Natural News Store

Monday, July 27, 2009

As the People Grow More Desperate...A Constitution in FULL Crisis

By JB Williams  Thursday, July 23, 2009

America’s extreme left tricked American moderates into supporting their candidate last November by campaigning on post-partisan cooperation and transparency in government. Six months after the election of a freshman senator with a blank résumé, a laundry list of evil associates and a life more secret than your average CIA agent, Obama’s entire history remains a mystery and his administration is the most hardcore partisan dictatorship ever experienced in the USA.
Washington DC partisanship has turned into outright Obama-Pelosi dictatorship. The so-called “Commander-in-Chief” is fast losing control of his military, which is increasingly and viciously divided between those who are refusing to take orders from an overt enemy of the Constitution, and those who foolishly defend Obama’s right to destroy that which they took an oath to protect and preserve.
Obama should have ended the divisions over his ineligibility long before it reached the ranks of American fighting forces. He chose not to, and instead to allow the issue to fester into a powder keg that even Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod are ill-prepared to extinguish.
The US Constitution is in FULL Crisis

The US Constitution is the contract between the people and their respective states, and the federal government established by it. The document was written to form a representative republic limited in power and scope to the matters and authority delegated and ratified in the Constitution. That contract has been breached by a runaway Fed…
Decades of outright destruction of the Constitution have left the nation on the brink of economic, political and social collapse. The 2006 and 2008 election cycles placed the Constitution in full crisis and the people are growing increasingly desperate for a peaceful means to restore their Constitutional Republic.
An administration which does not meet constitutional standards is expected to protect and defend a contract which it does not even recognize, much less respect. The contract either stands, or it doesn’t. Based on the 2008 election, and every policy put in place since, the contract does not stand at present. If the Constitution no longer stands, then the federal government which it established, no longer stands in authority. Tyranny reigns… 

The States Take Action

Ignored by federal public servants and cut off from any access to peaceful means of redress in congress or the courts, the people and their states are forced to take matters into their own hands.
A “constitutional” interpretation of the Constitution is in order, as the people begin to demand that a runaway Fed blatantly acting against the best interest of its people, return to a constitutional foundation, or risk being stripped of all power and abolished.
The federal government is the product of the Constitutionthe contract between the people and their states which established and assigned specific limited powers to the federal government, which is to serve at the pleasure of the states and the people.
If the Constitution no longer stands, then there is NO federal government. The federal government exists only as a result of the Constitution. A very real crisis is at hand…
As a result, more than 32 states are rushing to pass Tenth Amendment legislation intended to remind the federal government of this reality. But the Obama regime is not listening.
Many of those states are also passing second amendment protections for their citizens, making it illegal for the Fed to threaten private gun rights, even in cases of “Martial Law.” But the Fed has rejected all such state bills, claiming that “federal laws supersede state laws.”
Reacting to an “unconstitutional” letter from Obama’s ATF, which puts Tennessee on notice that the Fed will not recognize laws passed by the individual states under Tenth Amendment rights, Tennessee State Rep. Matthew Hill points out, --“Montana, Tennessee and all others, are SOVEREIGN states not subservient to the federal governmentThe Fed can send us letters all day long and it doesn’t change the fact that we are allowed to govern ourselves, under the 10th amendment of the US Constitution.” 

A “constitutional” interpretation of the Constitution

All constitutional text must be read within the context of Amendment Ten… which clearly states, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Does the Constitution delegate the power to “confiscate and redistribute private wealth” to the federal government?
Does it delegate power to force “Cap and Trade” or so-called “Universal Health Care” upon the people and the states?
Does it delegate the power over private industry, such as banking, auto manufacturing, energy and the likes? – Or the power to disarm American citizens under any set of circumstances, real or imaginary?
No such powers were delegated to the federal government under the US Constitution. Unlike many ill-informed US citizens, Obama & Co. knows it. But they don’t care…
Since no clause exists in the Constitution which specifically assigns any of these powers to the Fed, Amendment Ten applies… “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” 

The Second Amendment Example

Each clause of the Constitution must be read within the context of the Tenth Amendment. Power and authority is either specifically delegated to the Fed in the text of the Constitution, specifically withheld from the Fed by way of the Bill of Rights, or in the absence of any such reference to power and authority, the Tenth Amendment applies.
In the case of gun rights, the Founders specifically denied the Fed any power via the Bill of Rights, specifically prohibiting the Fed from playing around with the people’s right to keep and bear arms.
“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” –
Yet, operating in direct contradiction to this Second Amendment language, the federal government has assumed a power not assigned to it by the states, to regulate the right of the people to keep and bear arms. A case of the people’s past silence, being intentionally misinterpreted as their consent, which allowed the fed to step across boundaries it is specifically prohibited from crossing in the Bill of Rights.
As a result, the states have been forced to restate their border sovereignty and state rights in new state sponsored legislation, including Second Amendment protections for their citizens who wish to keep and bear arms, whether anti-second amendment leftists in Washington DC like it or not.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
My home state of Tennessee passed both Tenth Amendment and Second Amendmentlegislation, supported in such number as to override our Democrat governor’s attempts to veto.
But Obama’s Fed responded by issuing a letter, under his Justice Department headed by Obama buddy Eric Holder, on the letterhead of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms signed by Assistant Director Carson Carroll, advising the state that “federal laws supersede states laws.”
Like hell they do!
The states DO NOT serve at the pleasure of the FedThe Fed exists and serves at the pleasure of the states, a FACT that most states seem in a rush to point out to Obamanation.
The US Constitution supersedes both state and federal laws. Don’t confuse the US Constitution with federal laws passed by congress or passed by judicial fiat via the courts. Federal laws take precedent over state laws ONLY in matters specifically delegated to the federal government in the Constitution. If no such authority is assigned to the Fed, then no such power exists at the Fed.
When the federal government makes laws pertaining to matters NOT assigned to it under the US Constitution, which it has had a habit of doing for decades now, both in congress and in the judicial branch, the states are in NO WAY bound by those laws. Those laws are by definition, unconstitutional, no matter how they were passed.
As the Second Amendment makes it quite clear that the federal government has NO power to regulate the people’s right to keep and bear arms, and the Tenth Amendment clearly states that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”- Obama’s Fed, Justice Department and ATF, have NO constitutional authority over the states in the matter…
Tennessee State Rep. Matthew Hill is exactly right. They (the Fed) can send threatening letters all day long and those letters are completely irrelevant, as they are at odds with the Constitution. The ATF letter relates to federal laws written on matters NOT assigned to the federal government to begin with, matters therefore reserved to the states and the people under the Tenth Amendment.
Even the overly politicized US Supreme Court has recently defended Second and Tenth Amendment rights in its related rulings.
The Question of Enforcement

Clearly, Obama and Co. think they won the right to run roughshod over the states and the people last fall. If our Founders had given us a pure democracy, they would be right. But in a Constitutional Representative Republic, they are dead wrong!
Still, it’s also clear that they intend to force their will upon the masses, regardless of public or state dissent, or constitutional limitations. The “silent majority” has been silent for so long, that modern leftist think that they are now the new majority, free to run roughshod over the new “silent minority.”
Under this fantasy, they proclaim the right to ram their leftist agenda down everyone else’s throat. “We won - you lost—so shut up and take it!”… is the general sentiment displayed by O-bots on message boards across the blogosphere…
That sentiment has now reached within the ranks of the US Military, where a growing number of soldiers are beginning to challenge Obama’s right to issue orders and Obama minions are publicly attacking them with a vengeance. The heated chatter got so vicious on last week, that the publication removed ALL comments on the subject from its web site before the discussion could spin out of control.
Active duty soldiers are refusing Obama orders. Reservists are refusing recall and deployment orders. Retired Navy Commander Walter Fitzpatrick has filed criminal “treason” charges against Obama. Flight Surgeon, Lt. Col. Dr. David Earl-Graeff has sent a letter to Sec. of Defense Gates, stating the following…
“Enough is enough! You must be aware at this point of the tempest brewing among the Rank and File. I am writing you in an effort to appeal to your sense of concern for the Military; a concern we share not only for the Military as a whole but for each and every individual who wears the Uniform in the Service of our Country. I am in this regard specifically asking you for your help. I implore you to not wait until the “pot boils over” and we find ourselves in total disarray. –
I am convinced, beyond any doubt, that the moral well being and efficiency of our fighting forces to defend our Country is soon to be hanging in a precarious balance if not already. In my humble estimation this is NOT a theoretical possibility to construct a thesis or a contingency plan about. It is a reality and is happening right now. Resolution of this issue must be accomplished in the most expeditious manner available at your disposal to gain immediate relief to those of us who are struggling to fully comply with our sworn Oath to the Constitution while being conflicted by questions relating to the qualifications of the POTUS to hold the office in full and absolute compliance with the Natural Born Citizen Clause.”
So, how does Obama plan to enforce his global vision upon the masses when the US Constitution which provides for a federal government, delegates no such authority and an increasing number of soldiers and law enforcement are taking a stand against a “potential domestic enemy” in an effort to uphold their oath to protect and defend the US Constitution? 

Once Silent running out of Tolerance

Convinced that the Constitution is under constant threat from within today, Americans normally happy to avoid the subject of politics altogether are building a head of steam to thwart the current constitutional crisis. They are erecting lines of defense at the state borders before Obama can capitalize on one of his many manufactured disasters by removing the people’s right to stand opposed.His Department of Homeland Security has already redefined “domestic terrorist” to include anyone who disagrees with Obama. His minions have already labeled anyone concerned with the Constitution, “birthers,” in a childish name-calling effort to silence the dissent. His left-wing press has affixed the title of “racist” to anyone who dare doubt Obama’s anti-American Marxist agenda, or his mystery messiah status.
Pelosi has made certain that Republicans have no voice in congress and Holder has made certain that the people will not find a legal forum to resolve Obama’s overt agenda or hidden past in any court.
Growing increasingly desperate to restore the Constitution and fast running out of peaceful means of doing so, the people find themselves in a very real Constitutional Crisis. 

Peacefully Forcing the Fed to Reverse Course

With a tone deaf Fed, the people are turning to their state legislators and the states are moving to close down the Fed. Led by the Tenth Amendment Center, state legislators are rushing to reclaim freedom and liberty on behalf of their citizens.

    Step One – Tenth Amendment Affirmation

    Step Two – Second Amendment Affirmation

    Step Three – Kicking the Fed out of the States

    Step Four – Shutting down the Fed by cutting off 97% of Fed funding by repeal of the 16th Amendment

    Step Five – Repeal of the 17th Amendment, removing every current member of the senate and sending new representatives of states right to establish a new constitutional senate.

    Step Six – cleaning house in Washington DC and establishing a constitutional limited government which will once again serve at the pleasure and benefit of the states and the people
Unlike drug rehab, it doesn’t take twelve steps to reinstate a constitutional Fed, although it could take a twelve step program to break many modern Democrats addiction to free-stuff from the public trough.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...”
If the people fail to quickly alter a Fed run wild, via their state legislatures, they will be left with no option but to abolish and start over from scratch.Republicans in Washington DC have either lost their way or lost their nerve. As a result, they have lost all power.
But Republicans, Independents and even Blue Dog Democrats across the nation in state legislatures, are acting in defense of their citizens and the Constitution, and the people MUST take a stand with those state legislators, immediately.
Visit the Tenth Amendment Center for an up-to-date picture of where your state stands in the march to reclaim states rights and reign in the runaway Fed.Contact your state legislators and get behind their efforts to affirm state sovereignty and rights. Even Obama does not have the power to force his will upon fifty states who stand united and opposed!

JB Williams Most recent columns
JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. JB Williams’ website is Williams can be reached at: JB_Williams@comcast.netOlder articles by JB Williams

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Brzezinski: New 9/11 To Be Blamed On Iran

This man, Zbigniew Brzezinski, is a major U.S. and global Power Broker. Either he is giving us a clandestine warning or he has made a howling error. In either case he should be questioned under oath about these comments and their implications. What he says here is basically an admission of State-Sponsored False-Flag Terrorism being practiced within the U.S. No surprises there.

Friday, July 24, 2009

FDA Threatens to Seize All Natural Products that Dare to Mention H1N1 Swine Flu...but untested vaccines are safe!?

Thursday, June 18, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

the FDA

(NaturalNews) In an effort to censor any online text that might inform consumers of the ability of natural products to protect consumers from H1N1 influenza A, the FDA is now sending out a round of warning letters, threatening to "take enforcement action... such as seizure or injunction for violations of the FFDC Act without further notice."

"Firms that fail to take correction action," the FDA warns, "may also be referred to the FDA's Office of Criminal Investigations for possible criminal prosecution for violations of the FFDC Act and other federal laws."

The message is crystal clear: No product may be described as protecting against or preventing H1N1 infections unless it is approved by the FDA. And which products has the FDA approved? Tamiflu (the anti-viral drug that most people will never have access to), and soon the new H1N1 vaccine that's being manufactured at a cost of one billion dollars (paid to Big Pharma by the taxpayers). This vaccine, of course, will be utterly useless because H1N1 will undoubtedly mutate between now and the time the vaccine is ready, rendering the vaccine useless.

In other words, according to the tyrants at the FDA, the only products that may be marketed alongside the term "H1N1" are those products that either don't work or aren't available to most people. Anything that really works to prevent influenza infections -- such as natural anti-virals, medicinal herbs, etc. -- is banned from even mentioning H1N1 without the threat of being criminally prosecuted.

Note: I reveal the five most powerful natural anti-viral remedies in a free report you can read here:

Such are the operations of our U.S. Food and Drug Administration -- a criminal organization that's working hard to do what every criminal organization does: Eliminate the competition! As the defender of Big Pharma, the FDA is also the destroyer of knowledge that seeks to remove educational statements from the internet. Truth has nothing to do with it -- it is verifiably true that anti-viral herbs, probiotics and other natural products help protect consumers from influenza -- but the FDA cannot allow such statements to remain online for the simple fact that people might become informed. And that, it seems, would be a dangerous precedent.

If people were informed about the healing and protective powers of herbs, they would no longer remain enslaved by the medical establishment. Profits would be lost. Power would evaporate. This is why people can never be allowed to attain any real knowledge about herbs, superfoods or nutritional supplements. And the FDA will threaten people with imprisonment just to make sure they don't dare publish knowledge that the FDA does not want the people to see.

Targeted by the FDAWho is being attacked and threatened by the FDA? Lots of companies offering highly-effective natural remedies. You can see a list of some of the companies being targeted right here:

Byron Richards' company Wellness Resources, a favorite target of the FDA (no doubt because Richards wrote a book attacking the FDA), is also targeted in this censorship campaign. You can see the FDA's ridiculous complaint against his company here:

The FDA sends similar letters to other companies, invoking terrorizing language designed to scare companies into self-censorship. This is the FDA's key strategy, and it largely works: Most companies are scared to death to take a stand against the FDA because the ones that do end up being shut down, with their owners arrested at gunpoint and thrown in prison.

This is how natural medicine advocates are treated in the United States of America, the "land of the free and the home of the brave." (It is really the land of the enslaved and the home of the cowards who don't even have the courage to protest in the streets anymore...)

This is how the FDA secretly intimidates the natural products industry: It sends threatening letters to anyone who dares tell the truth about a natural product they sell. While pharmaceuticals can openly and brazenly lie about their supposed benefits, natural product companies aren't even allowed to state obvious truths about their products! (Like "Vitamin C helps prevent colds" or "Omega-3 oils improve moods.")

Note, carefully, that the FDA openly brands the people promoting natural anti-viral products as "criminals." The language from the FDA's own website says it is listing "Web sites that are illegally marketing unapproved, uncleared, or unauthorized products in relation to the 2009 H1N1 Flu Virus."

In reality, this FDA list is a really good list of highly effective natural products that can protect you from Swine Flu. Many of the companies on the list, in fact, offer products that are far more effective than any vaccine or Big Pharma anti-viral drug. And that, by the way, is precisely why the FDA must accuse these companies of being criminals: Products that effectively compete with Big Pharma's drugs simply cannot be allowed to exist in the marketplace!

This is all about destroying the competition, limiting consumer options and censoring truthful health information on the internet.

And it's all paid for by your tax dollars, by the way. This is a government operation taking place under the Obama Administration, which apparently continues in the Bush Administration's footsteps when it comes to destroying the natural products industry and leaving consumers helpless in the next great pandemic.

Learn what the FDA hopes you never find out: Read my free report on the five most powerful anti-viral products for beating swine flu:

FDA Fraudulent 2009 H1N1 Influenza Products List:

The New Mr. America: Bankrupt, Diseased and Running Out of Options

Friday, July 24, 2009 by: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) With a military rifle in one hand and a bottle of prescription medications in the other, the new "Mr. America" is over-fed, under-nourished, over-medicated, over-spent and "over there" (waging war in the Middle East). And soon, with Obama's new disease care reform proposals, America will find itself destitute and diseased, unable to climb out of the medication dependence pit it has dug for itself.

See the political cartoon on this topic here:

To understand why this is true from a financial point of view, take a look at these numbers:

If you read the actual federal budget for 2009, it's an astonishing $3.1 trillion. The size of the number itself is mind-boggling, but it's even more disturbing when you realize just how much of the federal budget is spent on these three things:


In fact, let me ask you this question right now: What percentage of the federal budget do you think is spent on these three things? War, Disease and Debt.

Is it 10 percent? Twenty-five percent? Fifty percent?

Keep going...

Of course, if you actually work in Washington, you won't even describe these as "War, Disease and Debt." Instead, you call them:


It all sounds much nicer when phrased that way. But these terms are intentionally deceptive. We're not really "defending" our way into Iraq, Afghanistan and seventy-five other countries where we have a military presence. Spending on "health care" doesn't have anything to do with health (it's all about disease). And people who say spending more debt money to "help the economy" are mathematical retards. You can't get yourself out of debt by spending more money (even though V.P. Joe Biden insists you can...).

So are you ready for the actual number?

It's an eye-opener. The actual percentage of the U.S. federal budget spent on WAR, DISEASE and DEBT is 87 percent.

Here's how it breaks down according to publicly-available numbers: (Source =,_2009 )

Total U.S. Federal Budget for 2009: $3.1 trillion

1) WAR: Department of Defense ($515.4 billion) + War on Terror ($145.2 billion) + Dept. of Veterans Affairs ($44.8 billion) + Dept. of Homeland Security ($37.6 billion) = $743 billion

2) DISEASE: Medicare ($408 billion) + Medicaid ($224 billion) + Dept. of Health and Human Services ($70 billion) =$702 billion

3) DEBT: Debt to the people: Social Security ($644 billion), Social Security Administration ($8.4 billion), Welfare ($360 billion) and Interest on National Debt ($260 billion) = $1,272 billion

(Note: This does not even include the financial cost of the War on Iraq or the War in Afghanistan, as those are budgeted separately as appropriations and are not included in the Dept. of Defense budget. So the actual numbers are far worse than what's shown here...)

Combined spending on War, Disease and Debt: $2,717 billion ($2.7 trillion), which is 87% of the total expenditures by the federal government ($3.1 trillion). 

How do you dig yourself out of this hole?For every tax dollar you send to Washington (and it's about to become a whole lot more of 'em), 87 cents gets spent on war, disease and debt. That leaves just 13 cents on the dollar for roads, schools, parks, technology, science, the environment, adult education and other programs.

If you spent 87% of your own household income on war, disease and debt, leaving only 13 cents on the dollar for food, clothing, transportation and entertainment, how long would your own finances stay solvent? Not very long...

It doesn't take a financial genius to realize that the United States of America has dug itself into a financial trench so deep and so infected with really bad planning that there is virtually no way it can get out. As a result, the American people are increasingly bankrupt, diseased and homeless. (I predict a new wave of tent cities springing up across the American landscape as increasing numbers of Americans lose their jobs and their homes.)

"Mr. America" is burned out, stressed out, tapped out and about to be rubbed out.

It is only a matter of time before economic reality sets in and the American people find their currency is phased out, too.

An economic prison to keep you trapped and pennilessIt's easy to see this from afar (from South America, in my case, where I live full time): America is living in a fantasy world, where the laws of economics have been (temporarily) suspended. There's no such thing as too much spending. No such thing as too many prescription drugs or vaccines. No such thing as too much war. It's all justifiable by the relentless fools in Washington who claim, "We saved the economy!"

Because, you see, we are past the point of dealing with reality in America. There will be no saving the nation from financial demise. There will be no meaningful health care reform. There will be no real changes that preserve your freedom or your bank account. Instead, one hundred percent of the efforts are now focused on preserving the illusionsthat keep America artificially propped up like a morbid human puppet.

The new Congressional bills, the financial bailouts, the empty talk of health care reform -- these are all designed to distract you from the sobering, unavoidable and simple truth: That you are a slave, Neo. Like everyone else, you were born into bondage, born inside a prison that you cannot smell, taste, or touch. A prison for your mind. [Recognize it?]

That prison keeps you working 60-hour weeks. It keeps you paying your taxes. It keeps you medicated and indoctrinated like a slobbering idiot who buys brand-name products because the logos seem somehow emotionally familiar (TV programming). It keeps you slaving away your precious hours, shoveling the fruits of your labor into a mindless, heartless machine of Big Government that has already mortgaged your assets, sacrificed your health and stolen your future.

And there's always a seductive motivation beckoning you to sacrifice more. If you only work another job, you'll be able to afford that giant TV screen you've always wanted. Here's a credit card to make it easy, or you can just sign over your home. Here, take this vaccine shot for your own protection. Vote for me, and I'll give you free health care. I'll stabilize the economy by spending future generations into yet more debt. Don't worry about paying anything back... we'll let the next President deal with that.

The fraud continues, year after year, with new faces and names at the helm, but the same old failed thinking at the core. You cannot spend your way to prosperity, you must SAVE your way there. You cannot make a population healthy by drugging more people. You cannot make peace by waging war. And you cannot make a nation great by abandoning the real needs of the people and selling out to corporations and their lobbyists.

Sadly, while Mr. America was once a healthy, thriving, hard-working individual, he's now a jobless, indebted medicated heart patient with a caffeine habit and an upside-down mortgage on the home he's about to lose. And the worst part is that the lawmakers in Washington are doing everything in their power to make sure Mr. America stays that way.

About the author: Mike Adams is a consumer health advocate with a strong interest in personal health, the environment and the power of nature to help us all heal He has authored and published thousands of articles, interviews, consumers guides, and books on topics like health and the environment, reaching millions of readers with information that is saving lives and improving personal health around the world. Adams is an independent journalist with strong ethics who does not get paid to write articles about any product or company. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a maker of energy efficient LED lights that greatly reduce CO2 emissions. He also launched an online retailer of environmentally-friendly products ( and uses a portion of its profits to help fund non-profit endeavors. He's also the founder and CEO of a well known email mail merge software developer whose software, 'Email Marketing Director,' currently runs the NaturalNews email subscriptions. Adams also serves as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a non-profit consumer protection group, and enjoys outdoor activities, nature photography, Pilates and adult gymnastics.

Thursday, July 23, 2009


For those who do manage to keep their current insurance -- well, it won't cost $2,500 less, as Obama promised. Lewin estimates it will cost $460 a year more because of new cost-shifting from the government-run plan to private health plans.

That's right. The $1.3 trillion House health-care bill would cause millions of Americans to lose the insurance they have now -- while the rest of us would pay even more than we do now.

Faced with onerous new regulations and the possibility of heavy fines, employers might choose the simpler -- and legally safer -- route of dropping their health plans entirely and simply paying the new 8 percent payroll tax, which will be levied on employers who don't provide the government-approved health insurance.

Jam the phone lines TODAY! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202)224-3121 and ask for your Representative to STOP the criminal forced health"care" legislation that will rob everyone of us blind!!




July 22, 2009 
Posted: 1:00 am
July 22, 2009

Obama: Breaking oft-repeated promises.

AT tonight's press conference, someone should ask President Obama why he's endorsing, and not threatening to veto, the 1,018-page House health-care reform bill now being rushed to passage: It breaks nearly all his core promises about health-care reform.

"If you have health insurance, then you don't have to do anything," Obama said on Oct. 15, 2008. "If you've got health insurance through your employer, you can keep your health insurance, keep your choice of doctor, keep your plan. . . 

And we estimate we can cut the average family's premium by about $2,500 per year."

Both these solemn pledges, repeated often ever since and as recently as yesterday, are violated in the House bill. Its perverse incentives, plus the onerous regulations Congress plans to impose on employer-provided insurance, would cause more than half of those with employer-provided insurance to lose it -- 83.4 million Americans, according to The Lewin Group, a prominent, politically neutral health-care analysis firm.

And for those who do manage to keep their current insurance -- well, it won't cost $2,500 less, as Obama promised. Lewin estimates it will cost $460 a year more because of new cost-shifting from the government-run plan to private health plans.That's right. The $1.3 trillion House health-care bill would cause millions of Americans to lose the insurance they have now -- while the rest of us would pay even more than we do now.

Most of those who lose their current insurance would be enrolled in Congress' newly created government-run health plan. The health benefits these Americans get would be decided by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, based on the recommendations of a newly created Health Benefits Advisory Committee. The HHS team would decide, year by year, what health-care benefits you would and would not get in the government-approved package.

Change we can believe in, huh?

Congress would authorize the HHS secretary to pay doctors and hospitals who participate in its health plan on the basis of Medicare rates, plus 5 percent.

But Medicare rates are much lower than those in private insurance -- 19 percent lower for doctors and 32 percent lower for hospitals. So the plan means big cuts in payments to health-care providers. They'd try to cover part of their losses by charging more to the private plans still left.

Doctors would lose -- big time. Based on the projected number of people forced out of private insurance and into the public plan, the Lewin Group estimates that physicians will lose $13.4 billion in net income -- equivalent to an average pay cut of 6.3 percent.

Hospitals would be hit even harder, losing $67 billion in revenue. That's more than the total net cash flow of all the hospitals in the country. Facing bankruptcy, a lot of hospitals might have to close their doors.

It could get worse. The Lewin Group's estimate of the rise in premiums only accounts for the possibility that doctors and hospitals would try to raise prices on the privately insured to make up for their losses from patients in the new public plan.

But there's another reason why private insurance premiums might increase even more: The House bill also creates a new office with the Orwellian title "Health Choices Commissioner." After a five-year "grace" period, employer-sponsored private health plans would be subject to approval by this commissioner.

The commissioner would be empowered to set benefit levels, decide what services will be covered regardless of the preferences of patients and otherwise set standards for private health plans. These mandates are all likely to increase health-care costs and therefore private insurance premiums.

Those standards aren't specified in the bill and may never be debated in Congress. They are up to the discretion of the "Choices" commissioner -- who will, of course, limit your choices to "acceptable" plans only.

Your employer's health plan might not be deemed "qualified." In that case, your employer could be fined, and even prohibited from enrolling new employees until the commissioner is satisfied that the violation "has been corrected and is not likely to recur." More change you can believe in . . .

Faced with onerous new regulations and the possibility of heavy fines, employers might choose the simpler -- and legally safer -- route of dropping their health plans entirely and simply paying the new 8 percent payroll tax, which will be levied on employers who don't provide the government-approved health insurance.

In fact, for most employers, paying this tax will be cheaper than paying for the company-based insurance even at today's prices. If the Health "Choices" Commissioner's yet unspecified standards turn out to be sufficiently onerous, Americans could end up with single-payer health care -- universal government health insurance -- by default.

Perhaps that's the idea?

Faced with payments that don't cover their expenses, and fewer and fewer private insurers to shoulder the costs, expect even more hospitals to close and more doctors to choose early retirement or another profession.

But at least if they could find a doctor, the House bill would cover every American with something, right? No -- according to Lewin, 16.5 million Americans would still be left uninsured.

This is bad medicine, that will take an already ailing health-care system and render it severely dysfunctional.

Robert A. Book is the senior research fellow in Health Economics at The Heritage Foundation (, where Robert E. Moffit directs the Center for Health Policy Studies.

Does OBAMA and the House really want to raise taxes on eight million uninsured people? YES!!!

Jam the phone lines TODAY! Call the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202)224-3121 and ask for your Representative to STOP the criminal forced health"care" legislation that will rob everyone of us blind!!

As expected, the House bill would MANDATE that individuals and families have or buy health insurance. And for those who do manage to keep their current insurance -- it will cost you...A LOT MORE!

Posted on July 14th, 2009 by kbh in featuredhealthtaxes 

The President has said he would not allow taxes to be raised on anyone with less than $250,000 of income.
Today for the first time we see the legislative language for and a summary of the health care reform bill that House Democrats intend to try to pass before the August recess.  The following is based on an initial quick scan of the bill and studying a few key sections.  I have been wondering how the drafters were going to solve the problem I am about to describe.  As best I can tell, they didn’t solve it.

As expected, the House bill would mandate that individuals and families have or buy health insurance.
But what if they don’t buy it?
Then Section 401 kicks in.  Any individual (or family) that does not have health insurance would have to pay a new tax, roughly equal to the smaller of 2.5% of your income or the cost of a health insurance plan.
[ Technical note:  From the legislative language, it appears the tax = min( 2.5% * (modified AGI – personal exemption), average premium cost).  In the examples below, for simplicity I assume modified AGI = AGI. ]
I assume the bill authors would respond, “But why wouldn’t you want insurance?  After all, we’re subsidizing it for everyone up to 400% of the poverty line.”
That is true.  But if you’re a single person with income of $44,000 or higher, then you’re above 400% of the poverty line.  You would not be subsidized, but would face the punitive tax if you didn’t get health insurance.  This bill leaves an important gap between the subsidies and the cost of health insurance.  CBO says that for about eight million people, that gap is too big to close, and they would get stuck paying higher taxes and still without health insurance.

Example 1:
Bob is single and earns $50K per year.  He earns more than four times the federal poverty level, so he does not qualify for subsidies under the House bill.
Bob works for a five-person small business that does not provide him with health insurance.  His $50K wage is average for this company, which therefore does not qualify for the new small business tax credits.
This company is small enough that they do not have to pay the IRS any fee for not providing Bob with health insurance.  (See the table on page 184.)
With only $50K of income, Bob cannot afford to buy health insurance.  Under the House bill, he would then have to pay about $1,150 per year in higher taxes to the government.  That’s 2.5% of (his income minus a $3,650 personal exemption).
I went shopping for Bob on  He is 50 years old and a non-smoker, living where I do in Virginia.  The cheapest bare bones policy he can get is $1,620 per year.  Most plans are in the $3K – $5K range.  That $470 difference between the tax and the cheapest premium is more than Bob can afford on a $50K pre-tax annual wage.
To summarize, under the House bill:
    Bob is a single 50-year old non-smoking small business employee who makes $50K per year before taxes and does not have health insurance.
    Bob cannot afford a $1,600 bare bones health insurance policy, much less a $3K — $5K policy.
    Bob would get no subsidies under this bill, and his employer would face no penalty for not providing him with health insurance.
    Bob would end up without health insurance and would have to pay $1,150 more in taxes.

Example 2:
Freddy and Kelsey are married with two kids.  They earn $90K per year.  They earn more than four times the federal poverty level, and therefore do not qualify for subsidies under the House bill.
Freddy and Kelsey own and run a small tourist shop in Orlando, Florida.  They are the only two employees.  Their wages exceed the amounts that would qualify them for small business tax credits under the House bill.
Because their business is so small, the House bill would impose no financial penalty for not complying with the employer mandate.  Even if they did, the tax penalty would come out of their own bottom line, since the two of them are the business.
Freddy and Kelsey are both 40 years old.  They have a 15-year old son and a 12-year old daughter.  None of them smoke.
Shopping on eHealthInsurance, the cheapest plan I could find for them is a high-deductible PPO plan with a $6,000 annual deductible.  That would cost them more than $3,800 per year.  And it’s a bare-bones plan.
They can’t afford that.  Maybe they are recovering from a hurricane, or dealing with the real estate collapse in Florida.  They are also saving for their kids’ college, which is only a few years away.  Even with $90K of income, money is tight for a family of four.
If they cannot afford the (at least) $3,800 in health insurance premiums, then the House bill would make them pay more than $2,050 in higher taxes.
To summarize, under the House bill:
    Freddy and Kelsey are a 40-year old couple with two kids.  They own and run a small tourist shop in Orlando, Florida.
    They are the only employees, and earn a combined $90K per year.
    They cannot afford even an inexpensive health insurance plan, and so the House bill would make them pay $2,050 in higher taxes.

These two examples show the difficulty of making an individual mandate work.  To get people to comply with the mandate, you have to impose a significant tax penalty on those who don’t comply.  This will change the calculation for many who were previously uninsured – they will buy health insurance, because the delta between the cost of having insurance and the tax penalty cost of not having it has shrunk, so they might as well buy it.
The bigger this gap, the fewer people will switch.  And for those who do not or cannot comply with the mandate, they end up in the worst of all worlds – uninsured and paying higher taxes.
From CBO’s new tables, it appears that about eight million U.S. citizens would fall into this category.  I expect that very few of these people would have more than $250,000 of income, the no-tax-increase line defined by the President.
I expect the House Democrats will emphasize that their bill would result in 97 percent of U.S. citizens having coverage.  Those other three percent, however, really get shafted, and that’s about eight million people.
If the President were to sign such a bill into law, I cannot figure out how his team could reconcile this consequence with his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class.
But without the tax penalty, the mandate isn’t effective, and the number of resulting uninsured goes way up.
The House bill drafters have made a hard policy choice.  It is important that Members of Congress and the public understand the benefits and the costs of the approach they have chosen.

Thanks to a friend for pointing this out: We know the President understands this point.  Here is then-Senator Obama in a debate with then-Senator Clinton on February 21, 2008, opposing her proposal for a universal individual mandate to purchase health insurance (emphasis added):
SENATOR OBAMA:  Number one, understand that when Senator Clinton says a mandate, it’s not a mandate on government to provide health insurance, it’s a mandate on individuals to purchase it. And Senator Clinton is right; we have to find out what works.
Now, Massachusetts has a mandate right now. They have exempted 20 percent of the uninsured because they have concluded that that 20 percent can’t afford it.
In some cases, there are people who are paying fines and still can’t afford it, so now they’re worse off than they were. They don’t have health insurance and they’re paying a fine.
In order for you to force people to get health insurance, you’ve got to have a very harsh penalty, and Senator Clinton has said that we won’t go after their wages. Now, this is a substantive difference. But understand that both of us seek to get universal health care. I have a substantive difference with Senator Clinton on how to get there.