April 29, 2012
Here are just a few reasons why states should refuse to create them.
Jobs. Refusing to create an exchange will block Obamacare from imposing a tax on employers whose health benefits do not meet the federal government’s definition of “essential” coverage. That tax can run as high as $3,000 per employee. A state that refuses to create an exchange will spare its employers from that tax, and will therefore enable them to create more jobs.
Religious freedom. In blocking that employer tax, state officials would likewise block Obamacare’s effort to force religious employers to provide coverage for services they find immoral — like contraception, pharmaceutical abortions, and sterilization.
The federal debt. Refusing to create exchanges would also reduce the federal debt, because it would prevent the Obama administration from doling out billions of dollars in subsidies to private insurance companies.
The U.S. Constitution. The Obama administration has indicated that it might try to tax employers and hand out those subsidies anyway — even in states that don’t create an exchange, and even though neither Obamacare nor any other federal law gives it the power to do so. If that happens, the fact that a state has refused to create an exchange would give every large employer in the state — including the state government itself — the ability to go to court to block the administration’s attempt to usurp Congress’s legislative powers.
via No Obamacare Exchanges – Michael F. Cannon – Townhall Finance Conservative Columnists and Financial Commentary – Page 1.
April 29, 2012
Anticipating a senior revolt, the administration took action. It ran millions of dollars’ worth of taxpayer-funded TV ads featuring Andy Griffith saying things like, “That new health care law sure sounds good for all of us on Medicare!” It mailed out full-color, taxpayer-funded propaganda brochures singing the same tune. It repeatedly claimed (and continues to claim) that money taken out of Medicare to fund Obamacare would—magically—also stay in Medicare and be used to extend its solvency.
But the administration didn’t stop there. Instead, it launched an $8.35 billion “demonstration project” to postpone the vast majority of Obamacare’s Medicare Advantage cuts until after what Obama likes to call his “last election.” In truth, this isn’t really a demonstration project at all. It’s something closer to the opposite: an attempt to keep Obamacare’s effects from being demonstrated until it’s too late for voters to respond.
via Obama’s Senior Swindle | The Weekly Standard.
April 29, 2012
researchers determined that watching an hour of television can snip 22 minutes from someone’s life. If an average man watched no TV in his adult life, the authors concluded, his life span might be 1.8 years longer, and a TV-less woman might live for a year and half longer than otherwise.
via Stand Up for Fitness – NYTimes.com.
April 27, 2012
The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, which calculated total rebates at $1.3 billion, says that around $426 million will go to people who bought their own health plans; $541 million will go to large employers; and $377 million to small businesses.
In a separate analysis based on the same filings, Goldman Sachs analyst Matthew Borsch estimated the total rebates at around $1.2 billion.
via Health Insurers Plan Over $1 Billion in Rebates – WSJ.com.
April 26, 2012
As co-authors of Why ObamaCare Is Wrong for America,1 we strongly recommend that the Affordable Care Act of 2010 should be repealed and replaced as soon as possible. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has become deservedly more unpopular since its enactment.2,3 It is too costly to finance,4 too difficult to administer,5 too burdensome on health care professionals,6 and too disruptive of existing health care arrangements that many Americans prefer.7 It will limit future economic growth,8 distort health care delivery,9 exacerbate already-unsustainable entitlement spending,10 and erase any meaningful constitutional limits on the enumerated powers of the federal government.11 By relying on illusory formulaic reductions in future payments to physicians, on burdensome new reporting requirements, and on top-down restrictions on medical innovation, it will further jeopardize access to quality care.12
via Why the (un)Affordable Care Act should be repealed and replaced – Health – AEI.
April 26, 2012
This article comprehensively reviews legal developments involving futile or non-beneficial medical treatment since 2009. These developments are usefully grouped into the following 11 categories:
1. Texas Advance Directives Act
2. Ontario Consent and Capacity Board
3. Surrogate selection
4. Ex post cases for damages
5. Ex ante cases for injunctions
6. Coercion and duress
7. Assent and transparency
8. Brain-death cases
9. Criminal and administrative sanctions
10. Conscientious objection
11. Penalties for providing futile treatment
via Legal Briefing: Medically Futile and Non-Beneficial Treatment by Thaddeus Pope :: SSRN.
April 26, 2012
This report describes the supports and services available to formal and informal out-of-home carers, including existing qualitative evidence from carers, in order to: analyse current gaps in support; build an understanding of carers’ needs and priorities; understand the barriers to undertaking a caring role.
The key questions for this project are: What financial and non-financial support and/or services are currently provided to both formal and informal out-of-home carers? What are the gaps and inequities in the current support system? How do formal and informal out-of-home carers access and experience both Australian and state/territory government services and support? What are the needs and priorities of different groups of carers, and what barriers are there in undertaking a caring role?
The report comprises: an inventory of financial and non-financial support for formal and informal carers (based on information provided by the Commonwealth and each of the states and territories); descriptions of the barriers to the caring role; a review of existing qualitative research on carers’ experiences of supports and services, service gaps and inequities; examples of good practice in out-of-home care (OOHC).
via Financial and Non-Financial Support to Formal and Informal Out-of-Home Carers by Marilyn McHugh, Kylie Valentine :: SSRN.