is such nonsense that it is Un-American and directly traceable back to such organizations and CHOICE judges of the Federalist Society.
Judge O'Connor is an interesting study in point. He is a home grown Texan with less exposure to high society and the Federalist, but, just the same has decided to make a name for himself by being the MOST "Anti-Obama" and "Anti-Civil Rights," and "Anti-Immigrant" and "Pro-White Man" Judge in the USA.
Federal Judge Reed O'Connor (click here) receives a helping hand from Dobie Principal Franklin Moses while installing his plaque on the wall of the Dobie Hall of Honor during ceremonies on Friday nigh
He made it his business to weigh in on everything Obama that the political right wing was running on. He ruled against the Obama rules of Title IX, issued an injunction against rule 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, he ruled that the Indian Child Welfare Act was unconstitutional and of course he ruled that the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional.
Judge O'Conner of Texas is so corrupt he has teamed up with the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a hate campaign of LGBT rights.
March 27, 2015
By John Wright
This issue spans the legislative branch of the USA government in a way that creates an illusion of legislative dependency within the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
The issues surrounding anti-American Congress really begins with the wayward approach to power by the GOP, instead of governance. The GOP obtains and holds power through corrupt measures such as gerrymandering, the ill conceived Electoral College and Citizen's United. Included in the corruptible and corruption paradigm are institutions masked by political non-profit status such as the Federalist Society and it's judges. If a system is corrupt and acts against the best interest of it's democracy because of a shadow government supported by wealth it is the duty of the citizenry to move against such a shadow government and return it's democracy in full strength.
In the case of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act the actions by the GOP has been to focus on the Robert's Court Decision AND FIND THE WORDS that will dismantle the very heart of a democracy, the health of it's' people. Is health a national security issue and indeed it is. The place to look for health as a national security issue is the "Selective Service Classifications."
To begin, this is the Director of the Selective Service Commission:
Senator Don Benton (click here) was appointed by President Donald J. Trump to be the 13th Director of the U.S. Selective Service System on April 11, 2017. He was sworn in by Justice Samuel Alito at the Supreme Court on April 13, 2017.
Prior to his appointment as Director of the Selective Service System, President Trump named Benton as a Senior White House Advisor to lead the transition team at the Environmental Protection Agency.
Benton is the son of a WWII Retired Naval Officer and the brother of two Vietnam combat veterans. Following high school, he enlisted in the U.S. Army under the Guaranteed Enlistment Program, later receiving an Honorable Discharge.
Benton brings over 30 years of public service experience to Selective Service. He was a Washington state senator for 20 years. He was elected Chairman of the Washington State Republican Party. Benton served in the state House of Representatives for two years.
Don Benton and his wife of 36 years, Mary, have four children....
But, the Director is the least of the statement regarding health as seen by the primary National Security instrument, the USA Military.
Classification (click here) is the process of determining who is available for military service and who is deferred or exempted. Classifications are based on each individual registrant's circumstances and beliefs. A classification program would go into effect when Congress and the President decide to resume a draft. Then, men who are qualified for induction would have the opportunity to file a claim for exemptions, deferments, and postponements from military service.
The highest ranking for military service is A-1 when it comes to fitness. If there is an understanding as to what "Available for military service," means, then there is an understanding as to what is not available for military service.
1-A - Available for military service.
1-AM - Medical specialist available for military service
1-A-OM - Medical specialist conscientious objector available for noncombatant military service.
1-OM - Medical specialist conscientious objector available for civilian work contributing to the national health, safety or interest.
2-AM - Medical specialist deferred because of critical community need involving patient care.
2-M - Registrant deferred for medical study.
4-F - Registrant not qualified for military service.
4-FM - Medical specialist not qualified for military service.
In everyone of those classifications the word medical appears except for 1-A and 4-F. I propose those two classifications are the polar opposite in definition and hence the clear understanding that there are fit and unfit Americans for military service. The USA military cannot be compromised by unfit Americans or volunteer immigrants looking for American citizenship, because, that would create a grossly inferior defense force. The USA military always had a very ready and competent military.
But, to return to the idea that health is important as a national security directive, these classifications dictate the fitness of the military measured through mental and physical health. If the USA is to continue to have a ready and competent military that means the wellness of it's citizens is a part of that competency. If there is not a pool of men and women ready and willing to be a part of an all volunteer force, the USA is about to lose it's competency in the very basic idea of national defense.
So, to simply state the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional is nonsense. It is such nonsense that it is Un-American and directly traceable back to such organizations and CHOICE judges of the Federalist Society.
Judge O'Connor is an interesting study in point. He is a home grown Texan with less exposure to high society and the Federalist, but, just the same has decided to make a name for himself by being the MOST "Anti-Obama" and "Anti-Civil Rights," and "Anti-Immigrant" and "Pro-White Man" Judge in the USA.
He made it his business to weigh in on everything Obama that the political right wing was running on. He ruled against the Obama rules of Title IX, issued an injunction against rule 1557 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, he ruled that the Indian Child Welfare Act was unconstitutional and of course he ruled that the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional.
Judge O'Conner of Texas is so corrupt he has teamed up with the Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a hate campaign of LGBT rights.
By John Wright
...On Thursday, Paxton (click here) — a "tea partier" who admitted to securities fraud last year — won a small, temporary victory in his ongoing war against LGBT people.
U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, a President George W. Bush appointee, issued an order blocking the new FMLA rule from taking effect as scheduled on Friday in Texas and three other states that joined Paxton's lawsuit — Arkansas, Louisiana and Nebraska....
So, with the reputation of Judge Reed O'Connor well established as byzantine and surreptitious it is easy to see why the law passed in 2010 under the Obama Administration has come under attack once again.
Now as a point of focus mostly unrelated to my point regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, if there is any state in the United States of America that needs a refreshing of it's two party system it is Texas. The state is not different in many ways as other southeastern states in that the corruption of it's laws is so dense it sticks out like a sore thumb. Beto O'Rourke sincerely tried to return reason to Texas (click here), but, that stubborn oil money simply swept him away in the closing weeks of the US Senate race. I think Trump takes credit for it, but, in reality Trump was there for the petroleum industry, hence, Ted Cruz.
When looking at Judge Reed O'Connor it is easy to realize that judicial decisions he makes in the US District Court (click here) are corrupt. There is no doubt to that and it is based in party loyalty to keep those that contribute to the GOP understanding that no matter how corrupt a court has to be, it will be to ensure the outcome the cronies expect. North Carolina is mired in such junky judges. For a case to be properly decided coming out of North Carolina the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is the only way to achieve fairness.
So, to get back to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act being under assault, one has to realize why it is under assault and it is because the Robert's Court made a big deal of the Individual Mandate as a tax that is legal and can be upheld to support the law. Now, let's look at that. It might have been a big deal to the GOP, but, in reality of the law it is not. The reversal of the tax of the Individual Mandate caused a drop in enrollment and for that insurance cronies of the GOP should be running the other way, but, as it being the sole element that completely destroys the law is nonsense. It is nothing but political noise even within the context of the Robert's Court. It is interesting a Federalist Judge would focus on the tax as legitimate. The wealthy simply hate taxes, including the current President.
To really understand the "idea" of taxing, let's first look at the wording of the USA Constitution Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress. To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. Article i, Section 8 clearly states the power to legislate lies with the Congress and not the other two branches of government. There are checks and balances to the legislature by the Executive Branch and the Courts, but, the primary driver of American law is Congress. They are the do all and end all for the will of the people and why Scott Walker's Lame Duck rant won't stand. The meaning of LEGISLATIVE BRANCH is strongly defined.
Now, to look at the article of the US Constitution that prohibits taxation. It is definitely one of the more interesting sections of the USA Constitution.
Article 1, Section 9
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
The country derived income from such things as tariffs to support any federal authority, but, that changed when the Sixteenth Amendment to the USA Constitution was ratified into law in 1913. It took three years and seven months to ratify the 16th Amendment, but, it was ratified according to constitutional statute and today the federal government is supported differently.
Now as a point of focus mostly unrelated to my point regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, if there is any state in the United States of America that needs a refreshing of it's two party system it is Texas. The state is not different in many ways as other southeastern states in that the corruption of it's laws is so dense it sticks out like a sore thumb. Beto O'Rourke sincerely tried to return reason to Texas (click here), but, that stubborn oil money simply swept him away in the closing weeks of the US Senate race. I think Trump takes credit for it, but, in reality Trump was there for the petroleum industry, hence, Ted Cruz.
When looking at Judge Reed O'Connor it is easy to realize that judicial decisions he makes in the US District Court (click here) are corrupt. There is no doubt to that and it is based in party loyalty to keep those that contribute to the GOP understanding that no matter how corrupt a court has to be, it will be to ensure the outcome the cronies expect. North Carolina is mired in such junky judges. For a case to be properly decided coming out of North Carolina the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is the only way to achieve fairness.
So, to get back to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act being under assault, one has to realize why it is under assault and it is because the Robert's Court made a big deal of the Individual Mandate as a tax that is legal and can be upheld to support the law. Now, let's look at that. It might have been a big deal to the GOP, but, in reality of the law it is not. The reversal of the tax of the Individual Mandate caused a drop in enrollment and for that insurance cronies of the GOP should be running the other way, but, as it being the sole element that completely destroys the law is nonsense. It is nothing but political noise even within the context of the Robert's Court. It is interesting a Federalist Judge would focus on the tax as legitimate. The wealthy simply hate taxes, including the current President.
To really understand the "idea" of taxing, let's first look at the wording of the USA Constitution Article I, Section 8, Powers of Congress. To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. Article i, Section 8 clearly states the power to legislate lies with the Congress and not the other two branches of government. There are checks and balances to the legislature by the Executive Branch and the Courts, but, the primary driver of American law is Congress. They are the do all and end all for the will of the people and why Scott Walker's Lame Duck rant won't stand. The meaning of LEGISLATIVE BRANCH is strongly defined.
Now, to look at the article of the US Constitution that prohibits taxation. It is definitely one of the more interesting sections of the USA Constitution.
Article 1, Section 9
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.
The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
No capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.
No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.
No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another: nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.
No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.
If Section 9 were still standing today there would be no doubt that the tax prescribed in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would be unconstitutional. I want to point to the fact that the country was intact and flourishing under a government that did not impose an income tax. That state of affairs was intact until the year 1913. So let's get rid of the idea that law only stands if it has a tax appointed to it. The USA stood as a sovereign power while passing laws in the federal legislature without any income tax for 137 years.
The country derived income from such things as tariffs to support any federal authority, but, that changed when the Sixteenth Amendment to the USA Constitution was ratified into law in 1913. It took three years and seven months to ratify the 16th Amendment, but, it was ratified according to constitutional statute and today the federal government is supported differently.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
That's it. That is the Sixteenth Amendment. It changes the law under Article 9 to state, The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. That is it. That is the verbiage the Sixteenth Amendment changed in the USA Constitution. There is absolutely no demand by the USA Constitution that every law that is passed be supported in it's constitutionality by a tax.
There are plenty of laws passed every year, except for the Ryan years, where the USA House and USA Senate do not assign taxes for it's constitutionality. I return to an important act by Congress that upholds the sovereignty of the USA in the "War Powers Act/Resolution (click here)." There is absolutely no tax assigned to this legislation which originated in the US House of Representatives, the body most responsible for the USA budget.
The idea that any legislation with extensive laws is solely upheld by an individual mandate and tax is grossly political and not at all accurate. Now, that is not to say corruption doesn't exist surround the law, obviously it does, but, the actual law is not dependent on an Individual Mandate. Amendment Sixteen definitely is an individual mandate, so the concept is not foreign to the USA Constitution.
The individual mandate was passed with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to allow attractiveness to the private sector insurance companies. Health Insurance in the USA is dependent on the private sector, except for Medicare and Medicaid.
The USA was in desperate need of law that provided health care insurance that protected Americans when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was passed.
Source: Gallup-Healthways poll (click here)
The private insurance companies were refusing coverage, causing deaths and selective of who received coverage outside that of businesses with 500 or more employees. The USA government needed to act because the care being received by Americans were either being denied or was very selective about the type of health care administered. The doctors, pharmacists and other health care professionals no longer were autonomous in administering care, they answered to the health care insurers as to how long patients stayed in hospitals and as a result newly born babies and there mothers were falling into peril.
At the time the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was enacted the stories coming from the country regarding health care insurance were nothing short of horrific. The new health care insurance now would give the entire family health coverage instead of only children receiving care. As viewed in the graph above the new health care law was well received. The participation rate increased and for the first time in decades Americans were able to receive health coverage.
The year the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act went live with the insurance exchanges the uninsured reached an all time high of 18 percent of Americans. That was simply outrageous and nearly a fifth of the country. One in five Americans were not becoming uninsured and there was no sign of stopping. The new law was needed and to even play with it for the sake of politics is nothing short of ludicrous.
Judge, if you can call him that, Reed O'Connor is nothing more than a political hack. He takes extreme positions to win recognition for his political decisions which should lead to more and more appointments with increase in pay and permanency within a court somewhere in the southeast USA. His decision has no real meaning in the truth of the health care needs of Americans. His decision is a stepping stone and he knows it. His ROLE in all this mess that is the political right wing of the USA, if you can call it that, is to providing that stepping stone so it can make it to the Supreme Court to TEST the new five conservative justice court.
I sincerely believe Chief Justice Roberts isn't interested in the politics or the stepping stone and the health care insurance law will stand. There is nothing earth shaking about Reed O'Connor's decision (click here) that wasn't expected. The headlines in some media is flamboyant and causes hair to stand up on the necks of some Americans; this one is from the Texas Tribune; "Federal judge guts Obamacare, handing Texas an early win." An early win? What is that supposed to mean? That's politics for you. Unless on the inside of jargon gone wild, it makes no sense.
Source: Gallup-Healthways poll (click here)
The private insurance companies were refusing coverage, causing deaths and selective of who received coverage outside that of businesses with 500 or more employees. The USA government needed to act because the care being received by Americans were either being denied or was very selective about the type of health care administered. The doctors, pharmacists and other health care professionals no longer were autonomous in administering care, they answered to the health care insurers as to how long patients stayed in hospitals and as a result newly born babies and there mothers were falling into peril.
At the time the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was enacted the stories coming from the country regarding health care insurance were nothing short of horrific. The new health care insurance now would give the entire family health coverage instead of only children receiving care. As viewed in the graph above the new health care law was well received. The participation rate increased and for the first time in decades Americans were able to receive health coverage.
The year the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act went live with the insurance exchanges the uninsured reached an all time high of 18 percent of Americans. That was simply outrageous and nearly a fifth of the country. One in five Americans were not becoming uninsured and there was no sign of stopping. The new law was needed and to even play with it for the sake of politics is nothing short of ludicrous.
Judge, if you can call him that, Reed O'Connor is nothing more than a political hack. He takes extreme positions to win recognition for his political decisions which should lead to more and more appointments with increase in pay and permanency within a court somewhere in the southeast USA. His decision has no real meaning in the truth of the health care needs of Americans. His decision is a stepping stone and he knows it. His ROLE in all this mess that is the political right wing of the USA, if you can call it that, is to providing that stepping stone so it can make it to the Supreme Court to TEST the new five conservative justice court.
I sincerely believe Chief Justice Roberts isn't interested in the politics or the stepping stone and the health care insurance law will stand. There is nothing earth shaking about Reed O'Connor's decision (click here) that wasn't expected. The headlines in some media is flamboyant and causes hair to stand up on the necks of some Americans; this one is from the Texas Tribune; "Federal judge guts Obamacare, handing Texas an early win." An early win? What is that supposed to mean? That's politics for you. Unless on the inside of jargon gone wild, it makes no sense.
