Liar, Liar—ObamaCare’s Pants on Fire!

image source

Catherine J. Frompovich
Activist Post

I don’t know about readers, but when I was a kid, one of our favorite sayings that we shouted to other kids we thought were joshing around, not playing straight, or not playing by the rules was, “Liar, liar, pants on fire!”

Who ever would have thought that in today’s political climate about healthcare that very sentiment would be bandied around about a U.S. president’s signature piece of legislation? Times are a changing, and I guess anything goes, especially when it comes to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a true oxymoron if there ever was one—affordable?, also known as ObamaCare.

For starters, please listen to Congressman Tom Price (an M.D.) from Georgia grill HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius about how ObamaCare statistics stack up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eGxmlJDUzTI#t=0.

The back and forth between the Congressman and an obviously totally inept HHS Secretary is so blatant and upsetting that there should be a mandate for a total review and overhaul of the Obama Administration at all levels if Sebelius is an example of what taxpayers are getting for the salaries we pay to presidential cabinet members and department heads. Sebelius’s performance reminds one of the “Peter Principle” working at warp speed.

According to Investopedia [1], this is how the Peter Principle works.

An observation that in an organizational hierarchy, every employee will rise or get promoted to his or her level of incompetence. The Peter Principle is based on the notion that employees will get promoted as long as they are competent, but at some point will fail to get promoted beyond a certain job because it has become too challenging for them. Employees rise to their level of incompetence and stay there. Over time, every position in the hierarchy will be filled by someone who is not competent enough to carry out his or her new duties. [….][CJF emphasis added]

Even with proper employee training, the Peter Principle predicts the employee will eventually get to a position where they are incompetent because of further promotion. [CJF emphasis added]

Not satisfied with the Sebelius shuffle, the Congressional Energy and Commerce Committee [ECC] finally went directly to the insurance companies, got their information, and published a report [2] wherein the opening paragraph states:

Data provided to the committee by every insurance provider in the health care law’s Federally Facilitated Marketplace (FFM) shows that, as of April 15, 2014, only 67 percent of individuals and families that had selected a health plan in the federally facilitated marketplace had paid their first month’s premium and therefore completed the enrollment process. Nationwide, only 25 percent of paid enrollees are ages 18 to 34. The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations today invited the leaders of some of the nation’s largest insurance providers and their trade groups to testify at a hearing, “PPACA Enrollment and the Insurance Industry,” on Wednesday, May 7, 2014, at 10:15 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building. [CJF emphasis added] [….]

The committee has compiled the data that provides a snapshot of the true enrollment picture as of April 15, 2014, after the official end of the open enrollment period. Due to the administration’s repeated and unilateral extensions and changes, as well as the fact that many insurers have reported that individuals will still have time to pay their first month’s premium, the committee plans to ask the insurers in the federally facilitated marketplace to provide an enrollment update by May 20, 2014.

In his April 17th press conference, President Obama crowed how successful his signature healthcare reform act was operating. What? How can that be when premiums aren’t paid? In order to have insurance, customers must pay premiums. With only two-thirds (67%) of acclaimed ‘insureds’ paying their first month’s FFM premium, how can a health insurance program be considered a success? Doesn’t it smell like something’s burning?

According to the ECC report [3],

Nationwide (as of April 15, 2014), 67 percent of people had completed enrollment and paid their first month’s premium and 33 percent had not. Of those who had paid their first month’s premium: 

Under 18: six percent; 

Ages 18 to 25: 10 percent; 

26 to 34: 15 percent; 

35 to 44: 16 percent; 

45 to 54: 23 percent; 

55 to 64: 29 percent; 

65 and older: 1 percent.

However, if readers want to peruse the nitty-gritty figures telling the percentages of individual families that paid their premiums in numerous states, I suggest studying this state-by-state page in the ECC report. “Paids” go from a low of 42% in Texas to a high of 88% in Arkansas. How’s that for “working” for you?

Perhaps ECC Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) is not exaggerating when he says,

In a sad reversal away from its vows of transparency, the Obama administration, from inside the Oval Office on down, has gone to extraordinary lengths to keep basic details of the health law from the public. Tired of receiving incomplete pictures of enrollment in the health care law, we went right to the source and found that the administration’s recent declarations of success may be unfounded. We need a complete picture of how this law is working. We will continue to strive for transparency and hold the administration accountable for this law’s shortcomings and broken promises. [4] [CJF emphasis added]

Nevertheless, more than just striving for transparency must be done by Congress, I suggest. Congress has to address, and someone needs to be made accountable for, the following:

• Between 5 and 6 million formerly insured people who lost their insurance due to ObamaCare and now must pay between double and triple the amount of premiums paid prior to ObamaCare.
• Employers opting to pay the ObamaCare fines rather than provide health insurance as employers had done for decades as employee benefits.
• Restructure ObamaCare – preferably ditch it completely – so that employers cannot downsize employees to part-timers to legally avoid ObamaCare regulations.
• Additional taxes written into ObamaCare that run over $400 BILLION [5,6]. Are readers aware of that nice little surprise in the Affordable (?) Care Act?
• Due to states rejecting ObamaCare, that will cost taxpayers BILLIONS from Medicaid expansion. (Source)

ObamaCare apparently looks and acts like a prescription for bankrupting the country! No ifs, ands, or ‘butts’ about it! It looks like a picture-perfect Ponzi scheme which, if any private individual would try to pull off, he or she would find their fanny sitting not-so-pretty in prison stripes for at least a few years.

So how can the feds, or an administration, get away with apparent “Pinocchio proofs” (lies) told when selling an insurance program before, during, after, and various extensions of its apparent unsuccessful launch, even to the point of no transparency or cooperation with Congressional investigations?

Everyone needs to remember the shenanigans of former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, plus the unrelenting push of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [9,10], who, in this writer’s opinion, should have been put out to pasture years ago by voters in Nevada.

The proverbial arm-twisting for ObamaCare votes by both those members of Congress should be the key reason for repealing ObamaCare because that bill actually was passed under duress, even possible bullying-like tactics, plus “deals” i.e., “On July 8, 2009, Barack Obama met with hospital lobbyists and struck a deal with the hospital industry to remove the public option in exchange for the industry’s support of the bill, while also reducing costs for hospitals under the plan.” [7] Furthermore, consider the backlash of American people who oppose ObamaCare and apparently have told their members of Congress “No! to ObamaCare.”

As of March 31, 2014 according to HuffPost Pollster, 52.4% oppose ObamaCare while only 41.1% favor it. [8] That’s already a double-digit spread.

What is it that the seeming cabal*-type movers and shakers in Washington, DC don’t get about “No, we don’t want ObamaCare or Repeal ObamaCare”? Or, perhaps, is there a new genre of politics in effect: Force-fed government mandates?

Notes:

[1] http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/peter-principle.asp
[2] http://energycommerce.house.gov/press-release/committee-learns-who%E2%80%99s-paid-obamacare-april-15-only-67-percent-enrollees-federal
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/15/how-much-will-obamacare-cost-in-taxes/
[6] http://jeffduncan.house.gov/full-list-obamacare-tax-hikes
[7] http://www.conservapedia.com/ObamaCare
[8] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/04/health-care-poll_n_5086821.html
[9] http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304347904579310683963665974
[10] http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/harry-reids-dirty-laundry/

*The Free Dictionary by Farlex definition of cabal: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cabal

1.Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a small group of intriguers, esp. one formed for political purposes
2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a secret plot, esp. a political one; conspiracy; intrigue

Resources:

Obama Care Facts / dispelling the myths
http://obamacarefacts.com/costof-obamacare.php

ObamaCare (from the conservative viewpoint)
http://www.conservapedia.com/ObamaCare

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008).