March 24th, 2010, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government’s TimesCheck.com has released an analysis of the coverage The New York Times has given to the healthcare legislation that has now been signed into law.

“White House spinsters have understandably focused on hard luck insurance cases that readers can empathize with as a way of selling an unpopular proposal,” said Kevin Mooney, editor of TimesCheck.com. “But, it is not the job of news media to simply repeat and parrot back emotional appeals that do not cut into the substance of ObamaCare.”

Mooney said recent articles have focused more on anecdotal stories that involve individual instances of financial hardship, while avoiding any discussion of the bill’s merits.

Although the reports call attention to insurance issues and financial challenges that are relevant to healthcare consumers, Mooney said “they omit key facts that would provide readers with greater perspective and context.”

Mooney continued, “For example, it is not accurate to suggest that without insurance there is no access to healthcare. In fact, it is already possible to offer direct payments, which doctors and hospitals gladly accept without the attending bureaucracy of insurance procedures. Moreover, existing law also makes it a requirement for anyone entering an emergency room to be treated regardless of their ability to pay.”

Mooney said that the Times “pretty much parroted the Democrat talking point equating health care access with civil rights.”

“Just one day after ObamaCare passed, The Times sought to equate the measure with the civil rights movement. Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) figured prominently in this narrative given his prominent role as an advocate for equal rights in the past,” Mooney explained.

ALG President Bill Wilson called the Times comparison of the health care takeover to civil rights “disgraceful,” saying, “If editors want to make this argument, it belongs on the editorial page because it is highly debatable and questionable,” said Wilson. “The bill includes costly, coercive measures that in the eyes of many Americans actually subtract from individual liberty.”

Mooney also took a look at Times coverage of the court challenges now being filed against the individual mandate to purchase insurance imposed by the legislation. “The Gray Lady has fired an opening salvo against state officials who have announced that they will challenge the bill on a constitutional basis,” Mooney said.

Mooney added that “This is an important story worthy of coverage and its fine to quote scholars who are philosophically opposed to the state action. However, readers deserve greater exposure to legal arguments on the other side that show ObamaCare could in fact be derailed for violating accepted interpretations of the ‘Commerce Clause’ of the Constitution.”

Mooney concluded, “If the legal challenges lack merit, why is The New York Times so concerned?”

Attachments:

(http://timescheck.com/2010/03/16/anecdotes-replace-hard-facts-in-front-page-report-selling-obamacare/)

(http://timescheck.com/2010/03/22/government-takeover-of-healthcare-equated-with-civil-rights/)

(http://timescheck.com/2010/03/23/nyt-fires-opening-salvo-against-constitutional-challenges-to-obamacare/)

###

March 24th, 2010

United States Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510

To the Members of the United States Senate:

As you are well aware, tonight begins an expected series of votes on reconciliation for the final step in President Barack Obama’s government takeover of the nation’s health care system. Americans for Limited Government would like to remind you of your duty as elected representatives of your states.

An overwhelming majority of Americans remain opposed to the government takeover of health care. They still oppose the unconstitutional individual mandate that will eventually force them on to government-run plans. They continue to be against the rationing of care away from seniors to pay for coverage for the unoccupied. They understand that the cost of premiums will rise even faster now that ObamaCare is the law of the land, and for the few who do not, they soon will witness it firsthand. Millions of Americans are rightly fearful of the implications of $2.5 trillion in insurance provisions costs from 2014 to 2023 once the program is fully implemented.

Reconciliation also remains an improper vehicle for enacting such far-reaching changes to the nation’s economy. The sole goal in utilizing the tactic is to block repeated attempts by the minority to work in a bipartisan fashion in crafting meaningful healthcare reform under the normal rules, and instead to ram the remaining “fixes” down the throats of an unwilling American public.

The problems with process notwithstanding, the troubles posed by the legislation itself are legion. For example, subsidizing premiums will not lower the cost of health care, as reported by the Congressional Budget Office. Instead, it will simply shift the burden of the price of health coverage increasingly to taxpayers. At the same time, the minimum requirements for insurance coverage are increased, and the price of premiums is artificially pushed up.

The CBO report states, “the average insurance policy in this market would cover a substantially larger share of enrollees’ costs for health care (on average) and a slightly wider range of benefits. Those expansions would reflect both the minimum level of coverage (and related requirements) specified in the proposal and people’s decisions to purchase more extensive coverage in response to the structure of subsidies.”

It is well understood that government subsidies have become a primary vehicle for artificially-inflated demand for goods and services, which leads to inflation. This has been the case with housing inflation, education inflation, and other asset bubbles.

Overall, such a tremendous escalation in spending by the federal government, when the nation’s Triple-A credit rating is already threatened and the costs of borrowing are about to go through the roof, will assuredly break the backs of taxpayers. Nonetheless, Mr. Obama has erroneously claimed that his bill would reduce the deficit when the entire entitlement will be operating in the red within less than 15 years, costing over $2.5 trillion from 2014 to 2023.

You know it’s false, the American people know it’s false, and even Congressional leadership acknowledges it to be false. In the lead-up to last Sunday’s vote, House Democrat leadership has internally acknowledged that ObamaCare is not deficit-neutral, as reported by Politico.

Finally, the corrupt process that you have undertaken pass this bill has been unprecedented. Following through on the use of reconciliation to make good on deals made with House Democrats who were reluctant to vote for your legislation is the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

Instead of upholding the will of the American people, you have instead chosen to abuse Senate rules to achieve the radical, ideological goal of taking over the nation’s health care system. I urge you to reject these shameless tactics, reverse course, and side with the American people by voting against the reconciliation bill.

Sincerely,

William Wilson
President
Americans for Limited Government

Ken Cuccinelli – Attorney General – Virginia

http://www.oag.state.va.us/PRESS_RELEASES/Cuccinelli/32210_Health_Care_Bill.html

Troy King – Attorney General – Alabama
http://www.ago.state.al.us/news/12312009.pdf

Bill McCollum –Attorney General – Florida
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2215987420100322
http://www.examiner.com/x-37583-Hillsborough-County-Elections-2010-Examiner~y2010m3d22-Florida-Attorney-General-Bill-McCollum-says-health-care-bill-is-unconstitutional–will-sue-video

Jon Bruning – Attorney General – Nebraska
http://www.ago.state.ne.us/news/pressreleases/032210_Health_Care_statement_MR_2.pdf

Tom Corbutt – Attorney General – Pennsylvania
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/press.aspx?id=5151

Greg Abbot – Attorney General – Texas
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagNews/release.php?id=3269
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagNews/release.php?id=3271

Henry McMaster – Attorney General – South Carolina
No press release

Robert McKenna – Attorney General – Washington
http://www.atg.wa.gov/pressrelease.aspx?&id=25402

Mark L. Shurtleff – Attorney General – Utah
http://www.attorneygeneral.utah.gov/PR_032210.html

Wayne Stenehjem – Attorney General – North Dakota
http://www.ag.state.nd.us/NewsReleases/2010/03-22-10.pdf

Marty J. Jackley – Attorney General – South Dakota
No press release

Michael Cox – Attorney General — Michigan
http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,1607,7-164–233880–,00.html

Lawrence Wasden – Attorney General – Idaho
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/17/idaho-state-sign-law-health-care-reform/

John W. Suthers – Attorney General – Colorado
http://www.coloradoattorneygeneral.gov/press/news/2010/03/22/attorney_general_joins_federal_lawsuit_challenging_health_care_mandate_0

James D. “Buddy” Caldwell – Attorney General – Louisiana
http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2010/03/13_states_sue_federal_governme.html

March 23rd, 2010, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson today urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to reject Barack Obama’s nominee for Judge to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Goodwin Liu, on account of what Wilson termed “Liu’s radical views on law and wealth redistribution that leave him far outside the mainstream of American jurisprudence.”

 

March 22nd, 2010, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson today condemned the House of Representatives for enacting what he termed “the government takeover of health care that will ration treatment, increase the cost of premiums, and force Americans onto government-run insurance.”

 

March 19th, 2010

 

To the Members of House of Representatives:

 

Sunday’s expected vote on the government takeover of our nation’s health care system promises to be the most important vote of your political career.  As you are already well aware, the American people do not support this takeover.  In Congressional District after Congressional District, the American people express strong majority opposition to the plan.

 

The only thing that remains is for you to do the right thing.  ObamaCare must be defeated.

 

Nothing has changed in this bill.  President Barack Obama’s plan – despite its numerous incarnations – will still ration care away from seniors, drive Americans off of their private health options and onto a government-run system, reduce quality, increase premiums, and saddle taxpayers with runaway costs, more spending, confiscatory taxes, and a debt that can never be paid.

 

That, of course, has not prevented Mr. Obama from intentionally misrepresenting the increased cost of insurance premiums as reported by the Congressional Budget Office at his fraudulent ‘bipartisan’ health takeover summit.

 

The relevant Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report stated, “CBO and JCT estimate that the average premium per person covered (including dependents) for new nongroup policies would be about 10 percent to 13 percent higher in 2016 than the average premium for nongroup coverage in that same year under current law… Average premiums per policy in the nongroup market in 2016 would be roughly $5,800 for single policies and $15,200 for family policies under the proposal, compared with roughly $5,500 for single policies and $13,100 for family policies under current law.”

 

The CBO also reported, “About half of those enrollees would receive government subsidies that would reduce their costs well below the premiums that would be charged for such policies under current law,” which formed the basis of Mr. Obama’s claim, responding to Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) at the “bipartisan” health care summit, stating, “Lamar, when you mentioned earlier that you said premiums go up, that’s just not the case, according to the Congressional Budget Office.”

 

Mr. Obama is misleading the American people.  This is not a case where Mr. Obama and Senator Alexander were “both right.” Mr. Obama was wrong.

 

Subsidizing premiums does not lower the cost of health care, it shifts the burden of the price of health coverage increasingly to taxpayers.  At the same time, ObamaCare increases the minimum requirements for insurance coverage, which forces premiums up, as noted by the CBO.

 

The CBO report also stated, “the average insurance policy in this market would cover a substantially larger share of enrollees’ costs for health care (on average) and a slightly wider range of benefits. Those expansions would reflect both the minimum level of coverage (and related requirements) specified in the proposal and people’s decisions to purchase more extensive coverage in response to the structure of subsidies.”

 

Because of the subsidy, Mr. Obama wants to claim that individuals would be paying less for premiums, and that therefore the cost of health coverage is somehow being reduced.  This is like claiming that subsidized housing and mortgage loans are causing the price of housing to go down, or that subsidized student loans are causing the price of education to go down, which of course is absurd.

 

In fact, subsidies across the economic spectrum have been directly linked to housing inflation, education inflation, and other asset bubbles, because the subsidies inflate demand artificially, which directly causes prices to increase.

 

These sorts of blatant lies explain exactly why the American people are completely opposed to this bill.  For example, Harry Reid claimed at the summit that “no one” was considering the use of reconciliation when he himself was speaking of it publicly.  And now, of course, we know that it is being considered on the floor of the House on Sunday.

 

But, the lies do not stop there.  Mr. Obama claimed in his address to the joint-session of Congress that his bill would reduce the deficit when the entire entitlement will be operating in the red within less than 15 years, costing over $2.5 trillion from 2014 to 2023.

 

Now it’s been revealed that House Democrat leadership are internally acknowledging that ObamaCare is not deficit-neutral, as reported by Politico.  Stop pretending that it is.  You know that adding 30 million individuals to government-run health care cannot be done in a deficit-neutral manner.  In fact, hardly anybody believes that it can.  When polled, only 11 percent say ObamaCare would reduce the deficit, compared to a full 68 percent of likely voters who say that it will.

 

Moreover, the corrupt process that has been undertaken to take over the nation’s health care system has been reprehensible, unconstitutional, and is undermining the public’s faith in our Republic. Once modified in the House, a bill, before it can become law, must proceed to the upper chamber under normal rules. The House cannot on one hand, say that it has voted “deem as passed” the Senate bill, and on the other, say it has only voted to modify the Senate bill.

 

House members cannot have it both ways.  Either they can vote on the Senate bill up-or-down, or they can modify it and send it back to the Senate under normal rules.  They cannot do both in accords with the Constitution.

 

The lies just go on and on.  The American people have had enough of Barack Obama and this Congress.  It’s time to scrap this bill once and for all, and to uphold the overwhelming will of the American people.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

William Wilson

President

Americans for Limited Government

 

March 19th, 2010, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government’s TimesCheck.com today released an analysis of New York Times’ coverage of recent significant Supreme Court decisions.

 

March 18th, 2010, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government (ALG) today released 15 Congressional District polls on incumbent House Democrats seeking reelection. The polls gauge voters’ support for the reelection of the incumbent Congressman or woman if he or she votes for the government takeover of health care bill.