Around 10:15 AM today the Supreme Court announced that the Obama Affordable Care Act has been completely upheld, including the individual mandate. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of keeping the new law known as “Obamacare.”

Justice Roberts did announce that the individual mandate could not be justified through the Commerce Clause but instead through the Taxing Clause. Roberts stated, “When a court confronts an unconstitutional statue its endeavor must be to conserve, not destroy the legislation.”

Roberts claimed that allowing the Commerce Clause to be used to justify the individual mandate would “open a new and vast domain” for Congressional Power. Never before has Congress had the power under the Commerce Clause to tell individuals to buy something. What the Supreme Court was worried about under this justification is that there would be no limit to what Congress could tell the American people to buy or not buy.

Justice Roberts also claimed that the required expansion of Medicaid may violate states’ rights. He wrote, “the states are given no choice in this case. They must either accept a basic change in the nature of Medicaid or risk losing all Medicaid funding.” This part of the law is the one part that Roberts states the federal government cannot require of states but is still a limited ruling. Roberts says that the justices have not completely removed this part of the law but have stated that they have included a possible solution to this problem in their ruling.

So far the Physicians for National Health Program have already responded to the ruling claiming they disagree with the Supreme Court ruling because 26 million people will still not be insured. They also advocate for a single-payer option.

The GOP has already started the fight to repeal the ruling, writing on Twitter, “The fight for #FullRepeal begins NOW. The way to get rid of #Obamacare is to defeat Obama in November.” The GOP claims that the Supreme Court has set “the stakes for the November election.”

For continuous updates see the CNN News Blog.

Image Courtesy of  spirit of america / Shutterstock.com

The article Obama’s Health Care Law Upheld by Supreme Court appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In the world of politics, there is nothing better than an opponent that shoots themselves in the foot. Hence, President Obama is having a much better time currently, than he should be.

Unemployment is still high and the debt is astronomical. Gas prices are high and rising and many of the President’s foreign policy accomplishments are footnotes because of Syria, Iran, and he’s continued throwing of Israel under the bus. But, none of that matters as much, because for the last three weeks the topic of choice has been the controversy regarding birth control and the President’s healthcare mandates.

If this is new to you, here are the bullet points. The Affordable Care Act that President Obama passed, mandates preventative medical care at no cost to anyone. No co-pays, no deductibles. Included in the preventive care list is coverage for birth control pills, the morning after pill, and elective sterilization procedures. Most company insurance plans already provide coverage for birth control, but now it must be covered for no co-pay.

The morning after pills and the sterilization surgeries would be at no cost as well. However, the Catholic Church does not believe in birth control and want waivers for having to provide coverage to employees of their schools and nonprofit organizations. The President refused, and the Republicans had an issue right up their wheelhouse.

So for the last two weeks, Republicans have been chopping at the bit regarding the infringement on religious rights by the President and the President has not been hurt by the debate because all that Americans hear are Republicans railing against birth control pills.  Except, that is not what they are upset about. The issue is that the government should not be trying to make religious organizations do things against their religious beliefs. The real problem however is that the Republicans have again allowed the Democrats to frame the issue.

Most women in the country, 98%, have used birth control pills. Though it is easy to make people who fight against the mandate sound as though they are against birth control, that is not the real issue. The real issue is one of personal responsibility. If you are a woman reading this, or a man that is discussing this with a woman, you need to ask yourself: “Why I should have to pay for your birth control pills?”

That is the real issue. No one disputes that women should be able to get birth control pills, if she wants them. But, why should they be free? Whether a woman uses them is a personal choice, but at what point did we start thinking that other people are required to pay for your choices?

Food is more important than sex, should others pay for your groceries as well? Sterilization surgeries are elective, so it makes equally little sense to not let the person electing to do it, pay for it. I believe there is no difference between that and a woman getting a breast implant. Should we pay for them as well?

This is not only the more effective line of attack, but it is also the more understandable. Not only should the religious employers not have to pay for a woman’s birth control, but also neither should anyone else.

Republicans have allowed themselves to again get distracted by a social issue that does not win the election or overall opinion polls.  If they focused on the personal responsibility aspect of this issue, they would be winning the debate. Because even women could disagree to pay for the decisions that other women make.

This is a classic case of what is right: arguing against the infringement on religious rights, versus being effective in arguing that it is wrong to make others pay for the elective decisions that individuals make in their own lives. If the Republicans continue to make this mistake, not only will they lose the election, but the U.S. will take an even closer step toward a society in which personal responsibility is absent from all areas of life.

Image Courtesy of    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article Republicans Dropping Ball on Birth Control Debate appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Obama Administration unveiled a revamped home loan refinancing program, Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP), that aims to help “underwater borrowers” whose home values have been declined. The program was first introduced in 2009.

HARP 1.0 was supposed to be the simpler part of the complex plan to revitalize the nation’s housing market when launched two years back. It was intended to help borrowers whose mortgages were owned or backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. This time HARP 2.0 aims to do more – to lower the mortgage payments as a way to free up cash for other spending that could potentially insulates faster economic recovery.

“If you met certain requirements, you will have a chance of refinance at lower rates, which could save you hundreds of dollars a month and thousands of dollars a year in a mortgage payment” President Barack Obama said in Las Vegas as he unveiled the plan there.

Also, this time around Fannie and Freddie removed or eliminated certain upfront fees charged for weaker credits, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Said. The big four banks combined to write $175.4 Billion in new Mortgages during the three months ended September 30.that is 24% lower than what these lenders wrote last year.

A quick check at the top five mortgage lenders in a 2011 quarterly report shows that Wells Fargo and Company tops the list with $65,662 in lending, followed by Bank of America with $41,425 million, Chase’s lending volume being $35,985 million, and finally CitiMortgage Inc. with $12,211 million of lending volume.

HARP never took off or performed as expected. Many believe numerous factors were responsible for its lukewarm performance over the last two years. Reportedly, the biggest threat was posed by falling home prices acting as a major obstacle to refinance. It helped just 800,000 homeowners, well below the 4 million plus mark originally targeted.

The changes announced on Monday by the FHSA, which regulates Fannie and Freddie, lift a cap that had limited the HARP 1.0  program borrowers whose homes had lost no more than 25 percent of their value relative to their outstanding mortgage. Luckily This limit has been changed.

The FHSA also said that Fannie and Freddie will eliminate certain fees borrowers who refinance into shorter-term-duration. In the big picture, rejuvenating how we oversee the housing marketing plays a pivotal role in repairing to damages we’ve experiences in this sector., Fixing and modifying working of refinance system might provide cushion to consumer spending in the days to come.

The article Obama Unveils HARP 2.0 to Boost Housing Market appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

President Obama unveiled his deficit reduction plan on Monday and his tone was widely different. Gone were the days of Obama holding out an olive branch to the Republicans. Obama, finally, took aim and fired.

In his plan, Obama clearly stated that millionaires and billionaires would have to begin to pay their fair share of taxes. He promised to veto any legislation proposed by the super congress that cut Medicare and did not include raising taxes for the wealthy. “This is not class warfare.

It’s math,” Obama declared, anticipating Republican criticism. He also called out Speaker John Boehner for his approach in earlier Bush tax cut debate. Boehner had stated that Obama would have to make some concessions. After concession after concession, Boehner and his party refused to budge, taking the same approach that they criticized Obama for taking.

The president’s proposal would focus on upper-income taxpayers, called the “Buffet Rule” after billionaire Warren Buffet has vocalized his low tax rate. The plan would also target tax loopholes and subsidies. Most of the cuts in Medicare would hit health care providers and not beneficiaries.

Although some benefit programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, however far less cuts that the GOP proposes. His cuts also include $1 trillion over ten years from the troop withdrawal in the Middle East.

The deficit-reduction plan represents Obama’s longer-term follow-up to the $447 billion in tax cuts and new public works spending that he has proposed as a short-term measure to stimulate the economy. The new proposal also inserts the president’s voice into the legislative discussions of a joint congressional “supercommittee” charged with recommending deficit reductions of up to $1.5 trillion.

Defending his emphasis on new taxes rather than only spending reductions, Obama said: “We can’t just cut our way out of this hole.” Republicans reacted exactly as expected. They used talking points about tax increases destroying jobs, but did not provide any real substance. Boehner said exactly as Obama thought so, calling it “class warfare.”

“Veto threats, a massive tax hike, phantom savings and punting on entitlement reform is not a recipe for economic or job growth or even meaningful deficit reduction,” said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell. “The good news is that the Joint Committee is taking this issue far more seriously than the White House.”

Sounds nice from the right, but it is wrong. There are easy charts and facts that show when we had a higher tax rate; we had a hell of a lot more jobs. So, I am not sure why Republicans keep up with this myth, but so many people believe it. Trust me—in the words of George Bush—read my lips—taxing the rich will NOT cause any job loss.

The rich have had this awesome tax cuts for 10 years, and we have just lost jobs. So, this rationale is illogical.

Alan Freed / Shutterstock.com

The article Obama Unveils Deficit Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Speaking to Congress in Washington yesterday, President Barack Obama outlined the centerpiece of his re-election campaign in the form of a $447bn jobs package designed to alleviate the deflated US economy.

Following the painful deadlock this summer over the debt crisis, Obama made sure to urge swift agreement between the Democrats and the Republicans: “The question is whether, in the face of an ongoing national crisis, we can stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy.”

In the televised joint session, Obama proposed a package of targeted tax cuts and government spending which aim at reviving the American job market. Unemployment rates has been steady at 9% or above for more than two years now, the voters are frustrated and the President saw fit to call the situation a ‘national crisis’.

Bloomberg reports that the package includes a $105 billion infrastructure proposal for school modernization, transportation projects and rehabilitation of vacant properties. Infrastructure spendings are expected to deliver most of its economic impact next year while some areas have to wait until 2013.

The president explained that he expects the recovery to be driven by businesses and workers — not by Washington. Instead, the administration is gearing up to help from the sideline. An estimated $35 billion is proposed as direct aid to state and local governments to stem layoffs of educators and emergency personnel, according to Bloomberg.

Furthermore, the main targets of the package will be the workers and small business owners who would be able to look forward to cuts in payroll taxes as an incentive for new hiring and development.

A final highlight proposes to grant states the authority to pay unemployment benefits to people who have been out of work for more than six months while they train for jobs at businesses for up to eight weeks. To encourage employers to take in these long-term unemployed, the unemployment-insurance funds will make sure the training will be at no cost to the business.

Obama’s proposal was met with both standing ovation and stony silence but some Republicans were willing to admit that the package promoted some common ground. Eric Cantor, House Majority Leader and a frequent critic of Obama, said that areas such as extending the payroll tax and especially the tax reduction for small businesses did appeal to Republican politics.

“That’s something we Republicans have been advocating for quite some time now,” he said to Bloomberg.

Anna Frajtova / Shutterstock.com

The article President Obama Kicks Off Election Trail with $447bn Jobs Plan appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Congressman Joe Walsh (the Eagles Joe Walsh must hate this guy) sort of apologized for calling President Barack Obama “idiotic.” This is the first time Walsh has said something offensive and he has only been in office for nine months.

On Friday, Walsh criticized the President for calling a joint session of Congress to lay out a jobs plan. “He is abusing his position,” Walsh said on MSNBC. “We reserve that for heads of state and visiting dignitaries, presidents in moments of crisis.”

“This is a political exercise. This is political theater.”

Earlier in the year, Walsh suggested that voters elected Obama because he was black in an interview with Slate. “Why was he elected? Again, it comes back to who he was. He was black, he was historic. And there’s nothing racist about this. It is what it is. If he had been a dynamic, white, state senator elected to Congress he wouldn’t have gotten in the game this fast.

This is what made him different. That, combined with the fact that your profession, not you, but your profession, was just absolutely compliant. They made up their minds early that they were in love with him.

They were in love with him because they thought he was a good liberal guy and they were in love with him because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal, the whole white guilt, all of that.”

He has since tried to distance himself from those assertions, although not very far. “I think we elected this president because of who he was,” Walsh told MSNBC host Martin Bashir. “He was a historic figure. It made this country feel good to elect him.”

“We did not vet him,” Walsh continued. “Your profession did not vet him as much we should.” At an Illinois gathering earlier this week, Walsh called the president “idiotic” and said he “destroyed job creation systematically for three years.”

Walsh told Bashir that he apologized for the statement at a town hall meeting on Thursday, saying he meant to call Obama’s plan to present a jobs speech “idiotic,” rather than the president himself. “I did not mean to say that,” Walsh told Bashir. “That was over the line.”

Walsh has stated he will not be attending the President’s job speech in a public statement released last week. “The president needs to stop the speeches, get out of his office and away from all the White House academics and start talking to real people out there,” Walsh said in a statement issued Thursday.

“They’re the ones who are going to create the jobs, not White House paper-pushers and bureaucrats,” the statement read in part.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article Congressman Joe Walsh Apologized for Obama Comments appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Obama is not likely to win another election according to recent studies. Voters are doubtful about the economy and its’ future, which may impact  President Obama’s relection in 2012.

Democrats are hopeful there will be a change in the next year to make Obama a two-term president. However, events that could help him, such as the assassination of Osama Bin Laden, seem to have been put on the back burner. Negative topics such as the economy are still in the spotlight.

Unemployment is at 9.2 per cent throughout the country, and it is a fundamental issue on many voters’ minds. President Obama may have a tough time gaining support unless something positive happens within the next year. The overall support throughout the country does not look promising for the president and certainly won’t be enough to get him reelected.

A recent study by Harris Poll found that 42 per cent to 52 per cent of the public say they are unlikely to vote for President Obama and only 35 per cent think he will be reelected.

President Obama also faces tough competition against leading GOP presidential candidates who are running for election in 2012, including Mitt Romney, Michele Bachmann, Ron Paul, and Rick Perry, who have made the economy their central focus in their campaigns.

In regards to President Obama’s handling of the economy Romney said, “When you see what this president has done to the economy in just three years, you know why America doesn’t want to find out what he can do in eight.” It is hard for voters to resist candidates who promise job creation and a better economy.

Security, which was recorded in a recent poll conducted by Barna Group, was also a top priority in the public that would influence which candidate to vote for in 2012. Security is something President Obama has proven he can provide for Americans. The victory of Osama Bin Laden’s death during his presidency could carry some substantial weight.

President Obama’s approval rating went up ten percent to 57 per cent the month after the assassination of Osama Bin Laden. His overall handling of foreign policy issues has also helped his rating. This could help Obama substantially, such as when Sadam Hussein was captured under the Bush administration.

President Bush was able to draw out his support through his second term and got reelected in 2004 because of this event; much like this could help Obama in his reelection.

Another aspect that is beneficial for the President is his promise to withdraw 30,000 troops from Afghanistan by 2012, which could help his campaign from supporters against the war. Other candidates running in the election are still making promises that voters are willing to take their chances on unless President Obama make some moves in the upcoming year.

With many odds working against President Obama, we will have to wait and see if he will have another four years in office, or if voters will look for someone who yet again can promise “change.”

Jose Gil / Shutterstock.com

The article Are All Odds Against Obama in 2012? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.