With the Supreme Court gathering this week to consider the constitutionality of the individual mandate and several other problems with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act - otherwise known as Obamacare - I thought it a good opportunity to share the results of some of my own research into this controversial law.
As you may be aware, the legislation was designed to cover up the real cost in order to encourage individual congressmen to vote for it. The administration has issued thousands of waivers to big businesses and unions, the non-partisan congressional budget office recently revised its forecasted cost by nearly doubling the original estimate and while the individual mandate is, this week, making its way to the Supreme Court, it was recently revealed that implementing the law will require religious organizations in the United States to choose between compliance and their core beliefs. These should all be signals to intelligent people that the law over reached… something...
Nancy Pelosi really meant it when she said "you have to pass the bill so you can read it." The good news just keeps on coming!
Stimulated by the idea that now two years later we are still learning more about Obamacare, I picked it up myself and did a little research.
Did you know that by 2016 all Americans will be required to eat broccoli three times a week and take vitamins? Of course the term "vitamins" is yet to be defined, but I'm sure that this will in no way be as objectionable as the government defining for us the appropriate coverage that must be included in an insurance plan.
I found the broccoli thing a little odd so I called a friend of mine who works as a committee staffer on the Hill. She confirmed my understanding and explained the rationale behind this requirement (and there are, of course other items on the "must eat" list) is driven by the fact that the government is now financially responsible for our health care and eating right unquestionably can lower the overall cost of healthcare, therefore, it is in our best interest as taxpayers to eat broccoli.
By 2018 when the economics of the law unquestionably turns upside down on us - notably after Barack Obama's retirement in any circumstance - there is another provision that will provide for a government subsidy for your gym membership if you can't afford it yourself. Of course it is yet to be defined by the government what qualifies as your ability to "afford" it and how this will be implemented -whether you can simply submit evidence of payment or, at the other end of the spectrum, potentially submit your workout diary or trainer's statement - but nevertheless it is there. Taxpayers will be subsidizing gym membership in order to achieve it's higher moral purpose of making everyone better off.
So I ask you, dear readers, are you ok with this level of involvement of the US Federal Government in your personal life? Are you ok paying taxes (or inflated insurance premiums) to subsidize other people's lifestyle choices? Frankly, I'm not. I'm joining the protest tomorrow [Tuesday March 27] in front of the Supreme Court to tell the government to keep its Hands Off My Healthcare. Why don't you come down and join us?