v Citizens are told by the federal government to buy approved insurance plans, instead of arranging to pay for health care the way free citizens see fit.
v The federal government approves the insurance plans that you must buy.
v The federal government requires that, beginning in 2014, large employers provide their employees with Obamacare-compliant insurance plans or pay a heavy fine and employers of any size who provide their employees with insurance must offer only Obamacare-compliant plans or face similarly burdensome fines and lawsuits. (26 U.S.C. § 4980H Pg. 1; ObamaCare Sec. 1562(f), Pg. 152), (26 USC § 4980D Pg. 1; ObamaCare Sec. 1562(e)-(f), Pg. 152; 29 U.S.C. § 1132 Pg. 1; ObamaCare Sec. 1562(e)-(f), Pg. 152) ww.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare
v The new law contains 700 references that the (Health and Human Services) Secretary “shall” determine and “may” determine 139 times. For instance, “The Secretary shall develop oral health components that shall include tooth-level surveillance.” Section 4102
v The federal government controls the amount of operating rooms there are in hospitals. Sec. 6001 PPACA (Consolidated) 62212y 100 PERCENT INCREASE LIMITATION
v “As part of new labeling requirements, she'll also have the power to regulate a wide variety of foods -- even Happy Meals. A clause of the law titled "MENU VARIABILITY AND COMBINATION MEALS" reads: "The Secretary shall establish by regulation standards for determining and disclosing the nutrient content for standard menu items that come in different flavors, varieties, or combinations, but which are listed as a single menu item, such as soft drinks, ice cream, pizza, doughnuts, or children's combination meals, through means determined by the Secretary, including ranges, averages, or other methods." http://spectator.org/archives/2010/06/04/the-empress-of-obamacare/1 At first this reads like the Secretary prescribes the nutrient chart, but read it again; “determining …the nutrient content…” Which definition of “determine” is used here? To ascertain after observation? Or, to control and decide?
v When life issues and “preventative services” conflict, the Feds via the Secretary determine the moral decision for insurance companies. K. Sebelius requires “free” coverage for early-abortion pills, and sterilizations. (Women’s Preventive Services Guidelines and HHS Mandate Pg. 2) www.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare
v Religious exemptions to the HHS mandated coverage of abortion pills and sterilizations are determined by the Secretary. The exemptions are narrow. Any religious school or charity that serves people of other faiths is not exempt because it does not meet the requirements (a Christian soup kitchen, a Catholic school, etc.) Even some churches are not exempt if they are too focused on serving people besides themselves. (HHS Mandate Pg. 2) www.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare
v The Secretary can fine doctors up to $10,000 if they have part ownership in their hospital and neglect filling out the correct paperwork informing the Secretary they are part owners. PPACA
v Employers can either pay $20,000 a year or so for the family coverage Kathleen Sebelius chooses for them, required by the PPACA not only for their workers but for all of their dependents as well, or they can start paying the tax penalties. That includes for those with 50 or more full-time employees a penalty of $2,000 per year per full time worker (minus 30 employees), if they offer no insurance. But even if the employer does provide employee health insurance, the employer is assessed a penalty of $3,000 per employee if the worker nevertheless qualifies to purchase his or her own health insurance on a state health insurance exchange and does so. http://heartland.org/editorial/2012/08/17/new-face-health-care-irs
v The Affordable care act creates the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB). IPAB is a rationing board.
v The government denies that it is a rationing board, but “with its authority to control prices, it will be able to drive Medicare payments so low, doctors will stop offering key services to patients.” Stanley Kurtz, National Review
v Dr. Elaine C. Jones, government relations committee co-chair of the American Academy of Neurology stated, "We are also very concerned about the power of the IPAB to cut payments to physicians. The sole function of the IPAB is to cut spending…”Mary Ellen Schneider (March 1, 2011). "Physicians Offer Rx for Fixing Health Reform Law". Internal Medicine News.
v Insurance companies are told who they must insure and how they must insure them. Acting in unison, there will be scant difference between them, thus creating a monopoly effect. This monopoly effect is hidden by the ruse of multiple companies, but really they take orders neither from you nor your employer, they take orders from the federal government. Their hope is to solicit favor with politicians to gain recognition on state-run exchanges, and also to protect the lucrative individual mandate. Instead of focusing on the consumer, sheer self-preservation will pin their hopes on campaign donations and lobbying.
v Doctors recognize this ruse and see it as the worst of both worlds; several big bullies and one Godzilla bully teaming up against them. “Eighty-three percent of American physicians have considered leaving their practices over President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, according to a survey released by the Doctor Patient Medical Association.” …co-founder of the DPMA Kathryn Serkes told TheDC. “Doctors clearly understand what Washington does not — that a piece of paper that says you are ‘covered’ by insurance or ‘enrolled’ in Medicare or Medicaid does not translate to actual medical care when doctors can’t afford to see patients at the lowball payments, and patients have to jump through government and insurance company bureaucratic hoops,” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/#ixzz20BUu3Vdw These additional organizations have also registered their disapproval. “Previous surveys by Athena, Sermo, Deloitte, the Doctors Company Survey, the Physicians Foundation, and IBD/TIPP have clearly shown that most doctors are unhappy with the direction of things, and a clear majority are opposed to the health care law” http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcsiegel/2012/08/12/will-your-doctor-quit-obamacare-foretells-mass-exodus-from-patient-care/
v Like insurance companies, healthcare providers motivated by self-preservation will pin their hopes on campaign donations and lobbying. The patient will be reduced to a “Where is Waldo” guy in a sea of insurance agents, compliance staff, lobbyists, politicians, lawyers and bureaucrats.
v The politicking of the healthcare industry will not save them. Godzilla has the Independent Payment Advisory Board whose meager reimbursement rates for Medicare/Medicaid can now only be vetoed by a congressional super-majority. The board is Independent by design, so that it is more difficult for Congress to rebuke paltry Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement rates. Healthcare providers will skimp on money-draining procedures or face closing their doors. Skimping on money-draining procedures is rationing.
v Citizens are told by the federal government to buy approved insurance plans, instead of arranging to pay for healthcare the way free citizens see fit. (It is worth repeating)