Obama’s Blood Money

I am tired of the finger-pointing, politicking, nuanced meanings, smoke and mirrors, and outright lies.  Worse yet, all of it may end up working.

Here’s a thought: healthcare reform should be about maximizing the health of a nation and extending coverage for everyone — including the unborn.  Healthcare reform must promote and encourage better health for generations yet to come — not destroy them.  

On October 7, 2009, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said the following when asked about federal dollars for abortion : “Well, I don’t want to get me in trouble at church, but I would mention there’s a law that precludes the use of federal funds for abortion that isn’t going to be changed in these health care bills.”

I give Mr. Gibbs all the credit in the world for such an accurate, skillful and deliberately misleading non-answer.  The expertise necessary to dissect such a disarming reply is most remarkable.  Thank goodness for fact-checkers like the National Right to Life Committee.

“[T]here’s a law… that isn’t going to be changed.”  Accurate ?  Yes.  Misleading?  Absolutely.

Pro-life people just want to know the truth.  Are government monies going to be used to help pay for abortions in Obama’s healthcare reform?  

Yes.  Assuming proposed reform ultimately passes–yes.

FACT #1: There is no current federal law that would prevent the new programs created by the pending healthcare bills from paying for abortion on demand.  And every attempt to add such limitations to the healthcare bills has been blocked.

Democrats are hiding behind the “Hyde Amendment” when they say federal funds cannot be used for elective abortions.  Guess what folks?  Democrats are completely bypassing the Hyde Amendment which only applies to appropriations bills.  The new premium subsidy programs are not funded through appropriations bills.

FACT #2: Under H.R. 3200, as amended by the Capps-Waxman Amendment, under the public option, the Department of Health and Human Resources is explicitly authorized to pay for elective abortions using funds drawn on a U.S. Treasury account.

“[T]here’s a law… that isn’t going to be changed.”  Accurate ?  Yes.  Misleading?  Absolutely.  It ignores the real question.  What about the unborn?

Any person intentionally misleading the public on the critical issue of federal funding of abortion will have blood on their hands if the proposed healthcare reform passes.  Tax dollars, federal funds, Treasury accounts, federal subsidies–whatever you want to call it–is blood money if it helps to kill the unborn.

Advertisements

Federal Mandates for Dummies

Well, I just picked up my Sunday morning mail. Yes, it was actually Saturday’s mail, but I digress. There’s almost usually nothing that I look forward to about getting the mail, and this morning is just one prime example of the many wonderful surprises awaiting most of us.

The electric bill.  Yippee…

Now I don’t know where you live, but lately in Missouri it has been hotter than the flames surrounding Obama’s Healthcare Proposal.  So, of course I was curious to see how much more I might have to pay the electric company than usual considering the air conditioning has been running non-stop (kind of like the federal deficit).

Actually, the bill was lower than I might have guessed by about $70.00 compared to winter rates and $10.00 less than last month.  This was a pleasant surprise considering we run the ceiling fans most of the time also.  (But I’ve heard that ceiling fans help lower the cost of air conditioning a bit.)  And then I thought about the savings that I expected when I changed every single light bulb in my home to extremely expensive energy efficient light bulbs.  Maybe I’m doing something right.  Right?   

Then I read this in the electric company’s newsletter:

“[W]e recognize that this is a challenging time…”   Well, thank you.   That makes me feel not at all better. 

“… this [16%] rate increase will help….”  Help what?  Help me?

“… help KCP&L pay for environmental investments… and allow us to meet federal environmental mandates.”  Oh, I see.  The new rate increase will help the electric company pass the costs to me. 

Lesson:  EVERY TIME the federal government MANDATES something to energy corporations, insurance companies, healthcare providers, or even educators, YOU and I are the ones who get the privilege of paying for ALL OF IT. 

This is precisely why the President’s current policies are so aggravating: that despite his “Ivy League” education, his basic economic understanding is that money grows on trees.  (That’s the technical term for his fiscal policies.)  Or at least he truly believes that the federal government can create wealth by printing more money and leverage the expected output of future generations yet unborn by continuing to charge the giant Red China credit card.

And what ever happened to the President’s promise to not raise  taxes on the middle and lower class to help me?  Federal mandates are just another type of sneaky tax — they just come around and in through the back door (or in this case my mailbox). 

Apparently, I have been helping myself just fine.  My electric bill was lower than expected.  I was saving energy and saving money.  But thanks to the government’s “help” I will now be experiencing a 16% increase in my electric bill despite all my attempts to lower it.  Thank you big government — I couldn’t have done it without you. 

And for what it’s worth, the government cannot promise something for nothing.  Healthcare — whatever its final form — will never be free.  “Rich” people and the businesses run by them will not be paying for government programs or mandates.  You and I will be paying for them one way or another.  The costs are ultimately passed down to the end-user, the consumer, and the very citizens the government proclaims to “help”.

Biden Predicts Crisis

I suppose Biden himself could also be a bit of crisis for Sen. Obama’s campaign.  Why so many people are willing to overlook the fact that Obama is the least prepared and most inexperienced presidential candidate in modern times is a quandary.  And why people think he can fix the economy when he has never actually even run a business or even a city government is remarkable. 

This is not some fairy tale story with a happy ending if Sen. Obama is elected.  No.  This is as serious as it gets.  The person elected will be responsible not only for our economy but also for our security and position in the world.  Russia, North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Palestine and Venezuela with all their problems do not disappear with an inspiring speech or campaign promise.  I think Biden understands that.  I think voters understand that too, but we ignore it to our peril. 

“Live free or die!” is one of our nation’s storied mottoes, yet America is on the precipice of trading freedom with its uncertainties and endless opportunities for the mediocre “safety” of massive government programs funded with your money to fix all of our problems.  Obama is attempting to buy votes with the promise of tax rebate checks for millions of people who don’t even pay any Federal income taxes.  I grant that McCain is not the best example of conservative economic prowess, but Obama is much worse and intentionally so.  We forget that government created these problems in the first place.  Over-taxing success and feeding more money to government solves nothing and kills jobs. 

In addition, we are about to tell the world whether they can “test” our resolve or not.  Obama has consistently demonstrated his willingness to back down from a necessary fight.  And he’s been dead wrong.  If Obama had been President these past four years, Iraq would be lost.  Gone would be the chance at a stable democracy and the new opportunity for women’s rights in the Middle East.  In fact, if Obama had been President eight years ago, Saddam Hussein would still be in power today.  And so what Obama represents to me is quite simple—less freedom here and abroad and more fear.  Don’t take my word for it, just ask Obama’s VP.            

 

Economics of Necessity

Hat Tip: Conservatism With Heart

 

 

Brass Tacks: The Tax Plan Details

Presidential Candidates Offer New Tax Policies

With the Democrat and Republican Conventions nominating their Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates, the fall political season will soon be in full swing. The campaigns of both Senators Obama and McCain have released proposals that state their positions on taxes. 

While the tax proposals are inevitably changing as the campaigns progress, there is a clear difference in their underlying perspectives. It is helpful to examine the “What Will I Pay” question by comparing the two plans. The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center has attempted to compare the tax liability for individuals based on the Obama and McCain proposals.

Determining personal taxes is a somewhat complicated issue, but the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has attempted to compare the result if the major proposals of both candidates were implemented. One of the published reports compares the Obama and McCain tax plans for a family of two parents and two dependent children.

Assume that this family of four is called USA Family. With an income of $50,000, the TPC estimates that USA Family saves $647 under the Obama Plan and $721 with the McCain plan.

If USA Family’s income is $100,000, then the savings under Sen. Obama’s plan is $1,883 and for the McCain plan $3,085. With USA Family income of $150,000, the Obama tax cut is $3,393 and the McCain plan is the same.

If USA Family has still higher income, the Obama plan involves a tax increase. The $500,000 income USA Family pays $6,727 more in tax under the Obama plan and has no change under the McCain plan. Finally, a USA Family with income of $1 million would pay an added $42,715 under the Obama plan and be unchanged under the McCain plan.

Editor’s Note: Your editor and this organization [Salvation Army] take no position on the presidential candidates or the fall election. This information on tax proposals of both parties is offered as an educational service to our friends. The following two sections describe in more detail the specifics of the Obama and the McCain proposals.