Category Archives: Supreme Court

Folks It’s Twilight Zone Time. Yup, BamaCare just Got Worse.

 These people are the stupidest people on the planet bar none!!

Obama style.

Obama style.

Rush, rush, rush to sign you up. Now you can not sign up till next year. Say What?

———————————————————————————————–

Latest ObamaCare surprise: Most won’t be able to buy health insurance until end of year.

MASSIVE 2012 VOTER FRAUD: 35,750 with same name & DOB voted in 2 states

More evidence that Obama and the Dems stole the 2012 elections.

More evidence that the United State of America has devolved into a Third World and third rate country.

DeadPeopleVoteBryan Preston reports for PJ Media, April 2, 2014:

The North Carolina State Board of Elections has found thousands of instances of voter fraud in the state, thanks to a 28-state crosscheck of voter rolls. Initial findings suggest widespread election fraud.

  • 765 voters with an exact match of first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in N.C. and the other state in the 2012 general election.
  • 35,750 voters with the same first and last name and DOB were registered in N.C. and another state and voted in both states in the 2012 general election.
  • 155,692 voters with the same first and last name, DOB and last four digits of SSN were registered in N.C. and another state – and the latest date of registration or voter activity did not take place within N.C.

The second point is key, as double voting is election fraud under state and federal statutes. Punishment for double voting in federal elections can include jail time.

In October 2012, Project Veritas produced video showing a Barack Obama campaign worker helping a voter register to vote in both Texas and Florida.

The Interstate Crosscheck examines 101 million voter records in more than two dozen participating states.

The findings, while large, leave open the question of just how widespread double voting might be since 22 states did not participate in the Interstate Crosscheck.

In addition to the above, the crosscheck found that more than 13,000 deceased voters remain on North Carolina’s rolls, and that 81 of them showed voter activity in their records after death.

North Carolina officials are now calling for tighter election security.

acorn_vote_fraud

That’s the call to action from NC officials? Pathetic.

What this calls for is a class-action lawsuit to overturn and nullify the 2012 Election’s supposed results — a lawsuit that should be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, only the sound of crickets from the MSM on the massive 2012 voter fraud . . . .

See also:

~Eowyn

The real reason why Obama is purging military’s top command

king

I’ll act with or without Congress!”

The POS first said it to Senate Democrats on January 15, 2014.

13 days later on January 28, he said it again, this time to all of America at his State of the disUnion address.

William Hamilton, J.D. and Ph.D., is a nationally syndicated columnist, educated at the University of Oklahoma, the George Washington University, the U.S Naval War College, the University of Nebraska, and Harvard University. He served 20 years on active duty as an infantry officer, followed by two years of duty with the U.S. Air Force. Among the military awards he received are the Silver Star, Legion of Merit, Distinguished Flying Cross, Bronze Stars (4), and a Purple Heart.

In his essay of Jan. 27, 2014, “Constitutional Crisis: Which way the Military?,” Dr. Hamilton reflects on the increasing lawlessness of Barack Obama, and connects that lawlessness with the POS’s purge of military commanders — 200 in less than 5 years — who are replaced with, we presume, boot-licking yes-men.

As Obama, in his lawlessness, pushes the United States toward a Constitutional crisis, he’ll be counting on his yes-men in the military not to intervene.

Here’s an excerpt:

[Nat] Hentoff, the consummate left-winger, has just called for the impeachment of President Obama, saying that Mr. Obama is the most dangerous and destructive president ever and is far worse than Mr. Hentoff’s former target, President Richard Nixon.

Mr. Hentoff says Mr. Obama has thrown the U.S. Constitution under the bus and is ruling as a dictator. As evidence, Hentoff cites Mr. Obama’s delay of the employer mandate in ObamaCare, the changing of types of plans available under ObamaCare, ignoring our immigrations laws, refusing to deport illegal immigrants, enacting stricter gun-control measures without Congressional legislation, sealing his presidential records, creating government offices and Czars without authorization, and changing the pay grades of selected federal employees without authority.

For work-a-day Americans, these burrs under Mr. Hentoff’s saddle might seem insignificant; however, one of conservatism’s leading voices, St. John’s University Professor M. Northrup Buechner, writing in Forbes Magazine on November 19, 2013, says Mr. Obama’s unlawful actions could lead to a troubling scenario: “A Republican Congress is elected and repeals ObamaCare over a Democrat President’s veto. The President refuses to enforce the repeal. The Supreme Court rules that the President’s refusal is unconstitutional. The President denounces the ruling and refuses to be bound by it.

“If the President persists in rejecting all authority other than his own, the Dénouement [outcome] would depend on the side taken by the Armed Forces…”

Writing in The Washington Times on November 12, 2013, Commander J.D. Gordon, USN (Ret.), a former Pentagon spokesman, says “…every week since President Obama took office, we’ve been hearing that another top leader has been summarily fired, despite decades of loyal service and valuable experience protecting the nation. Statistically speaking, it’s actually closer to one every 8.8 days, a staggering 200 military brass shown the door in less than five years.

Thus, one wonders if this Stalin-like purge of generals and admirals is a precautionary step taken by Mr. Obama in advance of a descent into the darkness of a Constitutional crisis.

H/t FOTM’s Wild Bill Alaska

~Eowyn

ObamaCare, Me and You, and A Boy Named Sue.

Strap In It’s about to get bumpy I think.

A few weeks back on another post a few of us were discussing some things we had noticed had happened to us since the beginning of the New Year. I was talking about a prescription problem I ran into. I also had something happen Tuesday kinda weird. So let me do some splaining, and either this is a sign of things to come, or my insurance Co. are a bunch of dopes.

This might hurt.

This might hurt.

First off I’m in a Medicare Advantage plan. I know there have been cuts to them so like I said I’m not sure, but I think this could be part of skippycare and things to come. Also I have been on these plans for about 5-6 years. This Ins. Co. Has been real good to me. They have allowed me to go out of network twice. Approvals for MRI’s and things were usually in a few days. That is until this year.

Problem 1 ) short version. Denied a RX 2 weeks ago and still trying to fix problem. Skip to 2 unless you want details.  :)

Problem 1) Oct – Dec 2013 I filled a Non-Prefered Generic Tier 2 in my plan which is a $0 co-pay. We used Generic because I was in Donut hole. I filled it no problem.

In Jan. 2014 Dr. Put me on Name brand to try. It is like $ 500 bucks (I did not know) It is a Tier 5 Brand Name. $ 55 C0-Pay. I filled that no problem, and then The Ins co. sent me a cranky letter saying basically to find a generic. OK.

No problem, I was on the generic and so I thought (That’s always trouble) I’ll just go back to that. I went to fill in Feb. and it was denied saying I needed a Prior Authorization. Hmm, Called Ins Co. and could not get a straight answer. Maybe 3 days to approve. They were sending some forms to my Dr. and they were to send them back to fix it. I need this med and could not wait so I paid cash for it. $ 272.00 Ughh.

Anyway back on the farm I thought this was handled till I received a new letter from Ins Co. saying I was being denied this med because my Dr. never sent in whatever. ( I know, stay with me here.  Ughh. I Call Dr. and nurse says she needs a denial from Pharmacy for her to complete the form that Ins co. sent.

It get’s good here

I call pharmacy and ask her to send a denial to my Dr.. She says no prob, and hold on. She comes back on and says I just ran it thru again and it went thru. HUH!! Say what? It cleared the Ins.co and I could come in for a refund of my $ 272 Which I ran like a thief in the night and collected and did not pass go.

Not done (Sorry) Something is not right, so I call Ins. Co and say what’s up with this? She could see it went thru, but it still says I need a P.Auth, and it’s still in denial . So she says she don’t know why it went thru, but basically I am still denied a med that I have taken for 3 months and now they have just paid for a 4th. In March she said it will come up as needing a P A again. I just dropped the denial letter off at my Dr. and the nurse said she will file an appeal from that and hopefully it should work. Keep ya posted.

OK, did that wear your brain out? Sorry. 

Problem 2

On Tues 2-18 this week I had a diagnostic test done on my back. I was sedated and they then jammed 6 needles into nerves in my lower back. I was told it would be extremely painful. That did not have any bearing on me or any decision to make. I mean I showed up and did what I was told to do. Lie down and shut up and go night night.   In fact I was put into a “Twilight” sleep. I was told that I kinda screamed from the pain (Don’t remember) and they jacked me with some more juice to go night night. So I get home Tues after the procedure and in the mail is a letter from Ins. Co. saying my Injections are approved, but the Anesthesia is denied. HUH!! 

A little late for that don’t you think? Sheesh! I spoke with Dr’s office and the Nurse said they are starting to get these almost routinely. She also said…

The theory goes something like this..If a woman can have a baby, you can endure the shot’s without being put out.

I don’t know if she was making this up, or it’s something she heard from Ins. Co. Bottom line is now they will have to fight this denial letter. I might have too also. I was a little ticked off talking to this nurse. I mean I was not told I may be on the hook for Anesthesia. She said they did not receive it , but it was a chance. They should have let me know. No way in hell am I paying for something I was not told about.

This test was a success, so they have just sent in for Authorization for 2 more procedures.  Because they said this one you must be sedated for. This time they will sedate me again and cauterize the nerves on right side the first time and left a week later. I’m waiting to see if these will be approved or do I have to give birth first, which I know no man can.  :(

Bottom Line this is the first problem ever for me. The pharmacist says this is starting to happen all the time. The Nurse at my Dr’s office said in 7 yrs she’s been there she has never seen so many denials. Everything is becoming a fight.

I would say if you have anything you have been putting off to maybe see about it sooner rather than later. I think this is about to get real bad. sangry_blowsupheart_100-100

~Steve~

Adm. McRaven ordered destruction of Osama bin Laden death photos

Barack Obama, William McRavenAdm. William McRaven with the POS

The non-partisan citizen watchdog group, Judicial Watch, reports, Feb. 10, 2014, that mere days after it had filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Obama administration’s Department of Defense, Admiral William McRaven ordered his underlings immediately to destroy whatever photos the Pentagon had on the assassination and death of Osama bin Laden.

That is not the behavior of righteous people, but of those who have something to hide.

Admiral William Harry McRaven, 58, is Commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command, since August 8, 2011. Georgetowner calls him “the  mastermind behind the raid to get Osama bin Laden.”

Under “Personal Life,” Wikipedia does not say that McRaven is married or has children, but gives only this rather non sequitur sentence: “McRaven attended the 2012 White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner as the guest of his fifth grade classmate, Karen Tumulty.” Tumulty is a national political correspondent for The Washington Post. However, an Oct. 28, 2013 article on Georgetowner has a picture of McRaven and “his wife Georgeann.”

Here’s the report from Judicial Watch:

Judicial Watch Uncovers Email Revealing Top Pentagon Leader Ordered Destruction of bin Laden Death Photos

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that on January 31, 2014, it received documents from the Department of Defense (Pentagon) revealing that within hours of its filing a May 13, 2011, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking photos of the deceased Osama bin Laden, U.S. Special Operations Commander, Admiral William McRaven ordered his subordinates to “destroy” any photos they may have had “immediately.” Judicial Watch had filed a FOIA request for the photos 11 days earlier.

The McRaven email, addressed to “Gentlemen,” instructs:

One particular item that I want to emphasize is photos; particularly UBLs remains. At this point – all photos should have been turned over to the CIA; if you still have them destroy them immediately or get them to the [redacted].

According to the Pentagon documents, McRaven sent his email on “Friday, May 13, 2011 5:09 PM.” The documents do not detail what documents, if any, were destroyed in response to the McRaven directive. The Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit seeking the documents was filed in the United States Court for the District of Columbia only hours earlier. Judicial Watch also announced the filing at a morning press conference.

On May 2, Judicial Watch had filed a FOIA request with the Defense Department seeking “all photographs and/or video recordings of Usama (Osama) Bin Laden taken during and/or after the U.S. military operation in Pakistan on or about May 1, 2011.”  Federal law contains broad prohibitions against the “concealment, removal, or mutilation generally” of government records.

The records containing the McRaven “destroy them immediately” email were produced as a result of a June 7, 2013, FOIA request and a subsequent lawsuit against the Defense Department for records relating to reports of the 2011 McRaven purge directive. McRaven’s order was first mentioned at the end of a 2011 draft reportby the Pentagon’s inspector general (IG) examining whether the Obama administration gave special access to Hollywood executives planning the film “Zero Dark Thirty.”  According the draft report, “ADM McRaven also directed that the names and photographs associated with the raid not be released. This effort included purging the combatant command’s system of all records related to the operation and providing these records to another Government Agency.”  The reference to the document purge did not appear in the final IG report.

The move by McRaven to purge the photos appears to have come, at least in part, in response to aggressive efforts by Judicial Watch to obtain images of the deceased bin Laden that President Obama, in a rewrite of federal open records law, had refused to disclose. In addition to its May 2, 2011, FOIA request with the Pentagon Judicial Watch filed an identical request on May 3, 2011, with the CIA. When neither the Defense Department nor the CIA complied with the FOIA requests, Judicial Watch, in June 2011, filed FOIA lawsuits against both agencies.  In the course of the litigation, the Pentagon claimed that it had “no records responsive to plaintiff’s request.”

On April 26, 2012, District Court Judge James Boasberg accepted the Obama DOD and CIA arguments, ruling that the images could remain secret while conceding: “Indeed, it makes sense that the more significant an event is to our nation – and the end of bin Laden’s reign of terror certainly ranks high – the more need the public has for full disclosure.” On May 21, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed the District Court decision while conceding that the documents may not have been properly classified. The Supreme Court of the United States subsequently denied Judicial Watch’s petition for a writ of certiorari seeking a review of the issue.

“The McRaven ‘destroy them immediately’ email is a smoking gun, revealing both contempt for the rule of law and the American’s people right to know,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama administration has tried to cover this scandal up – and our lawsuit exposed it.  We demand further investigation of the effort to destroy documents about the bin Laden raid.”

See also:

~Eowyn

Today’s ObamaCare “What’s Up With That”

After 3-4-5 years of setting up the ObamaCare website, with the greatest minds money could buy from Belarus, I can only come to one conclusion. This was designed to fail on purpose. No other company in the history of the world has been so inept. The kids on the corner selling lemonade have a better business model. So might I say to all those in charge, I mean this from the bottom of my heart..

And I mean it.

And I mean it.

————————————————————————————————–

HealthCare.gov can’t handle appeals of enrollment errors

By , Published: February 2

Tens of thousands of people who discovered that HealthCare.gov made mistakes as they were signing up for a health plan are confronting a new roadblock: The government cannot yet fix the errors.

Roughly 22,000 Americans have filed appeals with the government to try to get mistakes corrected, according to internal government data obtained by The Washington Post. They contend that the computer system for the new federal online marketplace charged them too much for health insurance, steered them into the wrong insurance program or denied them coverage entirely.

For now, the appeals are sitting, untouched, inside a government computer. And an unknown number of consumers who are trying to get help through less formal means — by calling the health-care marketplace directly — are told that HealthCare.gov’s computer system is not yet allowing federal workers to go into enrollment records and change them, according to individuals inside and outside the government who are familiar with the situation.

“It is definitely frustrating and not fair,” said Addie Wilson, 27, who lives in Fairmont, W.Va., and earns $22,000 a year working with at-risk families. She said that she is paying $100 a month more than she should for her insurance and that her deductible is $4,000 too high.

When Wilson logged on to HealthCare.gov in late December, she needed coverage right away. Her old insurance was ending, and she was to have gallbladder surgery in January. But the Web site would not calculate the federal subsidy to which she knew she was entitled. Terrified to go without coverage, Wilson phoned a federal call center and took the advice she was given: Pay the full price now and appeal later.

Now she is stuck.

“I hope,” she said, “they really work on getting this fixed.”

The Obama administration has not made public the fact that the appeals system for the online marketplace is not working.spc_angry_smack puter_100-103

In recent weeks, legal advocates have been pressing administration officials, pointing out that rules for the online marketplace, created by the 2010 Affordable Care Act, guarantee due-process rights to timely hearings for Americans who think they have been improperly denied insurance or subsidies.

But at the moment, “there is no indication that infrastructure . . .necessary for conducting informal reviews and fair hearings has even been created, let alone become operational,” attorneys at the National Health Law Program said in a late-December letter to leaders of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the agency that oversees HealthCare.gov. The attorneys, who have been trying to exert leverage quietly behind the scenes, did not provide the letter to The Post but confirmed that they had sent it.

A CMS spokesman, Aaron Albright, said, “We are working to fully implement the appeals system.”

Three knowledgeable individuals, speaking on the condition of anonymity about internal discussions, said it is unclear when the appeals process will become available. So far, it is not among the top priorities for completing parts of the federal insurance exchange’s computer system that still do not work. Those include an electronic payment system for insurers, the computerized exchange of enrollment information with state Medicaid programs, and the ability to adjust people’s coverage to accommodate new babies and other major changes in life circumstance.

The exchange is supposed to allow consumers who want to file appeals to do so by computer, phone or mail. But only mail is available. The roughly 22,000 people who have appealed to date have filled out a seven-page form and mailed it to a federal contractor’s office in Kentucky, where the forms are scanned and then transferred to a computer system at CMS. For now, that is where the process stops

The part of the computer system that would allow agency workers to read and handle appeals   has not been built, 

AGHHHHHH!!

AGHH!

according to individuals familiar with the situation.

In the meantime, CMS is telling consumers with complaints about mistakes to return to the Web site and start over. “We are inviting those consumers back to HealthCare.gov, where they can reset and successfully finish their applications without needing to complete the appeals process,” said Albright, the agency spokesman. The rationale is that, since the computer system is working better now, it’s less likely to make mistakes.

Agency officials have no way of knowing how many people have taken that advice, according to two individuals familiar with the situation. The computer system containing the scanned appeals forms cannot yet communicate with HealthCare.gov’s enrollment database, so it is impossible to cross-check the information.

Across the country, a few specialists trained to help people enroll in the health plans point to examples in which withdrawing an application and starting over has solved the problem. But that is not a solution for everyone.

Starting over would not help Addie Wilson, for example, because she has already begun to pay for her new insurance and would have no way to get her money back. A few days before Christmas, Wilson was hospitalized with what turned out to be a gallbladder so infected that doctors inserted a drain so it would be safer by the time they operated — the first surgery of her life. She needed a health plan because her employer, the organization Home Base, was cutting off the Blue Cross-Blue Shield coverage she and her co-workers had, reasoning that they could find better choices on the new marketplace.

Given her salary, Wilson knew she was eligible for federal subsidies to help pay for her coverage. She was discharged from the hospital on Dec. 23, the insurance sign-up deadline; she did not yet know that CMS had quietly reset its computers to give people one more day to enroll. It had been weeks since the Obama administration had announced that the system was working smoothly, so she could not understand why the HealthCare.gov screen on her laptop, which should have calculated her subsidy, stubbornly refused to appear. She asked her boyfriend to try on his computer and her father to try on his. Nothing worked.

She called HealthCare.gov’s toll-free number, where, she said, a woman on the other end tried typing and then told her, “Well, it’s not working for me either.” The woman recommended that she choose a health plan at the too-high price and file an appeal. Since her Blue Cross coverage would end Dec. 31, she went back onto HealthCare.gov and picked a plan.

A failure to compute a subsidy is among a variety of mistakes the computer system has made. Another involves what some CMS and state Medicaid officials refer to as “loopers.” These are people who applied for coverage on HealthCare.gov and were told that their income was low enough to qualify for Medicaid. But when they went to their state Medicaid agency, they were told they were not eligible after all, and should get a private health plan through the marketplace. So they have “looped” back to the federal system, which is unable to fix the mistake.

The letter from the National Health Law Program describes families who are appealing for other reasons. In one instance, a North Carolina couple were told that they were eligible for subsidies to buy private policies and that their son was eligible for the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which is public insurance for children of working-class families. But the computer told them that their daughter was eligible for nothing — an obvious mistake. At the time of the letter, the family was uninsured while waiting for a decision on its appeal.

In Fairmont, Wilson is waiting, too. In early January, she contacted her new health plan about her missing subsidy and asked what to do. She was told to pay the full insurance premium — $215 a month. She did. The next day, Brandon Williams, an enrollment counselor at a local health clinic, helped her check HealthCare.gov again. This time, the computer worked properly and showed that, with the subsidy, her monthly premium should be just $106 and her yearly deductible $617, not $4,750.

Wilson and Williams called the online marketplace and, after three hours on the phone, got only a promise from a supervisor that Wilson would hear from CMS’s “advance resolution team” within five days. The call didn’t come.

Wilson’s scheduled outpatient surgery turned into an expensive, five-day hospital stay after her doctors discovered her gallbladder had gangrene. Home after the ordeal, and dreading the hospital bill and her big deductible, Wilson called Williams, and they tried to reach the advance resolution team. They couldn’t get through. When the call from the team finally came, she said, a knowledgeable-sounding man told her, “The system is not set up to go into someone’s account and correct a mistake.”

With Williams’s help, she has filed an appeal. And she is waiting — waiting to be healed enough to drive so she can go back to work, waiting for someone to decide that she deserves her money back.

“These little kinks should have been worked out prior to this thing being launched,” she said. “This is one more thing stressing me out.”

Related stories:

Have you used the new exchanges? Share your story here

Understanding the Affordable Care Act

Your Obamacare questions, answered

Everything you need to know about the health-care law’s problems

Washingtonpost.com

~Steve~

Supreme Court justice says it’s unjust to call ILLEGAL aliens “criminals”

Definition of “criminal”:

A person who has committed a crime.

Definition of “crime”:

An unlawful or illegal act.

It is a crime to unlawfully enter and reside in the United States of America, that is, to enter without the U.S. government’s permission, granted via a visa, a permanent residence (or “green”) card, or a U.S. citizenship certificate (or certificate of naturalization).

So, unless you have one of the following, you’re in the United States illegally, which means you’ve committed a crime, which means you’re a criminal:

U.S. visagreen cardU.S. citizenship certificate

The Supreme Court is the United States’ highest judicial tribunal, America’s highest court.

A court is a tribunal that adjudicates disputes and administers JUSTICE.

A Supreme Court justice is one of an elite group of nine unelected individuals who sit on the Supreme Court — for life — which means a Supreme Court justice determines and administers JUSTICE.

Supreme Court nonJustice Sonia Sotomayor

Supreme Court nonJustice Sonia Sotomayor

And yet, as reported by the AP (via CBS-DC), Feb. 4, 2014, at a talk at Yale University Law School, Obama appointee Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was asked about her use of the term “undocumented immigrants” instead of the term “illegal alien.”

Sotomayor said labeling these “immigrants” as criminals seemed insulting to her: “I think people then paint those individuals as something less than worthy human beings and it changes the conversation.”

No, Ms. Sotomayor, labeling those who are in the United States unlawfully as “illegal aliens” is simply dictionary correct.

However, labeling you a Supreme Court justice most certainly is a travesty.

~Eowyn

SCOTUS Gives Little Sisters Of The Poor Temporary Stay.

Don't mess with a station wagon full of Nuns.

Don’t mess with a station wagon full of Nuns.

Skippy and Sebelius are trying to make these good Sisters violate their Religious Beliefs by forcing them to include Contraceptives in their health benefits. I don’t think so.

As Archie Bunkers Lawyer Told him “Don’t mess with a station wagon full of Nuns” crazy-11_files

—————————————————————————————————-

JAN 24, 2014 http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/Daily-Reports/2014/January/24/pm-scotus-rule-on-contraceptive-mandate-injunction.

Supreme Court Gives Nuns Temporary Reprieve On Health Law’s Contraceptive Mandate

SCOTUS Blog: Partial Win For Little Sisters
The Supreme Court on Friday afternoon gave an order of Roman Catholic nuns some added protection against the enforcement of a part of the Affordable Care Act, and spared them — for now — from having to file a government form in order to be exempt. The order, released after weeks of uncertainty, came without noted dissent in the case of Little Sisters of the Poor, et al., v. Sebelius (application 13A691). The bar to enforcement of the so-called “contraceptive mandate” against two groups of the Little Sisters order will remain in effect while their challenge unfolds and reaches a final decision before the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver. The Supreme Court order stressed that it was not ruling on the merits of that challenge (Dennison, 1/24).

Politico: Supreme Court Grants Temporary Reprieve From Contraceptive Mandate
The Obama administration cannot enforce the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage requirements against a Catholic nuns’ order for the time being, if the nuns tell the government they object to providing that coverage, the Supreme Court ruled Friday afternoon. The Supreme Court’s action could defuse for the time being a showdown between religious employers and the federal government over the procedures for providing contraceptive coverage to employees of hospitals, nursing homes and other entities run by religious groups (Gerstein, 1/24).

The New York Times: Justices Extend Order Blocking Contraception Mandate For Nuns
The health law requires most employers to provide insurance coverage for contraception. The nuns of the Little Sisters of the Poor said the requirement is offensive to their religious beliefs. An accommodation allowing them to opt out of the requirement — by issuing a certification to an insurance company to offer the coverage independently — also made them complicit in immoral conduct, the nuns said (Liptak, 1/24).

The Associated Press: Court Gives Nuns A Compromise On Health Care Issue
The Supreme Court is offering a short-term compromise to continue to exempt a group of Denver nuns that operates charity nursing homes from the birth control mandate of the nation’s health care law. The court is asking them to declare in writing that they have religious objections to providing that coverage. The nuns had said earlier that a government form they were being asked to sign violates their religious beliefs (1/24).

Reuters: Nuns Get Partial Win In Supreme Court Contraception Fight
Dozens of other Catholic groups are involved in similar litigation across the country. Most have already won temporary injunctions. So far, no federal appeals court has ruled on the merits of the groups’ claims, according to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents the Little Sisters (Hurley, 1/24).

The Supreme Court’s order can be found here.

This is part of Kaiser Health News’ Daily Report – a summary of health policy coverage from more than 300 news organizations. The full summary of the day’s news can be found here and you can sign up for e-mail subscriptions to the Daily Report here. In addition, our staff of reporters and correspondents file original stories each day, which you can find on our home page.

~Steve~

Obama crowns himself king

obama-king

President Lucifer has been behaving like a king, unchecked and unbalanced by other supposedly democratic institutions (like Congress, the Supreme Court, and the “free” press) in our supposed republic.

But now he’s made it official.

The Associated Press reports that yesterday, Jan. 15, 2014, Obama arrogantly and peremptorily told Democrats, “I’ll act with or without Congress”:

President Barack Obama has told Senate Democrats he plans to use his executive authority to act in 2014 when Congress stands in his way.

Obama met with senators from his own party Wednesday at the White House. The White House says Obama and Democrats discussed proposals to raise the minimum wage and efforts to pass a comprehensive immigration overhaul. Education initiatives and jobs measures were also on the agenda.

The White House says Obama wants to work with Congress to make progress, but will also act on his own to get things done.

The meeting was the first such session of 2014 and comes two weeks before Obama is set to deliver his State of the Union address.

The senators left the White House without speaking to reporters.

In other words, the POS just gave the finger to the legislative branch of our republican government (republic = representative democracy) and to the American people.

obama-finger

Note that Pres. Lucifer declares this even though the Supreme Court is in the midst of considering whether his rule-by-executive-order is in violation of the Constitution during his first term, specifically a trio of recess appointments he made to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) which are deemed unconstitutional by lower courts.

If this doesn’t warrant impeachment, I honestly don’t know what would.

Founding Father George Washington, who had declined a clamor that he be king, must be in tears . . . .

~Eowyn

Walmart’s employee health plans cheaper & better than Obamacare

Obamacare Screw U

The Washington Examiner reports, Jan. 7, 2014, that Walmart’s health plans for its employees are more affordable and provide significantly better access to high-quality medical care than Obamacare.

That’s what independent insurance agents affiliated with the National Association of Health Underwriters, as well as health policy experts discovered, when they compared Walmart’s plans to Obamacare’s, at the request of the Examiner.

Walmart offers its employees two standard plans, both managed by Blue Cross Blue Shield:

  1. Health Reimbursement Account (HRA) that costs more out of employees’ pockets but has lower deductibles. For a monthly premium of only $40 (individual) or $160 (family), the enrollee gets full-service coverage through a Blue Cross Blue Shield preferred provider organization.
  2. Health Savings Account plan that includes high deductibles but allows tax-free dollars to be used for coverage.

Other advantages of the Walmart plans include:

1. Unlike Obamacare, there are no income eligibility requirements for the Walmart plans.

2. Age and gender do not alter premium rates.

3. The company plan is the same for all of Walmart’s 1.1 million enrolled employees and their dependents, from its cashiers to its CEO. In contrast, we all know of the politicians (White House, Congress, Supreme Court) and groups (favored unions) who are exempt from Obamacare.

4. Walmart’s monthly premiums are 5 to 9 times lower than those of unsubsidized Obamacare enrollees. For example:

  • For an unsubsidized nonsmoking couple, age 60, the Walmart monthly premium is $134 vs. Obamacare’s $1,365.
  • For a unsubsidized smoker, age 30, the Walmart monthly premium is $70 vs. Obamacare’s $428 per month.
  • For an unsubsidized family of four, the Walmart monthly premiium is about $160 vs. Obamacare’s $962.

5. Walmart employees also has access to America’s most prestigious medical facilities, including the Mayo Clinic, Pennsylvania’s Geisinger Medical Center and the Cleveland Clinic, where Walmart employees and their dependents can get free heart or spinal surgery, and free knee and hip replacements at four hospitals nationwide. In contrast, many top-rated Walmart hospitals — such as the Mayo and Cleveland clinics — are left out of most Obamacare exchange plans.

6. Walmart employees have access to more doctors and hospitals:

  • Robert Slayton, a practicing Chicago independent insurance agent for 11 years and the former president of the Illinois State Association of Health Underwriters, says there is a dramatic gap between doctor availability in Chicago under the Obamacare and Walmart plans: In Chicago, Walmart employees have access to 54 hospitals and 24,904 doctors vs. Obamacare’s 28 hospitals and 9,837 doctors.
  • Former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey, a Republican who is now a health care advocate, said Obamacare’s lack of first-class hospitals is a big problem: “It’s not just the number, but who they are. You’ll find under the Obamacare exchanges that the academic hospitals have declined to participate, along with the specialists who practice at those hospitals. The same is true of cancer hospitals. People who are seriously ill need to stay away from these [Obamacare] exchange plans.

7. Walmart also offers a free preventive health plan that mirrors the Obamacare plan. Its employees can take advantage of a wide range of free exams and counseling, including screenings for colorectal cancer, cervical cancer, chlamydia, diabetes, depression and special counseling for diet and obesity. Their children can get more than 20 free preventive services, ranging including screenings for genetic disorders, autism and developmental problems to obesity, lead poisoning exposure and tuberculosis. There are also 12 free vaccinations, and free hearing and vision testing.

8. Cheaper drugs: Walmart employees pay as little as $4 for a 30-day supply of generic drugs; and only $10 for eye exams through a separate vision plan.

9. Walmart also gives cash to its employees for any health care expense. The annual payments run from $250 to $1,000 and are given at the beginning of the enrollment year in an account that can only be used for health care expenses.

10. Lower deductibles: Walmart individuals face a $2,750 deductible and families need to pay $5,500 under the HRA plan. Individuals pay $1,750 and families pay $3,500 deductibles under the HRA High plan. But Obamacare deductibles are higher — of up to $6,300 for individuals, and up to $12,000 for a family plan before benefits kick in.

The question, of course, is:

If Walmart can do it, why can’t Obamacare?

Neither Obamacare advocate Families USA, nor the United Food and Commercial Workers that backs anti-Walmart campaigns, responded to Examiner requests for comment.

H/t NewsMax

~Eowyn