About Me

Name: Jax Hawk
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

THE BIG UNION PAY BACK AND OTHER ABOMINATIONS!!

 





Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” —Ronald Reagan

Talk about regulation of people's lives. The Wall Street Journal reports that hidden within the over 1000 pages of HB 3200 is the biggest pay off and pay back to Unions for their over 500 million dollars that helped sweep Republicans out of Congress and elect Obama.

Tucked away in thousands of pages of complex new rules, regulations and mandates are special privileges and giveaways that could have devastating consequences for the health-care sector and the American economy at large.

The Senate version opens the door to implement forced unionization schemes pursued by former Govs. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois in 2005 and Gray Davis of California in 1999. Both men repaid tremendous political debts to Andy Stern and his Service Employees International Union (SEIU) by reclassifying state-reimbursed in-home health-care (and child-care) contractors as state employees—and forcing them to pay union dues.

Following this playbook, the Senate bill creates a "personal care attendants workforce advisory panel" that will likely impose union affiliation to qualify for a newly created "community living assistance services and support (class)" reimbursement plan.

The current House version of ObamaCare (H.R. 3200) goes much further. Section 225(A) grants Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius tremendous discretionary authority to regulate health-care workers "under the public health insurance option." Monopoly bargaining and compulsory union dues may quickly become a required standard resulting in potentially hundreds of thousands of doctors and nurses across the country being forced into unions.

Ms. Sebelius will be taking her marching orders from the numerous union officials who are guaranteed seats on the various federal panels (such as the personal care panel mentioned above) charged with recommending health-care policies. Big Labor will play a central role in directing federal health-care policy affecting hundreds of thousands of doctors, surgeons and nurses.

Consider Kaiser Permanente, the giant, managed-care organization that has since 1997 proudly touted its labor-management "partnership" in scores of workplaces. Union officials play an essentially co-equal role in running many Kaiser facilities. AFL-CIO President John Sweeney called the Kaiser plan "a framework for what every health care delivery system should do" at a July 24 health-care forum outside of Washington, D.C.

The House bill has a $10 billion provision to bail out insolvent union health-care plans. It also creates a lucrative professional-development grant program for health-care workers that effectively blackballs nonunion medical facilities from participation. The training funds in this program must be administered jointly with a labor organization—a scenario not unlike the U.S. Department of Labor's grants for construction apprenticeship programs, which have turned into a cash cow for construction industry union officials on the order of hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

There's more. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus has suggested that the federal government could pay for health-care reform by taxing American workers' existing health-care benefits—but he would exempt union-negotiated health-care plans. Under Mr. Baucus's scheme, the government could impose costs of up to $20,000 per employee on nonunion businesses already struggling to afford health care plans.
Baucus is a Democrat from Montana( chairman of the Senate who has served in the Senate since 1978, and is the seventh longest-serving senator as of 2009.
It is no wonder the Union Lobbyists have got their hooks in him!

Mr. Baucus's proposal would give union officials another tool to pressure employers into turning over their employees to Big Labor. Rather than provide the lavish benefits required by Obamacare, employers could allow a union to come in and negotiate less costly benefits than would otherwise be required. Such plans could be continuously exempted.Source:The Wall Street Journal

U.S. Senator Max Baucus finally broken his silence regarding his personal position on including a public option in health care reform legislation. Monday night (8/17/09), in an unprecedented conference call to Montana Democratic central committee chairs, the powerful leader of the Senate Finance Committee told his strongest supporters that he supported a public option. While discussing the obstacles to getting a public option through the Senate, he assured his forty listeners, "I want a public option too!" source:Gossip Rocks.com

This means that any proposal from a Democrat will probably open the door to the so called Public Option. This is a semantic euphemism for Socialized Medicine! And the main beneficiaries will not be the patients but the Unions!

And while Americans are distracted by the Health Insurance rancor the Democratic controlled Senate committee strikes a blow to our defense capabilities, and allows the USA to share valuable technology with foreign buyers.

A Senate panel urged the Air Force on Thursday to start developing an export model of its F-22 Raptor, the most advanced U.S. fighter jet, even as it voted to end U.S. purchases.

Japan, Israel and Australia have shown interest in buying the supersonic, radar-evading F-22 Raptor, designed to destroy enemy air defenses in the first days of any conflict and clear the way for other missions.

Foreign sales were banned by a 1998 law aimed at protecting the "stealth" technology and other high-tech features said to have made the F-22 too good for money to buy.The bill, adopted 30 to 0 in 15 minutes without debate, largely backed program cuts sought by President Barack Obama. Overall, it provided $636.3 billion for defense in fiscal 2010, which starts October 1.

If enacted, the measure adopted by the Senate Appropriations Committee would let the Defense Department prepare a modified F-22 that protects classified and sensitive information, technologies and U.S. war fighting capabilities.Source:

Both this bill and the Democrats Public Option health plan should be soundly opposed!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

POTUS HAS A UNION LABEL ON HIM AND DEMOCRATS

 

 





IF YOU SPEND 50 MILLION DOLLARS TO GET DEMOCRATS ELECTED TO THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. It is expected that you will get something in return, and the Union movement is reaping rewards in spades.
First there was this: President Obama, who campaigned on a promise of greater disclosure and transparency, has taken a step in the opposite direction. Under his administration, the Department of Labor has announced it will delay and review implementing a requirement from the Bush Administration that union managers and employees fully disclose how union dues are managed.

This foot-dragging by the Obama Administration — which could lead to a gutting of key disclosure regulations affecting labor unions.— This is the second misstep by the new president in the area of labor. The first was his embracing the controversial and blatantly misnamed Employee Free Choice Act. This act would strip union members of their right to a secret ballot.

The great irony is that, in both cases, Obama and his labor supporters would argue that these policies protect union workers. In fact, they work against the rights of union members by extending preferential treatment to labor unions' managers, top-level officials and staff employees.

Then there was the outright gift of 55% of the ownership of the new Chrysler to the Auto workers union retiree health-care trust fund. Fiat the supposed new owner gets 20%, with the rest of the company staying in the government’s hands.

And on the heels of this payback the new GM(aka government motors),
The United Auto Workers get GM stock for at least half the $20 billion the company owes to a union-run trust that will assume retiree health care expenses starting next year.

Combined, the union and government own 89 percent of the century-old automaker, which was bleeding red ink and was saddled with more than $62 billion in debt.

Now the ultimate payback and insult to ll taxpayers who are not involved in either government or unions, and our numbers are diminishing as the days Obama is in the Oval Office, is the law being proposed by senator Max Baucus of Montana.

Liberals believe the best chance for compromise legislation on health care may be a plan under construction in the Senate Finance Committee that would pay for a public plan in part by taxing some worker health benefits. And they will have a lot of help from two left-wing heavyweights joining the HCAN parade: the corruption-plagued SEIU (which has battled numerous(16) embezzlement scandals among its chapters across the country while crusading for consumer and patients' rights) and Obama's old chums at fraud-riddled ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

These union workers who helped Democrats win Congress and the White House and whose support will be key in getting a health bill signed into law would not pay the tax!
HCAN( Health Care for America Now)has a $40 million budget, with $10 million pitched in by The Atlantic Philanthropies, a Bermuda-based organization fronted by Soros acolyte Gara LaMarche. Also in the money mix: famous Democratic donors Herb and Marion Sandler, the left-wing moguls who made billions selling subprime mortgages and helped Soros fund his vast network of left-wing activist satellites. By their side is billionaire Peter Lewis of Progressive Insurance, whose "Progressive Future" youth group has dispatched clueless volunteers armed with clipboards and literature bashing Rush Limbaugh and Fox News to scare up support for Obamacare.
Source: Michelle Malkin


With cost estimates already as high as $1.6 trillion, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., has proposed paying for the bill in part by taxing health care benefits for workers who earn more than $100,000, or $200,000 for married couples, according to those familiar with the discussions.

Baucus is also weighing a tax based on the value of health care benefits that exceed a yet-to-be determined cap. A tax on benefits that exceed the cap by a mere $3,000 could amount to $750 in taxes annually for a worker who earns as little as $34,000, say experts.

But those union members serving under collective bargaining agreements would not be subjected to the tax, according to proposals under discussion.

Union workers enjoy some of the most extensive and costliest health benefits, and union officials complained their members would be unfairly burdened by a health care tax because their contracts cannot be changed quickly enough to avoid it.

Union members also represent one of the biggest and most powerful Democratic constituencies and their support of any health care reform proposal is viewed as essential to getting a bill passed in Congress.Big money from unions such as the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, as well as the Internet-fueled MoveOn have put the full force of their money behind the push for socialized medicine.

Senator Baucus has proposed the tax threshold on health care benefits be set higher than the cost of policies available to federal employees and he has proposed exempting until 2013 those plans negotiated as part of union contracts.

“It’s a means of making sure that unions are foursquare behind any reform bill that comes out,” said Henry Aaron, a health care policy expert at Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.

Critics of the Baucus proposal to exempt unions from a health care benefits tax said the exclusion could be used to lure into unions employees who are anxious to avoid the benefits tax.

.Is it any wonder that Unions are pushing hard for a government health plan. The union bosses can transfer their liability for health insurance for retirees and current employees from fee for service plans to a socialized plan that you and I will be responsible to pay for!
IS THIS HE CHANGE YOU VOTED FOR?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

TIME TO RECONSIDER TERM LIMITS?

Federalist 57 Is Still Appropriate







 

Federalist Paper 57, written by James Madison to the people of the State of New York, discusses the issue of elected representatives being advocates of the priviledged and powerful few instead of the many who elected them. He is saying that to prevent the domination of elected members of the House of Representatives, by the special interest few, is to use term limits.


 

Today with the Cost of Presidential, Senatorial and US House elections reaching mega-millions. The total amount of money raised by the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates may, by the time of Election Day 2008, approach or even break $1 billion. For just the first nine months of 2007, presidential candidates in the two major parties had already collected a total of $415 million.

It is appropriate to reflect on who is paying this expense, and what will the price be in return for their beneficence?

 


 

A case in point is the campaign verbosity of Obama and Hillary Clinton. Obama's "Time for a change" populist speeches are fine prosaicisms, but ring hollow when the fact is revealed that millions of dollars have been poured into his campaign from the trial lawyers and invesment bankers. The pharmaceutical and health industry are also large contributors to both Obama and Hillary.


 

One of Mr. Obama’s fund-raisers, Kirk Dornbush, president of Iconic Therapeutics, a biotech company in Atlanta, said, “The contributions reflect the simple calculus of the health care industry, making a bet that Democrats will control the White House and both houses of Congress after the next election.” Lobbyists, Commercial Banks, Health Professionals, Lawyers/Law Firms, Pharmaceuticals/Health Products, Real Estate, and Securities and Investment. The list is endless of the special interest goups buying influence with people who profess they will represent the people who want change!

 


 

The following is an fragment excerpted from Federalist 57:

"The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust. The elective mode of obtaining rulers is the characteristic policy of republican government. The means relied on in this form of government for preventing their degeneracy are numerous and various. The most effectual one, is such a limitation of the term of appointments( note: aka:election) as will maintain a proper responsibility to the people.

"We are to presume that in general they will be somewhat distinguished also by those qualities which entitle them to it, and which promise a sincere and scrupulous regard to the nature of their engagements. In the second place, they will enter into the public service under circumstances which cannot fail to produce a temporary affection at least to their constituents.

"It is possible that these may all be insufficient to control the caprice and wickedness of man. But are they not all that government will admit, and that human prudence can devise? Are they not the genuine and the characteristic means by which republican government provides for the liberty and happiness of the people? What are we to say to the men who profess the most flaming zeal for republican government, yet boldly impeach the fundamental principle of it; who pretend to be champions for the right and the capacity of the people to choose their own rulers, yet maintain that they will prefer those only who will immediately and infallibly betray the trust committed to them"?


 

The framers of our form of government never intended the representatives of the people would come to Washington and serve their entire active life in a position of power and influence, where corruption and accumulation of personal wealth has a perfidious effect on our government of the people and by the people!


 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »