House ObamaCare bill: Here comes the taxes!

posted at 12:15 pm on October 30, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Americans for Tax Reform has culled the 1990-page Pelosi health-care overhaul bill to find the taxes that will supposedly collect over $540 billion in revenue over 10 years.  It’s quite an impressive list of new burdens on Americans and their health-care providers and producers — but that’s redundant.  After all, who do you think will end up paying for the medical-device taxes?  It won’t be insurers or doctors:

  • Employer Mandate Excise Tax (Page 275): If an employer does not pay 72.5 percent of a single employee’s health premium (65 percent of a family employee), the employer must pay an excise tax equal to 8 percent of average wages.  Small employers (measured by payroll size) have smaller payroll tax rates of 0 percent (<$500,000), 2 percent ($500,000-$585,000), 4 percent ($585,000-$670,000), and 6 percent ($670,000-$750,000).
  • Individual Mandate Surtax (Page 296): If an individual fails to obtain qualifying coverage, he must pay an income surtax equal to the lesser of 2.5 percent of modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) or the average premium.  MAGI adds back in the foreign earned income exclusion and municipal bond interest.
  • Medicine Cabinet Tax (Page 324)
  • Cap on FSAs (Page 325)
  • Increased Additional Tax on Non-Qualified HSA Distributions (Page 326)
  • Denial of Tax Deduction for Employer Health Plans Coordinating with Medicare Part D (Page 327)
  • Surtax on Individuals and Small Businesses (Page 336)
  • Excise Tax on Medical Devices (Page 339)
  • Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting (Page 344)
  • Delay in Worldwide Allocation of Interest (Page 345)
  • Limitation on Tax Treaty Benefits for Certain Payments (Page 346)
  • Codification of the “Economic Substance Doctrine” (Page 349)
  • Application of “More Likely Than Not” Rule (Page 357)

See the ATR post for detailed descriptions of each new tax.  For the moment, I just want to focus on a couple of interesting choices.  For instance, the new “codification” on page 349 essentially allows the IRS to willy-nilly disallow legal deductions based on their view that the motive for it was not “entirely business related.”  Gee, I wonder how many times the IRS will reach that conclusion when the government needs cash?  The entire point of tax law is supposed to prevent that kind of subjective decision-making — and the historical thrust of American jurisprudence is to assume innocence until guilt is proven.  Now, the IRS can just ex post facto assume guilt and penalize the taxpayer.

Note, too, the two attacks on health-savings accounts (HSAs) and similar structures that allow people to use non-taxed cash without itemizing.  Congress wants to double the penalty for using HSAs for non-qualified distributions, which they have not done with similar shelters such as IRAs, 401(k)s, and the like.  They also have entirely eliminated non-prescription medication from the qualifications, except insulin, which means that taxpayers will pay more taxes and have less reason to keep HSAs.

And the Limitation of Tax Treaty bears special mention.  The Obama administration abandoned an effort to tax foreign earnings of American corporations, finally convinced that it would make US companies less competitive overseas (see here for explanation).  This codicil doesn’t quite restore the Obama plan, but it places a penalizing tax on American earnings for corporations with overseas profits.  That should drive those corporations that can relocate to foreign shores, while making other American corporations less competitive.

Jazz Shaw writes:

So while the Obama administration’s talking heads continue insisting they will only tax the “very rich” (a joke which really never gets old) and they work on taxing cigarettes, soda, coffee, gasoline and heating oil, (with hamburger soon to follow, I’m sure) now we’ll be treated to a whole new set of taxes. Need more help with your health care needs? No problem! We’ll just tax your wheelchairs, your teeth and your prosthetic devices!

Has the middle class discovered the biggest lie of the Obama campaign yet?  When statist policies get imposed, everyone pays.  Everyone.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Forget the 10 CD version of Turbo-Tax,
I’m gonna use Timmy the Tax Cheat’s version. His guarantees
a refund AND immunity from prosecution!

redneckjoe on October 30, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Picture of Nancy Pelosi + massive healthcare bill taxes = downright scary. Happy Halloween America.

canditaylor68 on October 30, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Why doesn’t our liberal Democrat marxist President and Congress save a couple trillion dollars and just lower health insurance premiums by regulating the health insurance industry better and impose health care related tort reform?

So easy even a caveman can do it.

SilverStar830 on October 30, 2009 at 1:09 PM

They will claim that most of the new tax increases and higher taxes are not taxes at all but only ‘mandatory surcharges’.

Wait for it…

RedbonePro on October 30, 2009 at 1:11 PM

redneckjoe on October 30, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Only if you’re a Democrat and an Obama donor (the more you donate, the more tax cheating the program lets you get away with).

AZCoyote on October 30, 2009 at 1:12 PM

With that list in mind, I can only imagine what else will eventually be included as taxable health care equipment.

Bishop on October 30, 2009 at 12:23 PM

wheelchair rentals, oxygen rentals, cpap machine rentals, hospital bed rentals, the list goes on and on. If they are talking about DME rentals, this will impact seniors the most.

Annietxgrl on October 30, 2009 at 1:18 PM

It effects everyone. Bush cut taxes for all income brackets. Once those cuts sunset, everyone’s income tax percentage will automatically increase.

Revenant on October 30, 2009 at 12:46 PM

SOOOOO — taxes will go up without Obama having to do anything. He will say that these are Bush’s tax increases, as Bush signed the law that allowed the decreased rates to sunset.

Can someone tell us why the sunset was put in there? Was this the only way to get the Dems to agree to it?

DOOF on October 30, 2009 at 1:19 PM

I’m for a public option. I’m one of those who believes in this. However, blah blah blah

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 12:33 PM

We already have this…it’s called Medicare and Medicaide. Two of the prime reasons healthcare costs are so out of control for everyone else.

To the extent our current system doesn’t work, Government is the REASON, not the remedy.

Youngs98 on October 30, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Keep your taxes out of my vagina.

faraway on October 30, 2009 at 12:58 PM

That needs to be on a bumper sticker ASAP.

BakerAllie on October 30, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Can someone tell us why the sunset was put in there? Was this the only way to get the Dems to agree to it?

Obviously. Bush fought to make them permanent, and the Democrats fought him (and won) every step of the way.

Any Obamacrat who attempts to argue the facts other than those with you on this point is lying (not surprising, of course).

And the argument that Obama and the Obamacrats are “powerless to stop tax increases” is also a flat out lie. Of course they can act to stop it. They don’t want to.

They can also cut spending and reduce the size and scope of government. They have no intention of doing that, either.

So for all intents and purposes, when Democrats try to whine about their inability to hold down taxes, THEY LIE.

Good Lt on October 30, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Two of the prime reasons healthcare costs are so out of control for everyone else.

Exactly.

If you look at health care costs historically, they rose exponentially immediately after the Democrats passed Medicare in 1965.

Prior to that, people largely paid in cash and costs were manageable.

All the government can do by fiat is to make goods and services more expensive OR increase scarcity.

Anyone who believes this bill will benefit anyone other than a small percentage of the population at the expense of the vast majority of people, is a complete fool.

NoDonkey on October 30, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Yes, but it’s awful right now, faraway. We have people literally dying in emergency rooms in LA. They dump people in front of the Mission here, who clearly need to be hospitalized.

Get ready for a whole lot more if ObamaCare passes in any form.

Dave R. on October 30, 2009 at 1:28 PM

We have people literally dying in emergency rooms in LA.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 12:47 PM

People, all over America, died in emergency rooms today.

Some died from:

heart attacks >>> Yep

drug overdoses >>> Yep

auto accidents >>> Yep

falls from heights >>> Yep

gun or knife inflicted traumas >>> Yep

strokes >>> Yep

slips and falls >>> Yep

heat strokes >>> Yep

hypothermia >>> Yep

choking on foreign objects >>> Yep

drownings >>> Yep

and the list goes on for EMERGIENCIES of numerous descriptions.

Now Ann, please answer this question: would a government health plan, or ANY insurance plan, have prevented these deaths in America’s emergency rooms today?

In essence your comment is one of the most vacuous I have seen in many a moon. Go stand in the corner.

Yoop on October 30, 2009 at 1:39 PM

Well, the bill isn’t passed now, and in LA, it’s impossible to find swine flu vaccine unless you’re willing to go to neighborhoods and stand in line for hours.

So, this particular system isn’t exactly winning awards, either.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 12:34 PM

You do know that the Center for Disease control is in charge of vaccine production and distribution, don’t you?

So blame them. The same feds who are going to take over health care.

And you don’t need the swine flu vaccine anyway, unless you’re very young, very old or pregnant. This is the kind of hysterical reaction to a seasonal problem that will bankrupt us when the government runs everything in health care.

NoDonkey on October 30, 2009 at 1:40 PM

I wish I had this before Rep. Paul Ryan (my Congresscritter) delivered the 1,990-page monstrosity to the Franklin, WI public library and had a short townhall meeting there.

steveegg on October 30, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Yes, it reminds me of that old Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.
AZCoyote on October 30, 2009 at 1:08 PM

Exactly.
Most people don’t realize something is an historic event until afterwards – when it can be viewed in context.

To borrow a line from Star Wars, “I’ve got a bad feeling about this”
This whole healthcare BS they are trying to Rahm down our throats is not going to end well.

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 1:49 PM

We have people literally dying in emergency rooms in LA.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 12:47 PM

People, all over America, died in emergency rooms today.

We both know she was just going for the emotional “THINK OF THE CHILDREN@!@!!!@” angle there.

No logic, fact, reason or fiscal reality will reach her. Because feeeeelings are all that matter. Reality? Doesn’t matter. Only feeeeelings.

Nothing is more important to the America people than misguided, misplaced hyperemotion and feeeeeelings guiding their leaders’ decisions about critical legislation that will destroy the health care system and individual liberty if enacted.

Good Lt on October 30, 2009 at 1:49 PM

The lack of interest in public health care really does sort of make me doubt that I’ll ever really back arch-conservatives.

You may be sincerely way too fringe for me.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:53 PM

But here’s the good news. That’s OK.

This is a democracy, and that’s what I like most.

I’ll vote for each candidate based on how well they represent my own values.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:54 PM

You do understand the difference between health care and health insurance, right? Nobody, repeat nobody, in this country is denied health care.

faraway on October 30, 2009 at 12:45 PM

No, you’re actually quite wrong. The hospitals in LA do dump. They have been caught on video doing it.

They dump indigents off in front of the Missions.

They are under court-order to stop the practice, and they continued doing it.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM

taxpayers will pay more taxes and have less reason to keep HSAs.

The forced path to the govt teat for those of us who refuse to be fed.

That should drive those corporations that can relocate to foreign shores, while making other American corporations less competitive.

The path to a more consumer-driven economy, causing us to become more depdent upon other nations.
The down fall of America is almost complete.
Thanks FDR. Thanks Carter.
Thanks OBAMA.
(did I miss anyone?)

Badger40 on October 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM

The lack of interest in public health care really does sort of make me doubt that I’ll ever really back arch-conservatives.
You may be sincerely way too fringe for me.
AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:53 PM

We’re interested in making the system better.
The Statists are only interested in controlling people.

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 1:57 PM

You do know that the Center for Disease control is in charge of vaccine production and distribution, don’t you?

So blame them. The same feds who are going to take over health care.

I do. I think this is a complete fiasco.

Why aren’t we talking about it more?

It’s sort of like everyone decided they were incompetent and is giving them a pass.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:57 PM

We’re interested in making the system better.
The Statists are only interested in controlling people.

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 1:57 PM

So far, all I’ve seen from the oposition is a bit of faith-talk, too.

Lowering state barriers is going to make a difference?

Really?

How?

It’s the same thing as Obamacare. Trust us.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:59 PM

The lack of interest in public health care really does sort of make me doubt that I’ll ever really back arch-conservatives.

You may be sincerely way too fringe for me.

What is “public health care?”

Making me pay for your health care because you don’t want to? Making me pay for the health care of others because you want me to?

What are you referring to?

I’m interested in public health care – the health care system created by the public here in America. Not the “proposed utopia” provided by the corrupt, influence-peddling lobbyists and politicians in a far-off government seat of inscrutable power in Washington.

The “not-working” system you currently eschew has been responsible for increasing the life expectancy of the average America every year for decades.

But let’s throw that our and replace it with a Cuban-style system or Canadian-style system where everyone is a number and can be tossed aside with no redress for the victims (those denied care by their wise and all-knowing government). After all, that’s your vision of paradise.

When you say “public health care,” you obviously mean ALL of us being coerced and forced to participate in your scheme. Most of us are simply telling you to get out of our health care decisions, our wallets, our insurance plans and our lives.

Take your childish utopian fantasy with you, please.

Good Lt on October 30, 2009 at 2:01 PM

I do. I think this is a complete fiasco.

Why aren’t we talking about it more?

What is there to talk about? The government is incapable of delivering even ONE VACCINE to people with efficiency, expediency, at low cost and at an adequate level of service.

Government health care in action – FAILING.

And yet, you still think there’s a LOT to talk about here.

They dump indigents off in front of the Missions.

They are under court-order to stop the practice, and they continued doing it.

How many of these poor souls are in this country legally?

Good Lt on October 30, 2009 at 2:03 PM

Democracy in action. No amendments for the healthcare bill will be allowed in the House.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/65635-rep-miller-no-amendments-likely-on-healthcare-bill

taney71 on October 30, 2009 at 2:04 PM

I do. I think this is a complete fiasco.

It’s not, what’s a fiasco is the media induced hysteria.

An average of 15,000 people per year, die across the US as a result of the seasonal flu. Yes, the flu is dangerous and H1N1 is no different.

But H1N1 is no more virulent than the average seasonal flu.

Vaccines are produced in February and are a shot in the dark. There will always be a number of strains out there that the vaccine will have no affect whatsoever on.

NoDonkey on October 30, 2009 at 2:05 PM

I do. I think this is a complete fiasco.

Why aren’t we talking about it more?

It’s sort of like everyone decided they were incompetent and is giving them a pass.
AnninCA

which is an interesting angle to take since that was basically your argument yesterday about the current bill. Hey, at least they’re trying, right?

WitchDoctor on October 30, 2009 at 2:06 PM

So far, all I’ve seen from the oposition is a bit of faith-talk, too.
Lowering state barriers is going to make a difference?
Really?
How?
It’s the same thing as Obamacare. Trust us.
AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:59 PM

“faith-talk”?

Have you examined what the opposition proposals are?

Obamacare would be the same type of Bloated government bureaucracy like every other government program, except we wouldn’t have a choice in the matter.

What is so different about Obamacare that it’s going to work better, cheaper, stronger, faster, and have a clean fresh lemony smell more than Medicare or the other government bureaucracies?

[Okay forget the part about stronger, faster..]

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 2:12 PM

AnninCA
which is an interesting angle to take since that was basically your argument yesterday about the current bill. Hey, at least they’re trying, right?

WitchDoctor on October 30, 2009 at 2:06 PM

No, I think I’ve finally figured out my own political “spot.”

I’m definitely not right-wing. I’m also definitely not left-wing.

I think the solution lays with any and all candidates who have a handle on implementation.

I know that anyone who says, “OK, this doesn’t solve everyone’s wish list, but it’s realistic and we can manage it.”

They will get my vote.

I’m one who has watched way too closely all the swings from right to left and back again.

None of you impress me as really on the mark.

So I’ll be looking for sensibility. And that won’t be over philosophical differences.

I’m look for pragmatism in implementation.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Grandma NaNa says no no no no these are not tax increases, she is “eliminating tax decreases

Brat on October 30, 2009 at 2:17 PM

Well, the bill isn’t passed now, and in LA, it’s impossible to find swine flu vaccine unless you’re willing to go to neighborhoods and stand in line for hours.

So, this particular system isn’t exactly winning awards, either.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Don’t look know, but creating and distributing vacinnes is pretty much govt responsibility now. Thanks to trial lawyers driving the private producers out of business.

MarkTheGreat on October 30, 2009 at 2:17 PM

They dump indigents off in front of the Missions.

They are under court-order to stop the practice, and they continued doing it.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:56 PM

You really believe that they will stop doing this when govt runs health care?

MarkTheGreat on October 30, 2009 at 2:19 PM

It is all over but the survivalist building. The last chance to stop it was during the Bush years and we failed miserably. The Tech boom killed us.

tomas on October 30, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Lowering state barriers is going to make a difference?

Really?

How?

It’s the same thing as Obamacare. Trust us.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Competition. That thing you keep claiming you support.

Additionally many states impose needless mandates on insurance carriers. Being able to buy out of state allows the consumer to avoid them.

MarkTheGreat on October 30, 2009 at 2:20 PM

MarkTheGreat on October 30, 2009 at 2:20 PM

You’re just wasting your time on this troll…

ladyingray on October 30, 2009 at 2:23 PM

The vaccine line that’s started on this thread is a good example of what happens with lots of govt intervention, well-meaning, but flawed, regulation, trila lawyers espousing the causes of growing cases of autism etc are from mercury-based vaccines (even though so far there’s no clear cut conclusion on the matter so far) & the real fact that HEY: R&D costs far outweigh the profits to be made from said vaccines.
Get a clue: vaccines are expensive to produce, but they save lives.
You get what you pay for.
Cheap vaccines = cost-cutting corners.
Some stuff is worth vaccinating for, some stuff, not so much.
Risk & geography should be considered when getting a vaccine & yes, you should have to pay for it.
This nonsense about heavy govt involvement in the vaccine business is a clear model that proves we do NOT want full-fledged govt meddling in the health care industry.
If you or your child comes down with a rare or dangerous, costly illness, pay for it.
If you don’t have the $$, that is what CHARITY & GOOD NEIGHBORS are for.
My husband’s cousin has breast cancer. She was a pharmacist & unmarried & yes, she had $$. But the community got together & had many fund raising suppers for her.
When she died, she instructed that the $$ that she hadn’t spent yet from the suppers was to be given to another sick individual in the community.
Charity is for the poor & unfortunate.
That’s what communities & churches are for.
NOT the govt.

Badger40 on October 30, 2009 at 2:34 PM

If my employer doesn’t offer it, and I don’t get it, then we are both taxed for my lack of insurance. Collecting taxes for the same condition from two parties… clever thieves.

CLaFarge on October 30, 2009 at 2:35 PM

You’re just wasting your time on this troll…

ladyingray on October 30, 2009 at 2:23 PM

Fence sitter.
That’s what those kind of folks are.
They waffle back & forth.
Sometimes compromise is not acceptable, no matter the cause.

Badger40 on October 30, 2009 at 2:35 PM

clever thieves.

CLaFarge on October 30, 2009 at 2:35 PM

Thy name is Congress.

Badger40 on October 30, 2009 at 2:36 PM

I’m look for pragmatism in implementation.

Wait.

You want more pragmatism AND further government involvement?

You can’t square that circle, Ann. And Lord knows you’re trying here.

Government is by definition bureaucratic, inefficient, ineffective, forceful and cumbersome when doing things it is not explicitly authorized to do (and even so when it is following it’s limited delegated powers).

So what makes you then leap to thinking that ONLY GOVERNMENT is the answer to lowering costs it helped to drive up? What makes you think the same entity responsible for the bankrupting of the housing sector, social security, medicare, medicaid, etc., will somehow MAGICALLY be a more effective and just arbiter of resources than the free market?

Your faith in Big Brother is misplaced. The problem is that you’re trying to take that misplaced loyalty to Big Brother and force ME to follow Big Brother off the cliff with you.

No thanks.

Good Lt on October 30, 2009 at 2:41 PM

I’m look for pragmatism in implementation.
AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 2:14 PM

Trying to figure out what you mean by this:

Merriam-Webster online Dictionary
pragmatism

1 : a practical approach to problems and affairs
2 : an American movement in philosophy founded by C. S. Peirce and William James and marked by the doctrines that the meaning of conceptions is to be sought in their practical bearings, that the function of thought is to guide action, and that truth is preeminently to be tested by the practical consequences of belief

How can you be pragmatic with a system that won’t work?

Any system that is based on the principles of Statism won’t work, they have Never worked.

You need to start out with a concept that is workable, then you have a chance that you can implement it properly.

It doesn’t matter how you implement a system that is proven to fail every time, it just won’t work.

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 2:48 PM

I have absolutely no interest in living in a country that feels no moral obligation regarding the health of its citizens.

Do you really believe that having the government FORCE an action will somehow magically make everyone “feel” a moral obligation towards others?

When people REALLY feel a “moral obligation”, they do things like give to charity or build hospitals or donate free medical care or . . .

Asking government to attempt to force everyone to “feel” like you do does not create a better, more caring, more moral society, it just makes those who would be inclined to be charitable less likely to do so (because government is doing it), and those who do not feel morally obligated to become resentful.

Government action is not a magic wand that makes everyone a better person! That’s why people joke about unicorns and rainbows – reality is that there are charitable giving people and there are selfish non-caring people – nothing government does, or can do, will ever change that! No matter how hard people “hope”.

Fatal on October 30, 2009 at 2:55 PM

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 2:48 PM

Liberals believe money has magical, mystical powers of transformation.

You don’t need a working system.

All you need is money.

Just look at our public “schools”, we pour more money into those every year and get steadily declining results.

But what’s the answer? More funding.

NoDonkey on October 30, 2009 at 3:09 PM

Whatever reincarnation of their National Healthcare Bill appears, the same taxes are always there
Tax any employer who provedes fancy (more expensive) health care

Tax any employer who doesn’t provide health care

Tax any employer who does neither of the above by making him buy the health care Nacy Peolsi likes for his workers, or by making him buy healthcare from the government. Buying insurance from the governmnet for someone else is simply paying the government a tax so they can give it to someone else

Tax medical equipment. The cost of medical equipment including federal taxes goes into the bill to the insurance company, The federal government is effective collecting a tax from the health insurer, to get money to pay the health insurer to pay the tax etc. It is simply moving money from one unit of Treasury to another

The fact that this insane and fraudulent tax appears in every bill shows where we have come. The only effect I can see is a tendency to avoid ordering medical equipment if there is a limit on amount covered, simce the cost of the equipment must go up to include the excise tax, or increased hardship for the patient since they may have to pay increased out of pocket. All to cover the percent the feds want to steal from the transaction

Health Savings Accounts are the only health insurance you can accumulate and carry to new policies. That would make you more equal than the other animals on the animal farm so they could not resist the attacks on the money stash.

Greedy sobs

If Healthcare Nationalization was presented as a set of taxes tax to subsidize healthcare the public would take more notice of the fraud being perpetrated

entagor on October 30, 2009 at 3:09 PM

This all comes down to how many Americans are dumb enough to think that free health care is free. Based on how many voted for B.O., we could be screwed.

Hening on October 30, 2009 at 3:15 PM

My understanding is health care industry; clinics, hospitals, pharmaceuticals, equipment, etc. is a 2.5 trillion dollar business. For that 300 million people are covered one way or another.
.
If that were all paid for with a single tax similar to Medicare tax; the current Medicare tax would go from 2.9 (1.45 employee, 1.45 employer) percent of taxable income to 19 percent.

Dasher on October 30, 2009 at 3:21 PM

They will never tax my condoms.

faraway on October 30, 2009 at 12:41 PM

YOU LIE!

uknowmorethanme on October 30, 2009 at 3:22 PM

They will never tax my condoms.

faraway on October 30, 2009 at 12:41 PM

Exactly, I tax my condoms enough as it is.

NoDonkey on October 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM

So long as 51% of the population hasn’t learned “there ain’t no free lunch” our freedom and liberty remain in constant jeopardy. People are going to have to get fired up and maybe even a bit radical to fight the OPR tyranny agenda. Going Galt is not an option in today’s wired, connected, and surveilled world. We need to get into their faces over this crap.

Metanis on October 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM

Trust that loathsome AnneCa troll-b*^#% about as far as I could chuck her 275lb walrus ass, which is to say, 2 and a half feet if I could somehow get a running start carrying 3 stones of her lard around.

You are flinging pearls at the worst sort of swine.

The Ronin Edge on October 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM

It’s OK to admit it. You have a crush on her, don’t you. ;-)

Yoop on October 30, 2009 at 3:54 PM

So long as 51% of the population hasn’t learned “there ain’t no free lunch” our freedom and liberty remain in constant jeopardy. People are going to have to get fired up and maybe even a bit radical to fight the OPR tyranny agenda. Going Galt is not an option in today’s wired, connected, and surveillance world. We need to get into their faces over this crap.
Metanis on October 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM

I’m not sure if there is any way to convince the dumbmasses that living by plunder won’t work.

Hannity had a group from NJ on last night, and he used the phrase “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” Straight out of Marx and it floored me that a couple of people AGREED with it!

There’s plenty of different ways of ‘Going Galt’, people are going to have to get creative to stop this onslaught.

The ‘Galts’ of this country hold the key to their own enslavement, they had better think about how to use it.

Juno77 on October 30, 2009 at 4:10 PM

When statist policies get imposed, everyone pays. Everyone.

Everyone.

davidk on October 30, 2009 at 4:27 PM

What is their problem with Health Savings Account?

Cindy Munford on October 30, 2009 at 12:52 PM

You can’t take a chance on people bypassing government control.

This is a very useful reminder that Obama’s not the only fascist in DC. We’d better take back Washington in 2010, or it’ll be too late for the next president to repair the damage.

tom on October 30, 2009 at 4:27 PM

And if they said we’d all have to get neutered in order to control world population growth, then we’d go and on and about how we’re angry as hell, “when they can pry it from my cold (and I suppose bloody) dead hands”…and then roll over and give in anyway.

Ho-hum.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 30, 2009 at 4:29 PM

It’s the same thing as Obamacare. Trust us.

AnninCA on October 30, 2009 at 1:59 PM

No it ain’t Ann.

Tort reform would save 58-60 billion dollars in healthcare costs. This is a direct counter to rising healthcare costs.

Allowing you to buy insurance out of state will allow larger pools to be formed, lowering insurance costs. It also expands competition by expanding consumer choice.

Shifting the tax credit from employers to individuals would allow people the same buying power to purchase insurance as the employers, and allow people take their insurance with them when they change jobs.

The Obamacare idea is to FORCE people to pay an excise, or force people to buy insurance. Obamacare then becomes a tax on breathing.

The Obamacare idea is to put up a public option that will bankrupt private insurers. That’s their idea of expanding ‘competition’: by erasing it.

The Obamacare idea is to raise taxes, decreasing the chance that anyone will be able to afford anything… private insurance included.

You are a fool, Ann, for saying that the two are the same. You are ignorant for saying the only thing we offer is faith based. Our plans have been put out but routinely ignored by the media, by the press, by the democrats, and by Obama.

I will say no more.

Chaz706 on October 30, 2009 at 7:49 PM

“Now, the IRS can just ex post facto assume guilt and penalize the taxpayer.”

An IRS audit is one situation where the American taxpayer’s guilt has always been assumed. That is, it is implicit in an IRS audit that you have to prove your compliance with tax law.

And it is my perception that business expenses are often deemed not business related, and on a subjective basis. And I think Congress gave the IRS the authority to make regulations a long time ago.

The pot with Frogs-Are-Us will boil over if the Dem-wits get their way.

alice on October 30, 2009 at 8:04 PM

Another Obama lie(no new taxes for…) come home to roost. This man has no honor and less integrity. At some point the people of this country have got to face that the man in the WH is one huge, gabby con artist.

jeanie on October 31, 2009 at 12:56 PM

How many of these poor souls are in this country legally?

Good Lt on October 30, 2009 at 2:03 PM

Doesn’t matter in this case.

Dumping hospital patients is illegal and immoral. End of story.

So is an insurance company dumping someone that paid them for years because some bean counter did the math and realized they’d now be too expensive…but I suppose that’s another argument for another day.

Dark-Star on October 31, 2009 at 1:10 PM

I have absolutely no interest in living in a country that feels no moral obligation regarding the health of its citizens.

I dont feel its a question of whether the Government “feels” a moral obligation to the health of its citizens or not. Its more a question of whether its Governments role to babysit its citizens or allow them to succeed or fail on their own. The citizens of this country should be able to survive without a government hand out and certainly will be better off without a forced one. It is not Governments role to ensure 100% success or perfect health. The role is to step back and allow the citizen the choice to succeed or fail or propigate good health or waste away on his or her own.

Koa on October 31, 2009 at 4:40 PM

\”End of story\” is an immature conclusion when there are other moral questions involved.

The assumption that there is one moral way for a country to work, that you know it, and we are to be forced into it, is immoral, as well as incredibly egotistical.

jodetoad on October 31, 2009 at 4:48 PM

Actually, Michelle Obama created and supervised a dump patients policy at a hospital she worked in Chicago. Of course, those actions are probably sealed now just like your favorite jerk, Obama’s records. That’s directed at leftists who troll here.

rlwo2008 on October 31, 2009 at 5:56 PM

Actually, Michelle Obama created and supervised a dump patients policy at a hospital she worked in Chicago.

rlwo2008 on October 31, 2009 at 5:56 PM

And now she wants (and may get) complete, uncontested government control of healthcare on a national basis. Wonderful.

Dark-Star on October 31, 2009 at 6:39 PM

First, they want to tax you so much you wish you were dead; Then the health care you get from these people will grant your wish!
What more could you ask for?

Cybergeezer on November 1, 2009 at 9:19 AM

As a direct comparison as to what these Democrat Communists want to accomplish:
Lets free all inmates of American prisons and let them control the law enforcement of the United States;
Then empty all the insane asylums and let them administer the mental health of all U. S. Citizens;
Turn over the U.S. economy to the Taliban for fiduciary responsibility;
Makes perfect sense to the Democrats!

Cybergeezer on November 1, 2009 at 9:26 AM

get out from behind your keyboards and join Michelle Bachmann on the steps of the Capitol this Thursday, Nov. 5th at noon, for her press conference and Healthcare housecall on congress. We will flood the halls of the congressional office buildings, seeking out our representatives to remind them that we are watching and that we don’t like what we are seeing coming out of the backrooms, in the form of government takeover of healthcare. We’re making it a day trip from NC. A sick day to save our freedom. contact your local tea parties and 9-12 groups. Be able to tell your kids and grandkids that you did everything possible, including a day off from work, to save their freedom. Here’s the clip of Rep. Bachmann’s request.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8_XcSHHxDk

tmedlin on November 1, 2009 at 10:54 AM

DOCTOR’S ORDERS
Republicans warn: Rationing medicine has already begun
Obama extends health care act blamed for costing AIDS patients their lives
Posted: October 30, 2009
11:35 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.

President Obama today extended a federal AIDS program that an unlikely pair of Republicans – one blasted for being “anti-gay” and the other chairman of an organization for homosexual conservatives – criticized earlier this month as a foreshadow of the rationing and waiting lists sure to come if the U.S. adopts even more government-run health care programs.

In a ceremony this morning, Obama signed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act, which continues a federal program that provides up to $2.5 billion annually in medication for AIDS patients.

The move was lauded by many homosexual advocates, including Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese, who called the extension a “tremendous step” on behalf of people with HIV and AIDS.

But in a joint opinion piece called “Govt.-Run Health Care Isn’t the Answer,” published in the online version of The Advocate, a leading homosexual magazine, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and GOProud’s Christopher R. Barron warned the homosexual community that the Ryan White CARE Act has already demonstrated how government-run health care has introduced rationing and waiting lists and cost the lives of the people under its provisions.

Send Congress a message – no government health care, or you’re outta there – through WND’s exclusive “Send Congress a Pink Slip” campaign!

“The federal government will spend $15 billion on AIDS treatment alone this year,” wrote Coburn and Barron, “yet due to the inefficiencies of the public-run program, thousands will not receive appropriate care.”

The Republicans leveled a list of accusations against the government program Obama extended and the recipient of most of its spending, the AIDS Drug Assistance Program, or ADAP. They alleged:

* “In recent years, two patients in West Virginia and five in Kentucky died while awaiting care on waiting lists for the RWCA AIDS Drug Assistance Program.

* “Today there are 247 Americans on waiting lists for lifesaving AIDS drugs in eight states. The number is expected to reach 500 by Christmas.

* “Many other ADAP patients, while receiving care, are being denied the best treatment. Fuzeon, the AIDS drug of last resort that has been successful in treating patients who no longer benefit from other drugs, for example, has been denied to ADAP patients in our nation’s capital.

* “The Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector found that tens of millions of dollars were going unspent at the same time as patients languished on ADAP waiting lists.

* “Millions of dollars have been misspent on beachside junkets by AIDS executives and bureaucrats or lost to fraud and abuse.

* “Investigation by the Government Accountability Office found that the program was overpaying for many of the drugs it provided.”

“These bureaucratic inefficiencies and mismanagement have literally cost lives,” the unlikely Republican pairing summarized. “The attractiveness of a public plan to ensure care for those with no insurance is understandable. But as we have seen with ADAP, a public health program is not a panacea.”

(Story continues below)

The Republicans’ appeal to the homosexual community – whose activists often take up the cause of advocating assistance for AIDS patients – has been met mostly with fierce criticism, in part because of Coburn’s reputation on homosexual issues.

“Of all the people to write an op-ed for The Advocate, why Tom Coburn?” commented Jason Linkins of the Huffington Post. “Coburn has opposed gay marriage, gay adoption and anonymous HIV testing, and he has called the ‘gay agenda’ the ‘greatest threat to our freedom that we face today.’”

In fact, the Human Rights Campaign, the largest national lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, as recently as 2006 gave Coburn a zero rating on its scale of homosexual issues pending before the legislature.

Comments on The Advocate’s website turned outright angry:

“I can’t figure out what’s more repulsive, a gay ‘leader’ teaming up with a loud-mouth ignorant bigot like Tom Coburn or the Advocate providing the two of them a platform,” spouted a post from David La Fontaine, reportedly of Philadelphia.

David Hamburger, reportedly of Boston, added, “Why would anyone listen to what a homophobe and gay traitor say about health care and HIV/AIDS? If the Republicans would actually support spending more money on HIV/AIDS and on health care in general, then we wouldn’t have any of this rationing they’re complaining about.”

James Kirchick, a contributing writer to The Advocate, however, praised Barron for teaming with Coburn in making his appeal.

“If there is to be progress in this country on gay rights,” Kirchick wrote in the New Republic, “Republicans, and conservative ones especially, are going to have to be a part of it.”

Coburn and Barron concluded the op-ed by pointing out that RWCA and ADAP aren’t the only government-run health care programs to suffer inefficiency.

“Medicare only recently began offering seniors prescription drug coverage that had long been covered by private plans, and no one would claim that those in Medicaid are receiving the best possible care,” the Republicans wrote. “Indeed, 40 percent of doctors currently refuse to treat Medicaid patients. Medicare teeters on the verge of bankruptcy, Medicaid is bankrupting state budgets and both programs are rife with billions of dollars of waste, fraud and abuse.”

Instead of more government-run health care, the op-ed proposes prohibiting insurance companies from refusing customers with preexisting conditions, allowing all Americans the same choices of health care coverage enjoyed by members of Congress and passing the Patients’ Choice Act.

“We can and should work to make sure that every man, woman and child in this country has access to quality, affordable health care,” they conclude. “We can do it without creating an inefficient and expensive government program, and we can do it in such a way that empowers individuals to take control of their own health care.”

nondhimmie on November 1, 2009 at 2:02 PM

Since the spending for this fiasco starts several years after the tax collection, how much you want to bet the libs spend it all before the costs kick in? Of course, then they will have to raise taxes to make up the shortfall. Unless doctors and hospitals will take a IOU.

Kissmygrits on November 2, 2009 at 10:57 AM

Comment pages: 1 2