Homer/Lockport Tea Party

In case you were wondering about the consequences of Obamacare, below is an incomplete list of new Boards, Agencies & Grants it creates.

And guess who will be paying for this? I wonder how many government employees it will take to fill all of these new offices???? Oh yes…they will all have benefits, sick days, vacation days, retirement, etc, etc. Do ya’ think ALL of this will create any bureaucratic waste???? —— Perhaps private companies can do this BETTER…they will watch the number more closely???

Gee—I didn’t see all of the additional IRS people they’re going to hire in this….oh…it must be someplace else.

This is a list of new Boards and Commissions created in the NEW OBAMA HEATH CARE BILL.

1. Grant program for consumer assistance offices (Section 1002, p. 37)
2. Grant program for states to monitor premium increases (Section 1003, p. 42)
3. Committee to review administrative simplification standards (Section 1104, p. 71)
4. Demonstration program for state wellness programs (Section 1201, p. 93)
5. Grant program to establish state Exchanges (Section 1311(a), p. 130)
6. State American Health Benefit Exchanges (Section 1311(b), p. 131)
7. Exchange grants to establish consumer navigator programs (Section 1311(i), p. 150)
8. Grant program for state cooperatives (Section 1322, p. 169)
9. Advisory board for state cooperatives (Section 1322(b)(3), p. 173)
10. Private purchasing council for state cooperatives (Section 1322(d), p. 177)
11. State basic health plan programs (Section 1331, p. 201)
12. State-based reinsurance program (Section 1341, p. 226)
13. Program of risk corridors for individual and small group markets (Section 1342, p. 233)
14. Program to determine eligibility for Exchange participation (Section 1411, p. 267)
15. Program for advance determination of tax credit eligibility (Section 1412, p. 288)
16. Grant program to implement health IT enrollment standards (Section 1561, p. 370)
17. Federal Coordinated Health Care Office for dual eligible beneficiaries (Section 2602, p. 512)
18. Medicaid quality measurement program (Section 2701, p. 518)
19. Medicaid health home program for people with chronic conditions, and grants for planning same (Section 2703, p. 524)
20. Medicaid demonstration project to evaluate bundled payments (Section 2704, p. 532)
21. Medicaid demonstration project for global payment system (Section 2705, p. 536)
22. Medicaid demonstration project for accountable care organizations (Section 2706, p. 538)
23. Medicaid demonstration project for emergency psychiatric care (Section 2707, p. 540)
24. Grant program for delivery of services to individuals with postpartum depression (Section 2952(b), p. 591)
25. State allotments for grants to promote personal responsibility education programs (Section 2953, p. 596)
26. Medicare value-based purchasing program (Section 3001(a), p. 613)
27. Medicare value-based purchasing demonstration program for critical access hospitals (Section 3001(b), p. 637)
28. Medicare value-based purchasing program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 3006(a), p. 666)
29. Medicare value-based purchasing program for home health agencies (Section 3006(b), p. 668)
30. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality (Section 3012, p. 688)
31. Grant program to develop health care quality measures (Section 3013, p. 693)
32. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 3021, p. 712)
33. Medicare shared savings program (Section 3022, p. 728)
34. Medicare pilot program on payment bundling (Section 3023, p. 739)
35. Independence at home medical practice demonstration program (Section 3024, p. 752)
36. Program for use of patient safety organizations to reduce hospital readmission rates (Section 3025(b), p. 775)
37. Community-based care transitions program (Section 3026, p. 776)
38. Demonstration project for payment of complex diagnostic laboratory tests (Section 3113, p. 800)
39. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration project (Section 3140, p. 850)
40. Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 982)
41. Consumer Advisory Council for Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 1027)
42. Grant program for technical assistance to providers implementing health quality practices (Section 3501, p. 1043)
43. Grant program to establish interdisciplinary health teams (Section 3502, p. 1048)
44. Grant program to implement medication therapy management (Section 3503, p. 1055)
45. Grant program to support emergency care pilot programs (Section 3504, p. 1061)
46. Grant program to promote universal access to trauma services (Section 3505(b), p. 1081)
47. Grant program to develop and promote shared decision-making aids (Section 3506, p. 1088)
48. Grant program to support implementation of shared decision-making (Section 3506, p. 1091)
49. Grant program to integrate quality improvement in clinical education (Section 3508, p. 1095)
50. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women’s Health (Section 3509(a), p. 1098)
51. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(b), p. 1102)
52. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(e), p. 1105)
53. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(f), p. 1106)
54. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women’s Health (Section 3509(g), p. 1109)
55. National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Section 4001, p. 1114)
56. Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health (Section 4001(f), p. 1117)
57. Prevention and Public Health Fund (Section 4002, p. 1121)
58. Community Preventive Services Task Force (Section 4003(b), p. 1126)
59. Grant program to support school-based health centers (Section 4101, p. 1135)
60. Grant program to promote research-based dental caries disease management (Section 4102, p. 1147)
61. Grant program for States to prevent chronic disease in Medicaid beneficiaries (Section 4108, p. 1174)
62. Community transformation grants (Section 4201, p. 1182)
63. Grant program to provide public health interventions (Section 4202, p 1188)
64. Demonstration program of grants to improve child immunization rates (Section 4204(b), p. 1200)
65. Pilot program for risk-factor assessments provided through community health centers (Section 4206, p. 1215)
66. Grant program to increase epidemiology and laboratory capacity (Section 4304, p. 1233)
67. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 4305, p. 1238)
68. National Health Care Workforce Commission (Section 5101, p. 1256)
69. Grant program to plan health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(c), p. 1275)
70. Grant program to implement health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(d), p. 1279)
71. Pediatric specialty loan repayment program (Section 5203, p. 1295)
72. Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (Section 5204, p. 1300)
73. Allied Health Loan Forgiveness Program (Section 5205, p. 1305)
74. Grant program to provide mid-career training for health professionals (Section 5206, p. 1307)
75. Grant program to fund nurse-managed health clinics (Section 5208, p. 1310)
76. Grant program to support primary care training programs (Section 5301, p. 1315)
77. Grant program to fund training for direct care workers (Section 5302, p. 1322)
78. Grant program to develop dental training programs (Section 5303, p. 1325)
79. Demonstration program to increase access to dental health care in underserved communities (Section 5304, p. 1331)
80. Grant program to promote geriatric education centers (Section 5305, p. 1334)
81. Grant program to promote health professionals entering geriatrics (Section 5305, p. 1339)
82. Grant program to promote training in mental and behavioral health (Section 5306, p. 1344)
83. Grant program to promote nurse retention programs (Section 5309, p. 1354)
84. Student loan forgiveness for nursing school faculty (Section 5311(b), p. 1360)
85. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors and outcomes (Section 5313, p. 1364)
86. Public Health Sciences Track for medical students (Section 5315, p. 1372)
87. Primary Care Extension Program to educate providers (Section 5405, p. 1404)
88. Grant program for demonstration projects to address health workforce shortage needs (Section 5507, p. 1442)
89. Grant program for demonstration projects to develop training programs for home health aides (Section 5507, p. 1447)
90. Grant program to establish new primary care residency programs (Section 5508(a), p. 1458)
91. Program of payments to teaching health centers that sponsor medical residency training (Section 5508(c), p. 1462)
92. Graduate nurse education demonstration program (Section 5509, p. 1472)
93. Grant program to establish demonstration projects for community- based mental health settings (Section 5604, p. 1486)
94. Commission on Key National Indicators (Section 5605, p. 1489)
95. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6102, p. 1554)
96. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6103(a)(3), p. 1561)
97. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 6103(b)(3), p. 1568)
98. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 6112, p. 1589)
99. Demonstration projects for nursing facilities involved in the culture change movement (Section 6114, p. 1597)
100. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1619)
101. Standing methodology committee for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1629)
102. Board of Governors for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute Section 6301, p. 1638)
103. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (Section 6301(e), p. 1656)
104. Elder Justice Coordinating Council (Section 6703, p. 1773)
105. Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation (Section 6703, p. 1776)
106. Grant program to create elder abuse forensic centers (Section 6703, p. 1783)
Grant program to promote continuing education for long-term care staffers (Section 6703, p. 1787)
107. Grant program to improve management practices and training (Section 6703, p. 1788)
108. Grant program to subsidize costs of electronic health records (Section 6703, p. 1791)
109. Grant program to promote adult protective services (Section 6703, p. 1796)
110. Grant program to conduct elder abuse detection and prevention (Section 6703, p. 1798)
111. Grant program to support long-term care ombudsmen (Section 6703, p. 1800)
112. National Training Institute for long-term care surveyors (Section 6703, p. 1806)
113. Grant program to fund State surveys of long-term care residences (Section 6703, p. 1809)
114. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 8002, p. 1926)
115. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 8002, p. 1927)
116. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 8002, p. 1931)
117. Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 8002(c), p. 1938)
118. Multi-state health plans offered by Office of Personnel Management (Section 10104(p), p. 2086)
119. Advisory board for multi-state health plans (Section 10104(p), p. 2094)
120. Pregnancy Assistance Fund (Section 10212, p. 2164)
121. Value-based purchasing program for ambulatory surgical centers (Section 10301, p. 2176)
122. Demonstration project for payment adjustments to home health services (Section 10315, p. 2200)
123. Pilot program for care of individuals in environmental emergency declaration areas (Section 10323, p. 2223)
124. Grant program to screen at-risk individuals for environmental health conditions (Section 10323(b), p. 2231)
125. Pilot programs to implement value-based purchasing (Section 10326, p. 2242)
126. Grant program to support community-based collaborative care networks (Section 10333, p. 2265)
127. Centers for Disease Control Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
128. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
129. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
130. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
131. Food and Drug Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
132. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
133. Grant program to promote small business wellness programs (Section 10408, p 2285)
134. Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2289)
135. Cures Acceleration Network Review Board (Section 10409, p. 2291)
136. Grant program for Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2297)
137. Grant program to promote centers of excellence for depression (Section 10410, p. 2304)
138. Advisory committee for young women’s breast health awareness education campaign (Section 10413, p. 2322)
139. Grant program to provide assistance to provide information to young women with breast cancer (Section 10413, p. 2326)
140. Interagency Access to Health Care in Alaska Task Force (Section 10501, p. 2329)
141. 142. Grant program to train nurse practitioners as primary care providers (Section 10501(e), p. 2332)
142. Grant program for community-based diabetes prevention (Section 10501(g), p. 2337)
143. Grant program for providers who treat a high percentage of medically underserved populations (Section 10501(k), p. 2343)
144. Grant program to recruit students to practice in underserved communities (Section 10501(l), p. 2344)
145. Community Health Center Fund (Section 10503, p. 2355)
146. Demonstration project to provide access to health care for the uninsured at reduced fees (Section 10504, p. 2357)
147. Demonstration program to explore alternatives to tort litigation (Section 10607, p. 2369)
148. Indian Health demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (S. 1790, Section 112, p. 24)*
149. Office of Indian Men’s Health (S. 1790, Section 136, p. 71)*
150. Indian Country modular component facilities demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 146, p. 108)*
151. Indian mobile health stations demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 147, p. 111)*
152. Office of Direct Service Tribes (S. 1790, Section 172, p. 151)*
153. Indian Health Service mental health technician training program (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 173)*
154. Indian Health Service program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 192)*
155. Indian Health Service program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 194)*
156. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 204)*
157. Indian youth life skills demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 220)*
158. Indian Health Service Director of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment (S. 1790, Section 199B, p. 258)*

*Section 10221, page 2173 of H.R. 3590 deems that S. 1790 shall be deemed as passed with certain amendments.

Tea Party Unveils ‘Contract From America’ Planks
Newsmax.com article
Thursday, 01 Apr 2010 11:58 AM Article Font Size

You won’t find many surveys that involve over 365,000 respondents, but that’s how many online forms were completed to determine the top three planks of the tea-party movement’s platform released Thursday as part of the new “Contract From America.”

Leading the list as issue No. 1: “Protect the Constitution: Require each bill to identity the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does.”

That proposal won the approval of 80.7 percent of the survey responses collected so far. Voting will continue through Monday at ContractFromAmerica.com.

The second most popular of the 21 issues that are up for a vote: “Reject cap and trade: Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumer prices, and weaken the nation’s global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures.”

The goal of that plank, tea party officials say, is to block any imposition of the cap and trade tax, whether by congressional fiat or by the Environmental Protection Agency, which has threatened to act unilaterally if Congress fails to do so. The issue won the support of 70.8 percent of respondents.

Issue No. 3 was unveiled Thursday based on the survey responses: “Demand a balanced budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax hike.” That plank received the approval of 69.9 percent of respondents.

Ryan Hecker is the 29-year-old Houston attorney who came up with the Contract From America concept even before the tea party movement was launched in February 2009. He says the ultimate objective is to influence the outcome of the midterm elections the way the Contract With America did in 1994, only more so:

“My dream, my hope,” Hecker tells Newsmax, “is that economic conservative candidates and those who want to be economic conservatives in the future will sign on, and that we get a bunch of blue-dog Democrats and tons of elected officials onboard, and that they recognize that any document they craft themselves won’t be as powerful as one coming from the people.

So I’m hoping this will be the legislative agenda, coming from the people, for the 2010 elections.”

The Contract From America proposal first emerged at CPAC in February, promising a legislative agenda bubbling up from the grass-roots rather than down from legislators. Since then, Hecker his colleagues at the Tea Party Patriots and other grass-roots organizations have sifted through a small mountain of proposals submitted from voters across the United States.

Using more than 5,000 surveys mostly completed by members of the grass-roots movement, they winnowed the ideas down to 21 proposals.

Next they posted the list online in the form of an extended survey, and directed voters to the ContractFromAmerica Web site to select the top 10 ideas.

The 10 proposals that the grass-roots voters deem the most important will be included in the full ContractFromAmerica proposal, which will be unveiled on April 15 during the massive Tax Day Tea Party rally being conducted in the nation’s capital. Reflecting the widespread, de-centralized power of the tea party movement, the Contract From America also will be simultaneously revealed in Houston, Austin, Atlanta, and 80 other locations in the country.

Hecker, who sits on the national leadership council of Tea Party Patriots, gives many others due credit for helping to make his vision a reality. He tells Newsmax that the Contract From America is intended “to help turn the tea party movement into more than just a protest movement. One of the major criticisms, which I is think is unjustified, is that they’re just ‘anti.’ This is offering powerful ideas from the people.”

The Contract From America concept has received the backing of former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, one of the architects of the original Contract With America, which helped frame the political debate that preceding the Republican takeover of the Congress in 1994.

It’s not the handiwork of me or any public official,” Gingrich wrote regarding the new Contract in a February column. “It is the genuine voice of the American people. Unlike the current political dynamic, in which the will of Washington is forced on America, this is the voice of America coming to Washington.”

Hecker is careful to emphasize he has deep respect for the original Contract. But he says this one should be even more effective.

“The Contract From America was a great document,” Hecker says, “but what this says is it’s not top down, it’s bottom up . . . It comes from the people, and it’s how representative government should work.”

What got Hecker, a young attorney fresh out of law school, interested in promoting a new political covenant in America?

“It was my frustration with the Republican Party’s lack of legitimacy on economic-conservative issues,” he explains. “They no longer represented for me a proxy for my beliefs on the economic front. So this idea came from that. I thought, ‘How do we move this country back into an economic conservative direction if that’s not where it seems either party is headed. And then it just fit perfectly within the tea party movement.”

From – Steve Kim, Republican Nominee for Illinois Attorney General

Health care reform is an important issue that must be pursued in a
bi-partisan manner. The health care bill signed by the President is not
such a piece of legislation.

Furthermore, this health care legislation is in direct violation of the
Commerce Clause as the Constitution has never given the authority to
Congress to mandate an individual to make a purchase of a service or a
good.

One’s life and health and how they choose to live it are not a privilege,
but a right that Congress should never impede upon. The claim that
requiring individuals to purchase automobile liability insurance as
precedent for a requirement to purchase health insurance is not a valid
argument. In the case of automobile liability insurance, a driver’s license is not a right but a privilege that can be taken away and has certain thresholds that must be met to obtain one. In the case of health insurance, this is a personal choice of the individual on what safeguards they choose to have in the case of their own medical care.

Additionally, Congress does not have the constitutional right to regulate non-interstate commerce. While Congress has used its taxing power to fund Social Security and Medicare, never before has it used its commerce power to mandate that an individual person engage in an economic transaction with a private company.

Source: Homer Horizon

Fifth Tea Party event to be held

April 10
Rep. candidate for governor Bill Brady headlines speakers

by Ryan Terrell

March 24, 2010

Republican candidate for governor Bill Brady headlines a list of speakers scheduled to address what’s expected to be a crowd of thousands at the Homer-Lockport Tea Party’s next event Saturday, April 10.

Presented on the lawns of St. John Serbian Orthodox Church, 13847 S. Bell Road, the Homer-Lockport Tax Day Tea Party event will kick off at 11 a.m.

“We’re expecting it be the biggest event yet and last time we had more than 2,000 people come out,” said Vivienne Porter, an organizer of the Homer-Lockport Tea Party, which has hosted four Tea Party events. “This time it will be especially big considering the healthcare bill that just passed.”

In addition to Brady, keynote speakers will include Dan Proft, local political commentator and former Republican candidate for governor, Dr. Steve Spontak, who will address healthcare issues, Tom Bernicky and Corey Singer.

“We’re definitely going to address the healthcare bill,” Porter said, calling the day President Barack Obama signed the bill a “sad day” in the United States. “We’re going to have a petition available to sign to send to [Illinois Attorney General] Lisa Madigan to let her know we want Illinois to be part of the injunction against the bill.”

Porter added that a voter registration table will be set up at the event, as well informational booths, including one regarding healthcare for seniors.

“[The Tea Party movement] is a long, ongoing process. We’re just trying to educate everyone about the different issues going on. People need to be informed about the issues in this country,” she said, adding that Megan Fox will sing while a host of vendors will offer food.

Porter said the Homer-Lockport Tea Party has grown by leaps and bounds over the past half-year — from drawing 400 people at its inaugural event last Fourth of July to 2,000 at a forum featuring candidates for Illinois senator in March.

“We’ve been growing through word of mouth but we’re also taking advantage of social media, such as our Web site, Facebook and Twitter,” she said. “Whatever we have to do to get the word out we’re trying.”

Residents of the community and surrounding areas are invited to the April 10 event.

“Anyone who loves their country and their freedom and cares about the future of their country for their children and their grandchildren should come out,” Porter said.

Parking will be available at the church or on side streets near the church, she added.

For more information regarding the event, visit homerlockportteaparty.com.

WHAT: Homer-Lockport Tax Day Tea Party

WHERE: The lawns of St. John Serbian Orthodox Church, 13847 S. Bell Road in Homer Glen

WHY: To protest the overall state of the country

WHEN: 11 a.m. Saturday, April 10

Wall Street Journal – April 2, 2010

If Congress can force you to buy insurance, Article I limits on federal power are a dead letter

The constitutional challenges to ObamaCare have come quickly, and the media are portraying them mostly as hopeless gestures—the political equivalent of Civil War re-enactors. Discussion over: You lost, deal with it.

The press corps never dismissed the legal challenges to the war on terror so easily, but then liberals have long treated property rights and any limits on federal power to regulate commerce as 18th-century anachronisms. In fact, the legal challenges to ObamaCare are serious and carry enormous implications for the future of American liberty.

View Full Image

Associated Press

A pocket sized copy of the U.S. Constitution
.***
The most important legal challenge turns on the “individual mandate”—the new requirement that almost every U.S. citizen must buy government-approved health insurance. Failure to comply will be punished by an annual tax penalty that by 2016 will rise to $750 or 2% of income, whichever is higher. President Obama opposed this kind of coercion as a candidate but has become a convert. He even argued in a September interview that “I absolutely reject that notion” that this tax is a tax, because it is supposedly for your own good.

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and 13 other state AGs—including Louisiana Democrat Buddy Caldwell—claim this is an unprecedented exercise of state power. Never before has Congress required people to buy a private product to qualify as a law-abiding citizen.

As the Congressional Budget Office noted in 1994, “Federal mandates typically apply to people as parties to economic transactions, rather than as members of society.” The only law in the same league is conscription, though in that case the Constitution gives Congress the explicit power to raise a standing army.

Democrats claim the mandate is justified under the Commerce Clause, because health care and health insurance are a form of interstate commerce. They also claim the mandate is constitutional because it is structured as a tax, which is legal under the 16th Amendment. And it is true that the Supreme Court has ruled as recently as 2005, in the homegrown marijuana case Gonzales v. Raich, that Congress can regulate essentially economic activities that “taken in the aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce.”

But even in Raich the High Court did not say that the Commerce Clause can justify any federal regulation, and in other modern cases the Court has rebuked Congress for overreaching. In U.S. v. Lopez(1995), the High Court ruled that carrying a gun near a school zone was not economically significant enough to qualify as interstate commerce, while in Morrison (2000) it overturned a law about violence against women on the same grounds.

All human activity arguably has some economic footprint. So if Congress can force Americans to buy a product, the question is what remains of the government of limited and enumerated powers, as provided in Article I. The only remaining restraint on federal power would be the Bill of Rights, though the Founders considered those 10 amendments to be an affirmation of the rights inherent in the rest of the Constitution, not the only restraint on government. If the insurance mandate stands, then why can’t Congress insist that Americans buy GM cars, or that obese Americans eat their vegetables or pay a fat tax penalty?

The mandate did not pose the same constitutional problems when Mitt Romney succeeded in passing one in Massachusetts, because state governments have police powers and often wider plenary authority under their constitutions than does the federal government. Florida’s constitution also has a privacy clause that underscores the strong state interest in opposing Congress’s health-care intrusion.

As for the assertion that the mandate is really a tax, this is an attempt at legal finesse. The mandate is the legal requirement to buy a certain product, while the tax is the means of enforcement. This is not a true income or even excise tax. Congress cannot, merely by invoking a tax, blow up the Framers’ attempt to restrain government under Article I.

The states also have a strong case with their claim that ObamaCare upsets the Constitution’s federalist framework by converting the states into arms of the federal government. The bill requires states to spend billions of dollars to rearrange their health-care markets and vastly expands who can enroll in Medicaid, whether or not states can afford it.

Florida already spends a little over a quarter of its budget on Medicaid, and under ObamaCare that will expand by at least 50% as some 1.3 million new people enroll. Those benefits, and the burden of setting up the new exchanges, will cost Florida $149 million in 2014 and $1.05 billion annually by 2018. The state will either have to cut other priorities or raise taxes. In legal essence, ObamaCare infringes on state sovereignty and unconstitutionally conscripts state officials.

Less potent, at least to our reading, is the challenge on behalf of state laws that bar or exempt their citizens from the mandate. Virginia passed such a law earlier this year, and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is suing on those grounds. But while such efforts serve as healthy political protest, federal laws that are constitutional are supreme under the 10th Amendment, and states can’t “nullify” a Congressional action.

***
Judicial and media liberals are trying to dismiss these challenges as a revanchist attempt to repeal the New Deal, or, worse, as a way to restore the states’s rights of Jim Crow. Modern liberals genuinely believe the federal government can order the states and individuals to do anything as long as it is in pursuit of their larger social agenda. They also want to deter more state Attorneys General from joining these lawsuits.

The AGs should not be deterred, because the truth is that ObamaCare breaks new constitutional ground. Neither the House nor Senate Judiciary Committees held hearings on the law’s constitutionality, and we are not aware of any Justice Department opinion on the matter. Judges have an obligation not to be so cavalier in dismissing claims on behalf of political liberty. Under the Constitution, American courts don’t give advisory opinions. They rule on specific cases, and the states have a good one to make.

Democrats may have been able to trample the rules of the Senate to pass their unpopular bill on a narrow partisan vote, but they shouldn’t be able to trample the Constitution as well.

From the American Thinker
WordWayze

The Senate health care bill just signed contains some exemptions to the “pay-or-play” mandate requiring purchase of Obamacare-approved health insurance or payment of a penalty fine. As Fox News has pointed out, for instance, the Amish are excused from the mandate:

So while most Americans would be required to sign up with insurance companies or government insurance plans, the church would serve as something of an informal insurance plan for the Amish.

Law experts say that kind of exemption withstands scrutiny.

“Here the statute is going to say that people who are conscientiously opposed to paying for health insurance don’t have to do it where the conscientious objection arises from religion,” said Mark Tushnet a Harvard law professor. “And that’s perfectly constitutional.”

Apparently, this exemption will apply similarly to believers in Islam, which considers health insurance – and, for that matter, any form of risk insurance – to be haraam (forbidden).

Steve Gilbert of Sweetness & Light calls our attention to the probability that Muslims will also be expempt. According to a March 23 publication on an authoritative Islamic Web site managed by Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid, various fatwas (religious decrees) absolutely forbid Muslim participation in any sort of health care or other risk insurance:

Health insurance is haraam like other types of commercial insurance, because it is based on ambiguity, gambling and riba (usury). This is what is stated in fatwas by the senior scholars.

In Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (15/277) there is a quotation of a statement of the Council of Senior Scholars concerning the prohibition on insurance and why it is haraam:

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (15/251):

Firstly: Commercial insurance of all types is haraam because it involves ambiguity, riba, uncertainty, gambling and consuming people’s wealth unlawfully, and other shar’i

Secondly: It is not permissible for the Muslim to get involved with insurance companies by working in administration or otherwise, because working in them comes under the heading of cooperating in sin and transgression, and Allaah forbids that as He says: “but do not help one another in sin and transgression. And fear Allaah. Verily, Allaah is Severe in punishment”

[al-Maa'idah 5:2]. End quote.

reservations.
And Allaah knows best.

So, it turns out that observant Muslims are not only strictly forbidden from buying any health insurance under the ObamaCare mandate, but may also not even work for any company that provides such insurance or any other form of commercial insurance.

It is not made clear whether or not it is religiously okay to accept “free” non-insured medical care such as that offered in hospital ERs and to some who are covered by Medicaid.

Whether it’s all right to serve as a doctor, nurse, or orderly caring for patients whose medical services are being paid for by insurance is not covered in the present response – but one could probably obtain a religious ruling from the Sheikh, whose site welcomes the submission of questions about Islamic law and practices.

WordWayze is the nom de plume of a freelance writer and political pundit who would prefer not to become the object of any attention such has been paid to the Mohammed cartoonists of Denmark and others.

How do they relate to the hiring of 16,000 new IRS?

How does the Census relate to identifying family members in prison or jail? Isn’t this a voting block the President feels is not utilized by Law at the present time?

How does the Census relate to the Health Care Bill?

How does the regulation requiring insurers to cover children to age 26 relate to the Income Threshold? (TAX THE RICH; HOUSEHOLDS?)

The 2010 Census asks very detailed questions regarding:
#3. Is this a house, apartment, or mobile home?
Owned by you or someone in this household with a mortgage or
loan? Include home
Include home equity loan.

Owned by you or someone in this household free and clear (without a mortgage or
Loan)

Rented?

Occupied without payment of rent?

#5. Please provide information for each person living here. Start with a person living here who owns or rents this house, apartment, or mobile home. If the owner or renter lives somewhere else, start with any adult living there. This will be person 1.
What is the persons name?

#7. What is Person 1’s age and what is Person 1’s date of birth?
Please report babies as age 0 when the child is less than 1 year old.
Print number in boxes.

Age on April1, 2010 Month Day Year of Birth

#10. Does Person 1 sometimes live or stay somewhere else?

In college housing
In the military
At a seasonal or second residence
For child custody
In jail or prison
In a nursing home
For another reason

You are asked to complete these questions for every household member. Talk about doing the legwork for the IRS.
This information gets passed on to the Sec. of the HHS and will be passed on to the Individual States.

You ask why?

Title II: Role of Public Programs-Subtitle A: Improved Access to Medicaid-(Sec2001, as modified by Section 10201) beginning in calendar year 2014.
(Sec. 2002) Requires a state to use an individual’s or household’s modified gross income to determine eligibility for non-elderly individuals, without applying any income or expense disregards or assets or resources test.

Subtitle B: Enhanced Support for the Children’s Health Insurance Program
(Sec. 2101, as modified be Sec. 10201)
Requires a state CHIP plan, beginning January 1, 2014, to use modified gross income and household income to determine CHIP eligibility.

Subtitle D: Medicare Part D Improvements for Prescription Drug Plans and MA-PD Plans (Sec. 3308)
Requires part D enrollees who exceed certain income thresholds to pay higher premiums. Revises the current authority of the IRS to disclose income information to the Social Security Administration for purposes of adjusting the part B subsidy.

TitleX: Strengthening Quality Affordable Health Care for All Americans-Subtitle A: Provisions Relating to Title 1-(Sec. 10108)
Defines “qualified employee” as an employee whose required contribution for such coverage and household income fall within a specified range.

At a time when there are few full time and more part time employment opportunities
All members or the Household’s Income will be considered; this includes the dependents up to age 26.

Does this give you any indication of WHO WILL BE TAXED?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2010/pdf/timeline_chart.pdf

-The following is a statement from Steve Kim, Republican Nominee for
Illinois Attorney General, regarding the passage of the health care
legislation.

Health care reform is an important issue that must be pursued in a
bi-partisan manner. The health care bill signed by the President is not
such a piece of legislation.

Furthermore, this health care legislation is in direct violation of the
Commerce Clause as the Constitution has never given the authority to
Congress to mandate an individual to make a purchase of a service or a
good.

One’s life and health and how they choose to live it are not a privilege,
but a right that Congress should never impede upon. The claim that
requiring individuals to purchase automobile liability insurance as
precedent for a requirement to purchase health insurance is not a valid
argument. In the case of automobile liability insurance, a driver’s license is not a right but a privilege that can be taken away and has certain
thresholds that must be met to obtain one. In the case of health insurance, this is a personal choice of the individual on what safeguards they choose to have in the case of their own medical care.

Additionally, Congress does not have the constitutional right to regulate non-interstate commerce. While Congress has used its taxing power to fund Social Security and Medicare, never before has it used its commerce power to mandate that an individual person engage in an economic transaction with a private company.