Posted on 09/13/2010 4:35:20 PM PDT by jazusamo
Last week saw more bad news for Obamacare. So the Obama administration slipped on the brass knuckles. Health insurance premiums grew by a smaller increment in 2010 than in any of the past 10 years. But on Tuesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Obamacare appears to be turning that around:
"Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats' efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections. Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1 percent and 9 percent to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators," reported by the Wall Street Journal.
In addition, a Mercer survey of employers found that 79 percent expect they will lose their "grandfathered" status by 2014, and therefore will become subject to many more of Obamacare's new mandates - a much higher figure than the administration had estimated. Employers expect those additional mandates will increase premiums by 2.3 percent, on average, and boost the overall growth of premiums from 3.6 percent to 5.9 percent in 2011.
In response to the health insurers' claims, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius fired off a letter to the head of the health insurance lobby. The news release on the HHS website makes her purpose plain:
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
She should have found a pirate and borrowed his eyepatch.
There was a woman on O’Reilly tonight saying the cost was
going to go up each year with a big increase by 2014
that would make us pay for things we don’t even want included.
O’Reilly said his had already gone up $2000.
Bring it, bitch! This ain't my first Bar-be-Que
Howdy, jaz ..................... FRegards
BTTT, Gonzo...Fregards!
No doubt about it, potlatch. :-)
Lol, smiles back attcha!
Hey gonzo, haven’t ‘seen’ you in ages! The last I recall was something about ‘tearing the legs off tables’.......lol.
Twas pretty funny!
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed . . .
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
That's half the Bill of Rights that the Dems systematically ignore in their grab for power. Do today's Dem politicians even know why Americans rebelled against British rule in the war that led to independence? Do they no longer care? Do they really not remember that freedom of speech includes the right to protest Dem policies and not just the "right" to spread pornography?
Excellent post, thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.