Senator West Virginia

Obama holds meeting with Congress about health care

President Obama has initiated a health care summit with Democrats and Republicans from Congress at the Blair House in order to create a bipartisan consensus on what is supposed to be done about health care reform.Some Republicans were receptive, others weren’t.  Thus far, two issues seem to have emerged – that the health care system as it stands is unfair to consumers, and that the U.S. Government cannot afford to begin picking up the tab.The usual suspect in bankruptcies is medical bills, causing 7 of 10 bankruptcy filings, and one of the most common things sending people looking for payday loans.

McCain and Obama trade barbs

Some of the quotes from the proceedings, from MSNBC, indicate verbal sparring between Sen. John McCain (R – AZ) and Obama.

“Let me just make this point, John, because we’re not campaigning anymore. The election is over.” — Obama
“I’m reminded of that every day.” – McCain

Republicans strongly contend that market solutions are the better course, which seems to be consensus in other circles.  A recent article in the Wall Street Journal upholds that contention, and two of the authors of the piece are professors of Business and Stanford and Columbia. The spending patterns of government seem unhinged, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid are on the precipice of insolvency, and a foreign policy in desperate need of review.  (One seems to recall not one, but two wars going simultaneously.) The Senate and the House are currently exploring the possibility of lifting the monopoly exemption that health insurance companies currently enjoy.

Meanwhile, the HHS grills insurance execs

On Wednesday, The Department of Health and Human Services brought a selection of health insurance CEOs to a meeting, as per this article from ABC News.  HHS head Karen Sebelius invited the heads of five major insurers to ask them about the nature of higher costs.CEOS were given a hiding about compensation of executives, such as lavish bonuses and vacations, like WellPoint, Inc. spending $ 37 million in 2007 and 2008 on retreats for executives. Rates increased almost 40% for some subscribers.

The rate increase was attributed to already rising cost and irrespective of executive compensation.  The increase in costs were also attributed to many younger insurance purchasers dropping coverage, and the remaining customers being elderly (the elderly are more prone to illness than the young) and because of the increased costs of caring for more elderly subscribers, a health insurance carrier would be forced to raise rates to stay solvent.  Anthem Blue Cross, a subsidiary of WellPoint Inc. claimed to lose $ 10 million or more only in California last year.That aside, a company that can afford to spend $ 30 million on executive retreats doesn’t need a cash advance from it’s customers.

How to pick what to do for the sick

It would appear that the Washington strategy is to throw money at the problem, instead of dealing with the causes of the rising costs.So far, few outlets have reported on the cause of rising health care costs. The cause could lie in more insurance claims and tort suits, perhaps the cause is in the greater amount of paperwork and staff needed for insurance company filings and medical records, but it appears that the symptoms are being treated in lieu of the disease.

Was America the sole recipient of the bailout?

Ben Bernanke’s testimony to Congress continued, including a heated exchange between Bernanke and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), part of which was an allegation of lending to Greece to aid in the financial turmoil there. Decide for yourself whether Greece should be allowed to borrow money from the Federal Reserve.

Bernanke flatly denied Mr. Paul’s allegation, calling them “bizarre.”

Is it truly that bizarre?

Is the Federal Reserve about to bailout Greece? Have they done the same with foreign nations in the past? Greece is still a question mark, irrespective of Bernanke’s testimony. The writing may already be on the wall.

Put in “Texas Straight Talk”

In a recent weekly column at House.gov, Ron Paul wrote about Greece’s economic crisis. The government is close to defaulting on public debt, as the Treasury is almost dry. The debt level, claims Paul, is “about 120 percent of their gross domestic product,” so the public sector soaks up “what amounts to 40 percent of GDP.” This has European investors running scared, needless to say. The European Central Bank seems suspiciously calm.

Why would that be? Outsiders aren’t sure. Is it possible that the Federal Reserve is going to perform a Greece bailout? We don’t know, says Paul, partly because the Federal Reserve’s distribution of bailout dollars hasn’t been as transparent as promised, but also because if they were aiding a foreign central bank, by law they don’t have to disclose that fact and it is exempt from audit. Considering that Greece isn’t the only European country in trouble – and that many of those countries in trouble have some sort of tie to Goldman Sachs – we wonder whether these countries will also be deemed “too big to fail” by the U.S. banking concerns. Who will be liable if that is the case? It would be the taxpayers at a time when unemployment is incredibly high.

Fiat currency and garish disregard for caution in its use

Our government buys into the idea of fiat currency. They create money for whatever purpose they see fit – a check that no one has the actual capital to cash.The US Government and the Federal Reserve seem content to keep the status quo, with no concern to the burden it puts on future generations. Ron Paul has upheld that the people deserve to know if they are “going to be left holding the bag” by the Federal Reserve spending money they don’t really have!

Evidence log for your consideration

1. Federal Reserve money supported Saddam Hussein and the Iraq military
2. Federal Reserve money was involved in Watergate
3. Here’s the Senate Watergate Report for more on Watergate.

Bernanke testimony does not inspire confidence

This is exactly why Ron Paul would like laws to be changed so that we can audit the Federal Reserve. Fast cash going from our pockets to other countries isn’t something that can perpetuate when our own is in trouble. We need to know what’s happening. Americans deserve transparency from their governmental institutions.

13 Republicans and two Independents cross the aisle

Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D), hailed it as “investing in America.”  After a 70-28 vote in the Senate, the $ 15 billion Democratic jobs bill to stimulate job creation has passed with 55 Democrats, 13 Republicans and two Independents saying yes. Considering just how far the American workforce and their pay day loans have to come, that $ 15 billion is considered to be “modest in scope,” as the New York Times puts it.

What is it that the jobs bill supposed to do anyway?

Fox News had previously shown the parts of the $ 15 billion bill as $ 13 billion in payroll tax breaks for employers who hire employees for over 60 days, $ 35 million for “small business depreciation,” a highway bill extension, and $ 2 billion in infrastructure bonds.

The bipartisan support might mean the bill will quickly pass through the House

This is turn would mean that the jobs bill gets to the president’s desk quickly. The best thing to perk the economy up is for people to be employed, and the jobs bill comes at a fortuitous moment when a lot of people are out of work.

Newly elected Republican Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts – a man who has attracted no small amount of controversy – was vital to the process of pushing the jobs bill through the Senate. He acknowledges the jobs bill isn’t perfect, but understands its importance in getting some of the unemployed back to work. But if the House sends through a version “full of pork, waste, fraud and abuse,” Brown told the Times he’d vote against it. That’s almost the sort of “Progressive Republican” that drives Glenn Beck insane, or rather more insane.

Harry Reid is happy about the result

“We have a jobs agenda, not a jobs bill,” the Senate majority leader told the media. “We’re going to have more votes, and create more jobs.”

At this point, any opportunity – from astrophysicist to payday lender – is a good opportunity.

Obama’s health care plan

The Obama health care plan, in its most recent incarnation, is now available for all to see on the White House web site. Of course, it’s a very lengthy document and some parts are a little hard to understand, so I have composed a summary focusing on the parts that have changed since the last health care bill was made public.

Obama’s health care plan contains elements from both the House and Senate versions of the bill, but the White House site says it more closely resembles the senate version. One important question people want to know up front is how the government will pay for Obama’s health care plan. People don’t want to see the feds take out another cash loan and incur more national debt.

How to pay for it

The White House site says the bill will make health care more affordable:

The House and Senate health insurance bills lower premiums through increased competition, oversight, and new accountability standards set by insurance exchanges.The bills also provide tax credits and reduced cost sharing for families with modest income. The President’s Proposal improves the affordability of health care by increasing the tax credits for families.

Middle class and low income families can receive tax breaks for paying for health insurance. Check out a table of income levels and tax breaks.

Here comes the heat

Part of Obama’s health care plan focuses on cracking down on waste, fraud and abuse. The bill creates a database of sanctions and asks for individuals and billing agencies to be subject to registration and background checks. It expands access to the health care integrity and protection data bank.

The president’s proposal also aims to ensure that people have access to mental health care. It also provides the ability for real-time data review and increases sanctions for committing Medicare or Medicaid fraud. Here’s a list of crackdown measures.

Looking at the long term

As far as making sure the cost of Obama’s health care plan can continue to be sustainable, the web site says:

President’s Proposal creates a set of benchmark payments at different percentages of the current average fee-for-service costs in an area.  It phases these benchmarks in gradually in order to avoid disruption to beneficiaries, taking into account the relative payments to fee-for-service costs in an area.

The plan also will delay and reform the high-cost plan excise tax, broaden Medicare hospital insurance, increase fees on brand-name prescriptions and close tax loopholes to prevent unjustified tax shelters. There is a searchable copy of the bill available at WhiteHouse.gov.

If you have ever thought about changing your heating oil boiler then now is the time to do it as the government are now paying £400 to those who agree to do it. To be eligible for the scheme your heating oil boiler needs to be over 25 years old and it needs to be G rated. The government has made 120,000 vouchers available but as of yet only 50,000 have actually been claimed. If you have been considering getting rid of your old boiler then this will offer you the ideal opportunity to do that.

 

The whole basis for the government offering this scheme is not generosity but rather the fact that they want to encourage people to be more energy efficient and it will obviously be better for the environment if the new boilers are introduced. Not only does having a new boiler mean that you can get one of these vouchers, but it also means that you are likely to save £200 a year by having these new energy-efficient boilers. It is hoped that more and more people will be encouraged to get rid of their old boilers with all these incentives on offer. New boilers are also better for the environment because they produce less CO2 emissions.

 

But the scheme is only open to residents in England at the moment. The reason for this is that the devolved governments in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland will need to decide if they wish to implement such as scheme.

 

If you live in England and would like to take advantage of the scheme you will first need to determine if your current boiler meets the criteria for the scheme. Whether or not it is G rated and the age of the boiler will have to be checked. Check whether or not your boiler has a permanent pilot light as this is an almost certain indicator that it is G rated. And most 25 year old boilers are G rated.

 

Getting the home heated up during winter can be very expensive. Electricity and gas prices are very high and show no signs of coming down any time soon. Many individuals are now changing over to cheaper home heating oil though. When they do they always need their tanks filled with heating oil to ensure they never run out.

 

 

The current Health Care debate has divided Americans amongst partisan lines more than any other subject in 2009. This debate continues in 2010. It is a debate that has seen accusations ranging from death panel’s to an entire government takeover of Health Care. It seems as though this problem is not going to be solved until a majority of Americans realize the effect that an efficient Health Care System is causing to our people and our economy.

 

We saw in the recent news that healthcare premiums in California have been increased by a particular insurance company by an average of 39%. In Maine premiums have rose by an average of 25%. However, these numbers are not enough to convince the American people at large that Health Care needs to be reformed. The reason for this is that the true costs of an inefficient Healthcare System is not directly associated with our current economic and social problems.

 

Insufficient Health Care coverage kills over 40,000 Americans a year. That is more than 10 – 9/11 attacks per year. The current antitrust exemption that the healthcare industry enjoys allows them to monopolize coverage by state, and because you cannot buy insurance over state lines, if you do not like the healthcare company that has monopolized your State you’re out of luck. Due to the ever increasing costs of Health Care coverage in the employer based system companies are not hiring a nearly as many employees as they would it if healthcare costs were not going up by an average of 15% per year. Even if you have been paying your insurance premiums and kept your insurance current throughout your entire life, once you do get sick insurance companies can cap the amount they pay out or deny your coverage completely because they’ve gone through your medical history and found something like chicken pox, called it a pre-existing condition, and deny your claim. Let’s look at these issues one by one.

 

There are over 40,000 people a year that die from insufficient Health Care coverage. Many of these individuals end go to the emergency room towards the end of their life because they have no other option left. Emergency room costs are some of the most expensive in the industry. Due to the fact that these individuals do not have insurance these costs are passed on to those who do. Therefore, if we were to implement a Healthcare System that covered these individuals it would bring down the cost for everyone. Not to mention the fact that we would be saving potentially more than 40,000 people’s lives a year that the insurance companies would otherwise let die.

 

The current laws guiding the Healthcare System are insufficient, out of date, and the biggest contributor the atrocities of our system. Simply put, the insurance companies are getting away with anything and everything they can. For example, let’s look at California. If you lived in California and your car insurance went up by 39% you would just go to another car insurance company. Health Care Insurers do not have to worry about this. They have a trust exception. This allows them to divide up the country and monopolize the market State by State. If you look at the market share of your state, over 80% will be controlled by one insurance company, and because you cannot buy insurance over state lines if you don’t like what you have, if you don’t like your premiums going up by 39%, you are basically out of luck.

 

In the year 2000 Health Care premiums for a family of 4 cost $6,000. By 2008 Health Care premiums rose to over $12,000. If this is the rate of the increases for premiums imagine what the increase in the overall costs are for employers. If healthcare costs are rising 100% every eight years, depending on the overall operating budget of the employer, companies are able to hire anywhere from 10% to 99.9% less employees, because the money that would normally be going to payroll is now going to the insurance companies.

 

Even if you have done all the right things and you have had insurance your entire life when you finally do get sick the insurance companies are able to cap the amount of they pay out for your Health Care costs. So if you get Cancer and your treatment cost $200,000 but your insurance company caps your pay out at $100,000, you had better either have another $100,000 or you’re going bankrupt. For many people this situation would be preferable to there’s because the insurance companies have told them that they’re not going to get a dime due to a preexisting condition. There are thousands of stories out there about people who have become sick and then been turned away by their insurance company due to a “pre-existing condition” not previously identified. These pre-existing conditions range from chickenpox to pregnancies, but they are nothing more than an excuse for insurance companies to deny coverage, allow people to die, and increase their profit margins.

 

The insurance companies, their lobbyists, and the politicians they have in their pockets have divided this country over an issue that should be simple to discuss and much easier to solve than they would have us believe. The They have divided us with lies about things like death panels and a government takeover of Health Care. They have divided the country by the people that have insurance and the people that don’t. They have told the people that have insurance that Health Care is going to be taken over by the government, when in the current Senate and House bills there’s no public option, therefore, there’s no government option, therefore, there is no government takeover of Health Care.

 

The simple fact of the matter seems to be a that the Healthcare System will not be reformed until a majority of Americans realizes benefit on all levels to all people. This reform is not as difficult as it may seem. If there were an individual bill proposed for each issue of the Health Care debate it would be able to be passed by the House and Senate and signed by the president much quicker and more efficiently. Propose a bill that ends the insurance companies antitrust exemption. Propose a bill that allows individuals to buy insurance across state lines. Propose a bill that creates a public exchange employees can go to if the insurance companies continue to increase the rates exponentially of their employers. Propose a bill that eliminates the caps insurance companies can place on their healthcare coverage payouts, and for crying out loud, propose a bill that makes it illegal for insurance companies to deny coverage based on preexisting conditions.

 

We as a people have allowed this issue to divide us. We allowed the pawns of the insurance companies to make us fight each other over the true problem instead of fighting the true problem itself. The problem is our Healthcare System and if we do not reform it we will continue to be crippled economically and socially. If we take this problem piece by piece, bill by bill, and eliminate these problems one by one, we can reform Health Care. Any politician or lobbyist who is against a bill, for example, to remove the caps insurance payouts, will have the answer for it. They will have to answer for it. They will no longer be able to play politics and denounce an entire, in-depth, wide-ranging, reform bill as a government takeover of Health Care. Politicians will finally have to explain why they’re against reform of “specific” problems of the Health Care industry that effects every one of their constituents.

 

No matter what we as a people have to come together. We have to stop fighting each other over small nonexistent issues and let those who represent us know that we want specific reform in the healthcare industry and we want it now stopped dictation.

 

Written By: Rob Gelhausen

http://www.joblinkssite.com

Reid does hack job on bill

By all accounts, the jobs bill was on the path to victory. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that he was going to cut the bill from $ 85 billion to $ 15 billion, cutting it to about an eighth its former size.

How did he do this? Fox News also reports that he cut “key priorities of both Republicans and Democrats.” Why did Reid sabotage the bill? Well, there’s no official word from Reid on that, but there are plenty of others out there willing to offer up their theories. If you asked Reid, I’m sure he’d say it was to save money.

What will the jobs bill do?

The slimmer version of the jobs bill does not ease the process for businesses to borrow money, though it grants tax incentives for employers that hire new people. Fox News says:

The $ 15 billion bill includes a $ 13 billion payroll tax break for employers who hire new workers; $ 35 million for small business depreciation; $ 2 billion for “Build America Bonds” for infrastructure; and a one-year extension of the highway bill.

Reid excised many extensions, such as research and development spending, and provisions that would decreased estate taxes. The estate tax extender had a lot of Republican support.

Why did Reid hack the jobs bill?

Fox News reports that Reid gutted the bill due to “criticism that the Democratic-sponsored jobs bill would not primarily create new jobs.” Christian Science Monitor says:

Senator Reid appears to be making a political calculation that the GOP will have a difficult time voting against his own, stripped-down version of jobs legislation. That’s because Reid has left the bill’s central job creation provisions intact, while jettisoning tax breaks and other provisions intended to win Republican support.

Reid only offered the following tidbit to explain the actions he took: “We are going to move a smaller package than talked about in the press. Republicans are going to have to make a choice. We have a bipartisan bill that will create jobs, according to the CBO, immediately.” He added “I don’t know in logic what they could say to oppose this.” I guess we’ll find out!

Will the tough budget deficit decisions be made?

It turns out “agnostic definition” is something Google searchers want to know. My guess is that it doesn’t have all that much to do with religion, which is typically how the word is applied. It does have other uses, though. Courtesy of the New York Times‘ “Word of the Day,” here’s a snapshot:

agnostic •ag-’näs-tik, əg-• noun and adjective

noun: someone who is doubtful or noncommittal about something
noun: a person who claims that they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God (but does not deny that God might exist)
adjective: of or pertaining to an agnostic or agnosticism
adjective: uncertain of all claims to knowledge

The Obama budget: vocabulary lesson or endless cash loan?

The Swamp ran an article bearing the “Obama Agnostic” headline about the deficits.” Reigning the federal deficit in can lead to higher taxes on the middle class, but Obama is promising it won’t happen. Rather than grab for that all-too-obvious political theology, he’s remaining “agnostic” and waiting for new ideas.

No new taxes, no new cuts?

Obama told the press we can’t simply “cut our way out of this problem.” A combination of tax spurts and cuts on Social Security and Medicare may be the road Obama travels, but he gave Bloomberg no definite indication. He is staying “agnostic,” which is the sort of typical non-committal language native to politicians.

Do anything but commit

I understand political gamesmanship. Obviously, repairing a problem as large as the national debt is a very complex and arduous undertaking. Obama’s proposed budget cuts it down to $ 1.267 trillion, improving on the $ 1.56 projection – but he’s eyeing $ 727 billion by 2013! Staying agnostic won’t get you far, as some tough decisions have to get made before the 2013 deadline. The recession has made things harder, and people are harder up for cash loans than in a while. Make a decision and stick with it.

Is it truly doable to get public records and just how simple is it? This piece of writing provides a detailed portrait on how you can browse through public records.

 

By searching public records you can find info about people thanks to the freedom of information act. By following the correct procedures you can freely view most of the records filed in government departments and agencies. Records included are driving, civil, adaptation and immigration records and many other records.

 

I will speedily brush through the most frequently used ways and the process involved in each step. Government agencies and local and federal records are the first place to browse through. You could browse through the public archives, courts, schools and any other local institutions that you can acquire info from. This could prove to be very time consuming if you have many institutions that you need to go through.

 

You could possibly hire a third person or agency to help with the search by dividing the search areas or to do the whole search for you. Using a third party to look for searching public records has one major set back. Hiring these people could prove to be very expensive as they charge per hour.

 

The third alternative would be to look for public records online. Of all the methods that are currently available this is the quickest and relatively cheapest way of viewing any public records that you want to access. Some sites will provide you with incomplete and unarranged info at no cost at all. By using fee basesd sites you could get up to date, accurate, comprehensive and detailed info.

 

Don’t worry they wont charge you an arm and a leg for searching public records. Their fees are very low and for the service and convenience that you get it’s worth the money. Think about it you get to access these records without even having to get up from that chair you are sitting on right now.

 

Also see the following recources

 

1. Click Here
2. How To Find Someone Free In England
3. Find Someone Free In The UK

As the War on Terror enters a new decade with a new administration, ghosts from the Bush era are beginning to emerge from the dark corridors of hidden detention centers, secret renditions, and elusive intrigues, writes Pramilla Srivastava at www.ibrahimsajidmalick.com . 

One of those ghosts whose story has been haunting the imagination of the Pakistani public for several years and recently even in Europe, is now beginning to capture the attention of Americans bold enough to enter the war’s most ghastly graveyard. 

It is the ghost of Dr. Aaffia Siddiqui, a Pakistani MIT graduate and mother of three, who disappeared from the streets of Karachi in March 2003 along with her  3 children, at the time age under 6 mos, 3, and 7.  

For years her family searched for her desperately, at times believing the worst; that she was dead.  Then suddenly, 5 years later the ghost appeared live in the flesh, 12,000 miles from where she had disappeared. 

In September 2008 the MIT Mom was brought to a Manhattan Court Room to be indicted on charges of trying to kill American soldiers and being a member of Al Qaeda.   She was frail, delusional, incoherent, and wounded with a bullet wound to her abdomen dressed so badly that the judge had to order immediate medical attention. Her mugshot picture portrayed unspeakable horrors. 

During the pre-trial hearing Dr. Siddiqui appeared in a complete veil, unusal for her according to family members.   Her court room outbursts and body language signified a completely broken human being.  Although there has been no independent assessment of her mental condition, she was clearly paranoid and incoherent. Moreover, her family has been unable to see her or communicate with her. 

Few American’s are familiar with the facts surrounding her case; even less are familiar with the shocking claims being made by her family and indeed, by a majority of Pakistanis.  Pakistan was so concerned with her plight that there have been resolutions passed in the parliament demanding her release.  Meanwhile the western media has portrayed her as the Mata-Hari of Al-Qaeda,  the female version of Chemical Ali,  the “mother” of all terrorist.  And much of this continues even as the prosecution made a stunning reversal when they announced to the court on January 11^th that they would “not be charging” her with any connection to “any terrorist group”;   This includes any connection to Al Qaeda, the Taliban, or Osama bin Laden.   

However to the family, to the majority of Pakistanis, and to her growing number of supporters throughout the world, she is in fact prisoner 650,  known as the “Gray Lady of Bagram”, whose shreaks and cries were so disturbing  that the prisoners went on a hunger strike to demand that the torture against her stop.   Several released detainees have since identified Dr. Siddiqui as the same prisoner 650 and several human rights groups also maintain that she is indeed prisoner 650.  In fact, the weeks before her sudden and mysterious appearance at a police station in Afghanistan, human rights groups had been intensifying their demands to have prisoner 650 identified and produced.   

Even more disturbing than what may have happened to her is what has come of her two still missing children.  Though the older child who is now 13, was returned to the family in Pakistan shortly after her arrest, there is no information on the whereabouts of her two younger children who should now be age 6 and 9.   Whether or not the prosecution is able to prove its limited attempted murder case to an American jury, surely no one can deny the innocence of the two missing young children. 

The case of Aafia Siddiqui raises a number of mysterious questions are still to be explored.  Now that the prosecution has decided not to charge her with terrorism why was she placed on the FBI’s terrorist list to begin with? What happened to her during those 5 missing years.  What was the level of cooperation between Pakistani and American intelligence in her pursuit and possible abduction?  What does her case mean for the future of Pakistan, U.S. relations.   How does her case redefine the war on terror and the meaning of law, liberty, and human rights in  21^st century  America? And, the most troubling and pressing question of all; where are the children?

Pakistan Politics and Economy News has been extensively covering Aafia Siddiqui’s trial from the Federal Court of Southern District of New York.