Updated: 03/30/11

MISSION STATEMENT

Repeal Obamacare, or, in the alternative, defund it or minimalize it, because it is unconstitutional, too intrusive,  too expansive, and too expensive.

Regarding the expansiveness and expensiveness: The latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office are that Obamacare will reduce employment by 800,000 people in its first ten years.  This is taken from www.thepelicanpost.org, 2/17/2011 comment.   The reason for the reduction in employment is that, by 2014, employers will be unable to limit what they must contribute to employee health care plans, and insurers will be unable to limit what they spend per person per year on insurance.  Costs are anticipated to sky-rocket.   The only way an employer can hold down its costs is to let employees go.  Evidence of the extreme concern about costs is found in the fact that over 1000 waivers have already been granted by the Department of Health and Human Services, which waivers largely are reducing some of the financial impositions for the first few years as entities (insurers/states/employers) begin to adjust to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (taken from www.thepelicanpost.org, 3/14/2011 comment).

Regarding the unconstitutionality:   Everyone is aware that the issue of the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), known as Obamacare by many, has been raised in federal district courts, with at least one court finding it to be constitutional and one finding it to be unconstitutional.   The battle alone proves to be costly as these court matters are fought in the various states, with the input of even more states, then ultimately submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court.   A very good article, with links to other good articles, about the constitutionality of Obamacare is written by Professor Philip Hamburger, Columbia School of Law, and found at http://www.suite101.com/content/another-constitutional-problem-for-obamacare-health-care-waivers-a353768, in which he argues that even the fact that waivers are being granted could be a ground to find the Act unconstitutional.

Regarding the expensiveness and intrusiveness:   Obamacare ”imposes $500 billion in new taxes, creates 150 new boards and commissions, swells the federal deficit to record levels, and forces costly unfunded mandates on the states..” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/dec/27/the-real-costs-of-obamacare/

Regarding the intrusiveness:  A large feature of Obamacare is the establishment of Accountable Care Organizations, which will monitor and make decisions about the direction of healthcare and insurance coverage.  This feature is to begin in 2012.  Rather than give doctors incentives to do more procedures (current system – pay for each procedure the doctor does), the ACO would pay physicians a flat fee  up front to keep people well and may not cover certain services that a fee for service environment coveres.   See article at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/27/patient-beware-of-accountable-care-organization/by Dr. Daniel H. Johnson, Jr.   A very good article regarding the pitfalls of Accountable Care Organizations is found athttp://www.aapsonline.org/index.php/site/article/who_is_accountable_in_accountable_care_organizations by Dr. Alieta Eck.

Posted 02/01/11

I spoke to someone in Senator Vitter's office yesterday.  He was real warm & friendly as I expressed kudos for the Senator's stance on Obamacare, as well as his support of Rand Paul's (1) Audit the Fed bill, and (2) RP's anchor baby bill.  I suggested that the senator should do more than just oppose O'care.......he should help to press for the vote to take place. The guy said he was.  But when I then suggested that the Senator should join Rand Paul and the Tea Party caucus in the Senate, there was a sudden chill in the air.  He told me somewhat dismissively that he would pass that on to the senator, and I could tell the call was over.  He was polite, but it was obvious he didn't like the Tea Party idea. 

I submitted a letter to the editor @ the advocate.  Mr.Bankston called me to confirm (routine before they run a letter).  But this time instead of just confirming authorship, he inquired as to whether I had read the health legislation bill in its entirety.  I told him no, but that I had very good reason to believe that the factual material that I used was from reliable sources that had indeed read the bill.  The Advocate has always been very fair as far as I've been concerned, printing my views in spite of its obvious left-leaning tendencies.  This was the first time I've ever been quizzed on my factual material.  This may cause him to just kill the letter; we'll find out this week.  I think the other side is taking hostility against Obamacare very seriously, and they are very concerned that they could lose this battle, especially in light of events of yesterday with the ruling in Florida.

Keep up the good work for liberty fellow patriots!
Mike Thibodeaux

Posted 02/01/11

Obamacare mission statement:  Get The new Healthcare Reform Act (otherwise known as Obamacare) repealed; alternative, get it defunded through the House.

Initial plan:

Comments towards that goal that we discussed at this past meeting of the BRTP:

1) We may need to support key conservative candidates for President in 2012 to be certain abolishment could pass at that time.
2) Want to put pressure on Vitter to repeal Obamacare.
3) Possibly look at portions of the bill and lobby to abolish those (such as the requirement in 2012 for all persons to issue 1099's to anyone to whom they paid over $600 unless it was to a publicly traded company).  However, many in our group thought the focus should just be on abolishing, and not piece-mealing.
4) Get a copy of the healthcare bill and split it among the group to review and report on next time.
5) Study what other states are doing and see what we might be able to implement in Louisiana.

Instead of trying to have a meeting in between the tea party meetings, we are emailing comments to each other and discussing steps people want to take to report on next month.  Some SUGGESTIONS only, in keeping with the comments above (and our group is dynamic with great leaders and everyone may be coming up with additional goals as well):

1)  Analyze the pros and cons for repeal in the latest U.S. News article:http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/01/28/should-the-healthcare-reform-law-be-repealed
2) Review the White House's summary of the Healthcare Bill:  http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/01/28/should-the-healthcare-reform-law-be-repealed
3) Locate the final law and email the group so we could all pick portions we would like to review.  (I looked quickly and didn't locate - if one of our group does, please hit reply all and send to all of us).
4) Contact Vitter or one of our Representatives and see ways we could help in the effort to repeal.
5) Do some internet research on what other states are doing to object to the imposition of the bill in that state, and see what efforts could be undertaken here.

Contact: Denise Akers