Internet Articles (2015)
he major conservative media (i.e., Fox News, the New York Post, The Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal) barely touched, or flatly ignored, the Obama birth certificate flap. Even to the point of not reporting when lawsuits against Resident Barack Hussein Obama were filed in US District Court. I saw a couple of news blurbs in a couple of special interest columns when three of the cases reached conservative judges on the US Supreme Court. The high court, of course, ultimately decided not to hear them. It was not until information that Obama's federal Health Board might actually be a Death Board, and former Alaska governor and John McCain running mate, Sarah Palin, called the Obamacare Health Board "downright evil," on her social networking Facebook page that the mainstream media seemed to start paying attention. On her Facebook page, Palin said Obama was creating a death panel that "...would deny healthcare to the neediest Americans." The rest of us in the Honest Media have been screaming it from the rooftops since details of the Obamacare Health Board first started leaking out a few months ago. But apparently none of us in the "Honest Media" are "real media" magnates even though many of us came from the "real media" ourselves.
Long before Obamacare, and long before Hillarycare, the Democrats tried several times to enact universal healthcare. Franklin D. Roosevelt tried three times. In 1935, FDR tried to fold a national healthcare provision into the Social Security Act. Because the American Medical Association opposed socialized medicine, his Committee on Economic Security advised FDR that if he persisted in trying to make healthcare part of Social Security, he would very likely torpedo the entire measure and lose Social Security as well. Roosevelt pulled the healthcare measure from the Social Security Act of 1935. In 1939 he tried again. The House and Senate-held hearing began in July, 1938 through the Fall on what would become the Wagner National Health Act. The socialist New Dealers in Congress were determined to enact "door-opener" healthcare reform in 1939. The Wagner Act proposed covering only the needy and the elderly. It was a non-threatening approach to healthcare. Who could object to providing healthcare for children and grandma? Even back in 1939 the politicians knew that once you got your foot in the door, the rest of the body would naturally follow. Health coverage for kids and the elderly today, compulsory insurance for everyone tomorrow.
But FDR suddenly cooled. He saw the handwriting on the wallof Congress. The Republicans gained 80 seats in the House in Nov., 1938. Opposition to national healthcare was growing like a firestorm. FDR knew if it passed, the Left would lose control of Congress for two or three decadesuntil a new batch of voters grew up who did not know life in a truly democratic America. And FDR, who was already planning to run for a third term in 1940, knew that an ugly healthcare debate would wipe out any chance of that happening. Seeing 80 House seats and two Senate seats suddenly filled with new GOP faces in January, 1939, the ardor for universal healthcare, paid 100% with tax dollars, cooled the ardor of Congress, too.
When the socialists overwhelmed the republican form of government of the United States in 1933, they had a super majority in the House and a filibuster-proof Senate. With 333 House members, the 89 Republicans were pretty much relegated to third party status. Like the Republicans in the 111th Congress, the Republicans in the 73rd Congress, entered their floor arguments against the New Deal legislation into the Congressional Record speaking to an empty House or Senate chamber. Since the left did not need their vote for anything, the arrogant socialists saw no need to listen to Republicans rant about their opposition to measures they could not stop.
Once the American people saw that the catastrophic collapse of the nation predicted by Roosevelt and the far left did not happen, and when the economy continued to worsen under Roosevelt, the Peoplewho in 1933 were willing to surrender a small measure of liberty for a job and food on the table for their childrenrealized that the socialist New Dealers were legislatively redefining the basic freedoms provided by the Bill of Rights without amending the Constitution. The left was legislating the Bill of Rights out of existence, and there weren't enough Republicans in either house to question them, let alone to stop them. The Democrats began to frighten the voters. And, conversely, at the same time, the socialists also feared the voters. Dictatorial control over the people would solve that. When you possess the power to take everything from the Peopleincluding their liveseven the most bellicose man becomes polite.
The Wagner Act resurfaced in 1943 as the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill (for Robert Wagner [D-NY], James Murray [D-WA] and John Dingell [D-MI]). The Left simply dusted it off, renamed it and sent it to committee. This act called for compulsory national care paid for with a payroll tax. The impetus to "try it again" came from a medical ally who joined the Roosevelt Administration as an adviser. His name was Dr. Henry E. Sigerist. When he joined FDR's team, he was featured as the "Man of the Year" by Time magazine. He was a European socialist who advocated on behalf of compulsory socialized medicine in Europe for several years that was adopted by 28 European nations. In the United States, Dr. Sigerist was the head of the Institute of the History of Medicine at Johns Hopkins from 1932-47. He received his MD from the University of Zurich in 1917. Sigerist was passionate about compulsory health insurance, and ardently campaigned for its passage. Opposition to the legislation was fierce. Wagner-Murray-Dingell went down in defeat in 1943, and again in 1944. In fact, the bill was reintroduced every year for next 14 years.
Where Roosevelt intended to backdoor the American people in 1939 with a single payer system controlled by him, President Harry S. Truman was content to simply modify Wagner-Murray-Dingell into a more progressive, egalitarian system. Truman wanted a completely voluntary plan that would give the people the choice to keep their private insurance or accept a public option. (Note: an article posted to the Harry S. Truman Library & Museum website claims that the national healthcare plan Truman proposed would have been open to all people, but that it would be optional. That may have been what Truman wanted, but Congress had other ideas. The New Deal Congress, which was still having trouble accepting the haberdasher from Missouri as the head of the ship of state, was still churning around in circles like a ship without a rudder since the death of Roosevelt. They had a slightly different version of healthcare in mind. When Wagner-Murray-Dingell finally showed up in Congress, it was an Obamaesque compulsory plan.)
What Truman proposed to Congress on Nov. 19, 1945 was simply too ambitious a piece of legislation to be enacted. It would have not only provided health insurance (as a supplement to Social Security), it would also have provided funds to build and staff hospitals in many of the 1,200 counties across the nation which had no local access to doctors or hospitals. The 79th Congress didn't let Truman's vision get in the way of a bill they thought they could get enactedthe Wagner-Murray-Dingell Act. Keep in mind that the Democrats did not have the extreme control of Congress in 1945 that they had in 1933. Republicans regained 102 House seats and 11 Senate seats. The Democrats could still enact any piece of legislation they wanted, but over the previous decade they learned that arrogance had a price. The Obama Raw Deal Congress hasn't learned that lesson yet. (Let's hope the Christian Right in America learned from the lessons of 2006 and 2008. You can't elect third party candidates in a two party system. Conservatives need to get proactive during the primaries since that is the time they can unseat an incumbent without giving his seat to the opposition party.)
Socialized medicine is the utopian dream of those attempting to create world government. It became the mandate of both the League of Nations and its smoke-and-mirrors replacement, the United Nations. Twenty-eight nations implemented compulsory healthcare. None of them work. If they did, their citizens (or at least those who could afford to do so), would not have felt the need to come to the United States for lifesaving medical care. Like everything that has anything to do with socialism, when you rob the free enterprise initiative to develop new technologies and new products, those new technologies and new products are simply not developed. The same is true of healthcare itself. The American healthcare system works better than any healthcare system in the world not because US doctors are smarter or better trained than doctors elsewhere in the world, but because American doctors, on the average, work harder and longer hours. Most work 12- to 16-hour workdays.
Once the State begins to sign their paychecks and assigns them a 35-hour work week, doctors are going to do what doctors in every socialist system dothey are going to work 35-hours a week because there will be no incentive for them to work longer. When that happens, the healthcare shortages and lack of quality care you find in Canada, England, Germany, the Netherlands, Russia, and the balance of the 28 nations with socialized medicine systems, you will find the same type of mediocre, rationed healthcare here. That's a "given" because, when the medical professional can no longer generate a high six- or seven-digit income by working 16- to 20-hour days, they will work 35-hour weeks, take their government paycheck and spend their free time managing the investments they made during the heyday of medicine when the free enterprise system produced the best healthcare in the world.
Want a truly zero-cost national healthcare system? Keep the government out of the healthcare business. Enact legislation that will allow any medical care provider or facility to write offdollar for dollar100% of all costs incurred by that provider or institution treating indigent patients (who are, first and foremost, US citizens who lack the money to buy coverage rather than simply wanting to spend their discretionary income on life's extravagances rather than life's necessities). These deductions would not be claimed at the top of the tax form where the taxpayer adjusts his gross income and determines his tax liability, but at the bottom of the form, after the tax liability is computed, and just before the check to the IRS is written. The deduction comes as a dollar-for-dollar credit against any taxes owed, or is added to whatever refund is due.
Who should be eligible for this free healthcare? The elderly. Those who are disabled and can't work, and those who were gainfully employed but have lost their job and are, or were, drawing unemployment but have not yet reentered the workforce. Excluded from eligibility would be those who think Uncle Sam owes them a living, or those who have the financial wherewithal to buy medical insurance but simply choose not to. And, most of all, excluded would be both resident aliens and illegal aliens. You now have as close to a zero-cost health insurance system as you will ever get. Everyone wins. And, best of all, you have a free market, private enterprise universal healthcare system which the government does not control.
As logical and simple as such a solution appears to be, neither the White House nor the socialists in Congress would let any Congressman or Senatorconservative or socialistpropose such a measure because it solves the healthcare problem without government interference or control. While the key objective of any healthcare plan theoretically is healthcare, the reality is when nations want to seize absolute, dictatorial control over a people, the easiest and swiftest way to seize control of a people through statism or socialism is to legislate population control mechanisms as regulations for some grand gratuity like healthcare. Once statism is disguised as a humanitarian project like healthcare, people generally do not oppose it because they can easily be made to look like villains for opposing medical care for the elderly, or for children. Yet, if you honestly outline the benefits and pitfalls of compulsory, single payer socialized medicine, and give the taxpayers (not the freeloaders) the option to choose, 100% of the time they will unflinchingly vote against it. Think not?
Between 1933 and 1961 the Democrats tried 14 times to ram a government-controlled healthcare system through Congress. In each case (except during the 80th Congress when the Republicans seized both Houses for 2 years), the Democrats had enough of a majority in both Houses that they could have enacted healthcare without a single GOP vote. Yet, in every instance they failed to enact it. With the American people on record as not wanting socialized medicine, the Democrats knew if they passed the measure without bipartisan support from the Republicans, the American people would engage in the mass termination of Democrats during the next election.
The American peoplethanks to Hillary Clintonnow have a more complex understanding of how, by design, universal healthcare puts into place the foundation of regulations that will allow government to control not only the lives of the people, but their mobility as well. Universal healthcare provides government with the platform that will surreptitiously allow them to, ever so slowly, steal the liberty of the People under the guise of taking care of them.
A large faction of American people still dislike Clinton because, as First Lady with no constitutional authority to engage in the legislative process, she formed a healthcare task force out of the public eye and created the most intrusive healthcare system devised by any US public official to date. Then, she arrogantly demanded that Congress pass it without change or comment. Her plan, created with the assistance of Bill Clinton's chief healthcare architect, Ira Magaziner, did far more than create a healthcare bill. Obamacare is Hillarycare with a few minor tweaks. Both, by the way, contained provisions for a federal Health Board whose job it would be to limit the government's liability by rationing healthcare to those with terminal or catastrophic chronic illnesses for which there is no cure. Actuarially, old age is one of those catastrophic chronic illnesses since old age always results in death. Hillarycare also included a biometric national ID card that was disguised as a healthcare card. That same card will be included in any healthcare system enacted by Congressincluding the healthcare co-ops if that becomes Congress' only option to get government's foot in the door.
In 1961 the American Medical Association [AMA] enlisted private citizen Ronald Reagan to speak out against expanding Kerr-Mills (Medicare)a program they initially supported. Congress was attempting to piggyback a new piece of legislation, a measure John F. Kennedy wanted enacted as King-Anderson (HR 4222, S.909) on top of Kerr-Mills in order to expand Medicare into a universal healthcare system for the elderly. Reagan began by detailing the many attempts by the Democratically-controlled Congress to enact a compulsory health insurance program in the United States. The American people, he noted, unhesitatingly rejected each attempt by the government to seize the healthcare industry. Fearful of losing their jobs, Congress backed down. Momentarily. Rep. Aime J. Forand [D-CT] introduced a measure that would have converted Medicare into a universal healthcare plan. He called it his "Ten-Point Bill of Rights for Older Citizens" which, when Lyndon Johnson assumed the White House, became the Older Americans Act of 1965. In the meantime, Reagan's efforts stalled attempts by both Kennedy and Johnson to convert Medicare into a single payer universal healthcare plan.
Reagan was right about one thing. When President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the Kerr-Mills Medicare bill into law in September, 1960, the socialists had their foot in the door. Reagan noted in his 1961 advocacy message that the Truman Era Wagner-Murray-Dingell Act would have forced all Americans to partake in a program of socialized medicine. The American people rejected socialized medicine. With the American people on the record about not wanting socialized medicine, Congressman Aime Forand introduced HR 4700. Forand's bill would have amended Medicare, forcing all people of Social Security age to be brought under a program of compulsory health insurance. This included not only senior citizens, it would include their dependents and all disabled people regardless of age, and children if they were dependents of someone who was eligible for either old age or disability insurance.
Forand argued that he was sponsoring the bill only for that specific group of people. Forand was a subscriber to the "foot-in-the-door" philosophy because, he said, "If we can get this bill through and get our foot inside the door, then we can expand the program after that." That is precisely what Barack Obama is doing today. And that is why he was willing to jettison his "public option" to get his foot in the door. Politicians have come to realize that once they get the correct framework passed, they can modify the plan within the bureaucracy by codifying whatever regulations they need to slowly convert the plan into whatever they want it to become. Reagan also quoted Walter Reuther who said: "It's no secret that the United Automobile Workers is officially on record backing a program of national health insurance." Reagan noted that "...by national health insurance he meant socialized medicine for every American. The socialists themselves say, 'Once the Forand bill is passed, the nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicine capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population.'"
Tragically, those who champion the grand gratuities of socialism most fervently are always communism's first victims when the socialists finally win because totalitarianism can't afford anyone who does not contribute more to society than they take from it. When the Clintons were mulling their limited options to keep Hillary's failed Health Security Act from total collapse in a series of very private war room meetings in the White House on Nov. 11 and 12, 1993, rationed healthcare for people with active AIDS was discussed in great detail. Like Obamacare, Hillarycare also contained provisions to ration healthcare to the elderly and also to catastrophically-ill people whom statistics said would drain the finite resources of the public healthcare system and bankrupt it if caps were not placed on catastrophic care.
According to the protocol of the Clinton White House meeting that took place on Nov. 12, 1993, "...[t]he President..." meeting with senior aide Gene Sperling and two other Clinton aides identified in the protocol only as as JFS and DG "...gives an overview of the AIDS situation and its relationship to the Health Security Act. Based on position papers submitted to the President from various organizations [that] include the WHO and the CDC, it is evident that AIDS is an epidemic in the United States. Juggling figures to show [only those with active AIDS] has kept the figures artificially low...The President now believes that it would be impossible to include any...AIDS patients with those citizens to be covered by the Health Security Act."
Clinton was so concerned about AIDS that on Nov. 12, 1993 as the Health Security Act was in its death throes, he suggested that a provision be added to the bill mandating a one-time screening for AIDS be done on all US citizens. Clinton also proposed having the CDC require every citizen with full-blown AIDS to be confined to AIDS sanatoriums until they were no longer contagious, or until they died. The sanatoriums were to be situated in sparsely-populated areas of the country. Upon admission, patients would be required to sign living wills with euthanasia previsions that could be triggered by proxy when their healthcare providers deemed them to be "terminal." The AIDS provision Clinton wanted to add to Hillarycare does not appear to be in Obamacare. However, the same federal Health Board that will be charged with the responsibility of doing the cost analysis on the merits of keeping the elderly alive versus denying them lifesaving procedures will also be responsible for preparing a cost analysis on the value of keeping terminally-ill AIDS victims alive on the public dime.
It's interesting to note that the gay and lesbian population actively campaigned for Clinton in 1992 and 1996 just as the elderlythe primary target of the Obamacare Health Boardactively campaigned, and voted, for Barack Obama in 2008. Yet, try to convince the gay and lesbian community that, if Hillarycare hadn't failed, most of them would be spending their final days in an isolated AIDS sanatorium somewhere in the Badlands. And the blue-haired seniors in Florida and Arizona may find that their next flare-up of irritable bowel syndrome, or their next broken hip, might land them in a terminal care unit of their local hospital where those who linger while dying go to die, instead of sitting around bragging about their latest hospital adventure at the assisted living center.
Make no mistake about it. The Obama Health Board, or as it is legislatively known, the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research, headed by death merchants the likes of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, based on the vision of Dr. Robert Pearlman, the Chief of Ethics Evaluation for the Veteran's Administration National Center for Ethics in Health Care, who was the visionary behind the notion that disabled veterans who do not want to be a burden to their families or to society, have the right to death with dignity through assisted suicide.
Pearlman authored his death protocol in 1997. For the remaining three years of the Clinton Administration, Pearlman's 52-page end-of-life planning document, "Your Life, Your Choices," not only became the basis for the living wills used by disabled military people but, it also became the framework for the federal regulation that now requires hospitals and other medical care facilities to pressure patientsparticularly elderly patientsto sign Living Wills (i.e., euthanasia provisions). Today, in violation of the Hippocratic Oath, doctors regularly euthannize patients deemed to be terminally-ill. Among the list of terminal illnesses that can trigger the Living Will death-with-dignity provision is old-age.
No right-minded person should ever sign a living will unless they have a penchant to prematurely expedite their exodus from this world. When you sign a living will, you are actually signing your own death warrantand you are giving someone you don't know the right to end your life when they see fit to do so. The argument of the pro-euthanasia crowd (whose primary goal is population reduction at both ends of the age corridor) is that people have a right to death with dignity. There is no such thing. There is no dignity in death. Even in a roomful of people, death is a journey we travel alone. God, not a bureaucrat, appointed when that journey will begin for each of us. Agendized bureaucrats and their minions in the medical community do not possess an inherent right to hasten that journey because they view us as a drain on the financial coffers of the State, or because stupid men believe the populations of the nations are responsible for cyclic weather change and floods and droughts. And, by reducing the population of the United States we will somehow make the world a better place. The sole purpose for euthanizing the elderly is to reduce the drain on a bankrupt Social Security and Medicare system. The government of the United States not only stole the Social Security Trust Fund to finance Lyndon Johnson's Welfare State, now they want to kill the elderly when they come to collect the money due them in their old age.
Here's just one of a thousand examples of "death with dignity." On February 20, 1998 when Mary Helmueller, a RN from Minneapolis, was visiting friends in Mexico City, her grandmother fractured her left knee and was admitted to a local hospital. When Helmueller returned, she learned that her grandmother had died. According to the hospital records concerning her grandmother's demise which Helmueller personally examined, her grandmother was alert and oriented upon admission but, within 48 hours, she went into a coma. The "coma" was in fact, unconsciousness induced by morphine. According to nurses at the local hospital who attended her, she would awaken between pain medications saying: "I don't want to die. I want to live to see Johnny ordained. I want to see Greta walk." (Johnny was her grandson who was studying for the priesthood in Rome. Greta was her new great-granddaughter.) She was transferred to a hospice where she died a day or so later. Her medical charts said she had a stroke and was in renal failure.
Helmueller insisted that her grandmother had no terminal illnesses. But, based on federal guidelines, she did. She was old. Old age is construed to be a terminal illness since you can't recover from it. Also, according to Helmueller, to the best of her knowledge, her grandmother never signed a living will. It was not until hospice officials called family members and told them that death was imminent and there was no chance the elderly woman would recover, that they tacitly gave the hospital permission to execute her. Keep in mind, all that was wrong with her when she was transferred to the hospice was a fractured knee and overmedicationby the medical staff.
Carefully tracing the events that led up to her grandmother's "coma," Helmueller discovered that her grandmother became increasingly unresponsive after each morphine treatment. It appeared to Helmueller that her grandmother's coma was caused by a morphine overdose. However, the admitting records at the hospice affirm the statements of two hospice doctors who swore, by their signatures, that she was terminally ill. However, the first doctor, the director of the hospice, never examined or evaluated hernor did he so much as review her chart which, by the way, listed her as a "No Code" patient. The second doctor was on vacation when Helmueller's grandmother arrived via ambulance from the hospital. He returned from vacation three days after her death. Yet, in the expert medical opinions of both doctorsneither of whom ever saw her while she was livingshe was terminal when she was admitted. The medical-legal community now defines terminal illness as any incurable or irreversible illness or chronic medical problem that will, or could, result in death in six months without medication or medical intervention. What that means is, if you suffer from heart disease that is under control with medication, but you are nearing retirement age, under Obamacare, you could be construed to be terminally-ill by the federal guidelnes mandated by the Death Squad.
Therefore, if youy've signed a living will, and you have a chronic illnesses or catastropic disability, you can be denied medical treatment or suddenly find yourself in a morphine-induced "coma,"and euthanized. If you recall the tragic death of Terri Schindler Schiavo, Pinellas County, Florida Circuit Court Judge George S. Geer ordered her to be denied liquid nourishment and life-sustaining watersentencing an innocent woman to be executed in an extremely painful manner. No judge in the United States of America has a constitutional right to sentence an unconvicted, innocent person to death. No judge in the United States could pronounce a death sentence on even the most notorious mass murderer that entailed starving them to death to the extent of even denying them water and have it stand up under judicial scrutiny. Yet, that's what Geer did to Schiavo. No court overruled him, and no governor "pardoned her." The death sentence stood, and Terri Schiavo was executed by the State of Florida..
The 15-member Obama Health Board was created under HR 1, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The board will gain its authority from HR 3200, The America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009. The board, which the legislation purports to be an advisory panel created to perform cost analysis of all phases of the stimulus plan is, in reality, a panel of physicians and healthcare providers whose role it will be to determine at what point it is no longer cost productive to sanction the use of taxpayer dollars to save the life of a patient who requires a surgical procedure, medical procedure or lifesaving medications to correct a medical malady that threatens the life of an elderly patient or someone with a catastrophic illness.
The specific language that deals with the rationing of healthcare to the elderly found in The America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (which was drafted in part by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel), an advocate of assisted suicide, with considerable input from Dr. Pearlman, the author of Your Life, Your Choices" the head of ethics evaluation for the Center for Ethics in Health Care in the VA.
On Sun., Aug. 23, Chris Wallace, host of Fox News Sunday questioned Tammy Duckworth, an Assistant Secretary of Veterans Affairs about the "death book" that suggests to all disable veterans that their lives aren't worth living and that they should consider "end-of-life" options. Duckworth, herself a paraplegic who lost both legs as a helicopter pilot in Iraq, told Wallace that the Obama Administration was not using Pearlman's death book. She then noted that it was used during the Bush Administration. Wallace corrected her by reading a July 9, 2009 VA memo which clearly indicates an Obama mandate that Your Life, Your Choices, be supplied to every veterannot just those who are traumatically disabled.
Duckworth told Wallace that, as the copilot of a Blackhawk helicopter, when she was shot down over Iraq, she had both a living will and a power of attorney that allowed her husband to execute her wishes. Duckworth was wounded on Bush's watch, not Obama's. Had Duckworth been wounded in Afghanistan or Iraq on Obama's watch, in a post-passage Obamacare world, under Obama's federal Health Board guidelines that weighs not only the monetary cost to save and rehabilitate the wounded warrior, but also the post-medical care cost in terms of the disability income, the government would be obligated to pay to that wounded warrior for the rest of his or her life.
When President George W. Bush learned that the Veteran's Administration was using Pearlman's death book in 2007, he asked that a copy of the booklet be sent to the White House. After reading the worksheet on page 21 that poised various negative life scenarios and then asks the reader to decide whether or not his or her own life is actually worth living. One of the most tasteless scenarios is this one: "Have you ever heard anyone say, 'if I'm a vegetable, pull the plug.'?"
Bush ordered the VA to discontinue its use. Why would the Veterans' Administration, or any agency of the United States government, pose questions specifically to make members of the armed services question their own worthiness as humans, and make them feel guilty for surviving the wounds that disabled them? Your Life, Your Choice was actually designed to cause disabled servicemen (and women) to ponder just how much of a burden they were on their families, and whether they should do the merciful thing and end their own lives? In point of fact, the Veteran's Administration wasn't raising the specter because they believe disabled veterans are a financial burden on their families but, rather, because they are a financial drain on the resources of the State.
At the start of his second term, in 2005, Bush-43 began frantically waving a large warning flags that Social Security was very literallynot theoreticallybankrupt. Bush warned that if something was not done very quickly, within 10 years, the system would collapse and the federal government would no longer be able to meet its financial obligations under Social Security. In order to devise a system that would prevent the bureaucracy from putting Social Security receipts into the general treasury and spending it instead of placing it in a trust fund as required by law, Bush proposed privatizing Social Security. Under Bush's idea, the money would go into investment accounts that Congress could not touch. The bureaucracy didn't like that idea. As Bush-43 scurried around looking for 45 million brand new US taxpayers earning middle class incomes to replace the Baby Boomers who began to retire in 2005 through an amnesty plan the make citizens out of approximately 25 million illegal aliens, the left accused him of fearmongering while they assured America's retirement age seniors and the soon-to-be retirement age seniors that there was absolutely nothing wrong with the Social Security system. Adding their voice to calm America was the AARP, the advocacy group of the elderlywhich receives millions of dollars in federal grants each year to advocate to seniors on the behalf of the federal government.
The bureaucracy knew there was a major problemtoo many old people and not even retirement revenue. The problem existed for over a decade before George W. Bush stumbled across it in 2005. Twenty years of unrestricted abortion in the United States between Jan. 22, 1973 and Jan. 20, 1993 (when the Clintons came to the White House) eliminated approximately 32 million future taxpayers. Adding the children these aborted babies did not grow up to have, we actually lost 49.6 million future taxpayers and consumers between 1973 and 1993. Today, after a quarter century of killing the unborn in the United States, that number has reach just a hair under 70 million. From 1973 to 2009, the age demographics of the nation radically shifted as the population of the United States began to age.
The problem wasn't that there were too many elderly people. The problem was that there weren't enough young people paying into the Social Security system. The Ponzi Scheme we call Social Security is underfunded thanks to Lyndon Johnson's Great Welfare Society. During that era, the far left changed the Trust Fund law and stole the Social Security Trust receipts. They replaced the money with worthless IOUs. Today, there is no trust fund. Tax receipts earn 1% interest, but the money is virtually spent as soon as it's received, so it doesn't matter. The money deducted from your paycheck this month covers someone else's Social Security check next month. Social Security has become a pyramid scheme. Violating the Ponzi law is what Bernie Madoff went to prison for. Like every pyramid scheme, ultimately there will be more recipients demanding benefits than there will be workers to fund those payments. When that happens, Uncle Sam's Ponzi scheme will collapse.Before that happens, government has to find a way to restore the age balance in the taxpayer pool needed to keep the fund solvent. Sadly, Hillary Clinton's failed Health Security Act of 1993 offered a bureaucratic solution: rationed healthcare. Hillarycare, like Obamacare, gave government the right to decide at what point it could no longer afford to keep its seniors alive in a desperate political system that sees an imperative urgency to jettison the old. Under Hillarycare and Obamacare, once the decision was made to deny lifesaving procedures to the old, that rejected recipient cannot be allowed to pay for the denied procedure from his or her own pocket. That radical decision makes sense only when you look beyond healthcare at the need to greatly reduce the number of Social Security recipients who are currently receiving either retirement or disability benefits from Uncle Sam.
If Obamacare, which will supersede all current health options (including those offered by private carriers) is enacted into law, your signing a living will that requires all extraneous means be used to prolong your life will not save, or prolong, your life for one minute if the Health Board rules that you have exhausted your "healthcare options." The Health Board will hold the power of life and death over healthcare recipients who are construed to have either terminal or catastrophic illnesses, or, if they are victims of expensive chronic illnesses that historically drain financial resources without healing the patient, the Board will have the right to deny procedures or surgery even though they may enhance the quality of life of the patient.
Obama's 15-member Health Board, officially branded as the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research, is authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Its mandate is to "...assist the agencies of the federal government, including HHS and the Department of Veterans Affairs...to coordinate comparative effectiveness and related health service research...The Council will consider the needs of the population served by federal programs." The verbiage in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. makes it appear that the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Research was legislated as an advisory panel to do cost analysis on all facets of the stimulus package as though to suggest their job is to make sure stimulus money is properly disbursed and that councilfunded with $1.1 billion annuallywill address the impact of the stimulus bill on subpopulations in the United States. Its deliberations, according to the legislation, will be public and transparent based, the government's memo said, on the [Resident's] commitment to open government.
The Council will be headed by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. From the HHS are Anne C. Haddox, Chief Policy Officer; Dr. Thomas B. Valuck, MD, Senior Advisor in the Center of Medicare Management; Peter Delaney, Director of the Office of Applied Studies; Dr. Carolyn Clancy, MD; Deborah Hopson, Ph.D, RN, Associate Administrator, HIV/AIDS Bureau; Dr. David Hunt, MD; James Scanlon, Acting Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation; Dr. Elizabeth Nabel, MD, National Institute of Health; Dr. Garth Graham, MD, Office of Minority Health; Dr. Jesse Goodman, MD, Acting Chief Medical Officer for the FDA; Dr. Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo, MD, Acting Deputy for Office on Disability, HHS; Neera Tanden, attorney for Health Reform at HHS; Dr. Joel Kupersmith, MD, Veteran's Administration; and Dr. Michael Kilpatrick, MD, Department of Defense.