Denver, U.S.A. — “Mitt Romney is the architect of Obamacare,” said Jefferson George, president of the conservative tax-exempt group American Right To Life Action. “Romney has already implemented what Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton only dream of: homosexual marriage, tax-funded abortion on demand by health care reform with the individual mandate, robbing religious freedom from pro-life hospitals. The list is long. If anyone believed the ‘lesser of two evils’ con, they’d have to vote for Obama.”

“Strategists say that independents decide elections,” said Darrell Birkey, the ARTL research director overseeing the new RepublicansAgainstRomney.com website. “So the only way for pro-lifers to get candidates who won’t kill unborn children is to become independent enough to oppose liberal, pro-abortion, pro-homosexual politicians like Mitt Romney.”

Agreeing with ARTL is the longtime vice president of the nation’s first “right to life” group, Colorado Right To Life. “The Republicans Against Romney site documents that the excuses the campaign makes for Mitt’s anti-child, anti-free-market, anti-family actions are nothing but lies,” said Leslie Hanks. “Sadly, conservative talk show hosts lap it up and repeat the lies. This website even offers a$100 reward for corrections to errors of fact.”

According to the site, Romneycare is fundamentally a liberal, socialist program with its individual mandate that saps the federal treasury. Romney’s top consultants aided the development of Obamacare and put Planned Parenthood on the “health” committee that, from day one, offered $50 tax-subsidized abortion on demand. And still today Romney plans to nominate justices “like John Roberts,” who upheld Obamacare.

RepublicansAgainstRomney.com documents that Mitt Romney claimed to be pro-choice in 1994, pro-life in 2001, pro-choice in 2002, pro-life in 2004, pro-choice in 2005, pro-life in 2006 and then funded abortion in 2006. In 2012, he’s back to supporting abortion for “health reasons,” the loophole opened by the Supreme Court’s Doe v. Bolton opinion that allows all abortions, as in Colorado for example, throughout all nine months.

“And ironically,” adds Birkey, “the ’legitimate’ rape issue is Romney policy, not a Todd Akin policy. The congressman advocates protecting every child, but it’s Romney’s rape exception that requires determining whether or not there was a rape.”

Image Courtesy of   Gage Skidmore

The article American RTL Launches RepublicansAgainstRomney.com appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Washington, U.S.A. – Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and now Freedom Watch, released this statement on July 17:

“Last Friday, Judge Richard Roberts of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered President Barack Obama to reveal under oath the specifics of his secret meetings with health care lobbyists such as PHARMA, Planned Parenthood, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others that lead up to the passage of “Obamacare,” or else submit to discovery depositions and document production in that my group filed a few years ago.

The judge’s order is courageous, particularly since he was appointed to the federal bench by Democrat President Bill Clinton, showing that some integrity still remains on the federal bench despite the politics of Obamacare and our comprised and partisan judicial system in general.

Now that the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of Obamacare and Congress is considering repealing or amending it, Judge Roberts’ decision is crucial for the American people to know what went on behind closed doors, including any lobbyist commitments to pay campaign contributions to the Obama reelection campaign, in order to fully understand and remedy Obamacare, which many feel will seriously harm the economy if put into effect as is during these times of deep economic crisis.”

Obamacare, which is actually called the Affordable Care Act, was passed by the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision. It was ruled constitutional not under the Commerce Clause but the taxing powers of Congress. Justice John Roberts, who tends to lean more conservative, seemed to jump to the opposing side in this decision, giving the liberals the majority that they needed to allow the law to pass.

For a copy of Judge Roberts’ decision, go to www.freedomwatchusa.org or Pacer with regard to the case styled Freedom Watch v. Obama et. al, Civil Action No. 09-2398 (U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia).

Image Courtesy of   michael rubin / Shutterstock.com

The article Obamacare Still in Court in Washington, DC appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

New York, U.S.A. – As the Supreme Court readies for its ruling on the fate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), sometimes referred to as “Obamacare,” Americans have different opinions on components of the law, depending on the type of health insurance they currently have. Specifically, over half of U.S. adults who have purchased health insurance individually (54%) think employers should not be required to provide employee health insurance compared to only 28% of Americans with employer-sponsored insurance who think this. Additionally, over half of those with individual health insurance (55%) think the government should play a role in assuring access to health insurance, compared to almost two-thirds of Americans with employer-sponsored coverage (64%).

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll of 2,208 U.S. adults (ages 18 and over) surveyed online between June 12 and 14, 2012 by Harris Interactive.

Two thirds of Americans (66%) agree that having health insurance should be a personal choice, so there may be some general disapproval of the ACA’s individual mandate. However, Americans do agree with some of the ACA’s other provisions. For example, over four in five U.S. adults agree that neither children nor adults should be denied health insurance if they have a pre-existing condition (83%) and nearly three-quarters of Americans agree that tax credits should be offered to individuals if they purchase their own health insurance (74%).

However, when looking at the data by the type of insurance respondents currently have, some distinct differences can be seen. Interestingly, among those that have individual coverage, almost half (46%) agree that all people do not need to be covered by health insurance, compared to 30% among those with employer-sponsored coverage and 36% among those that have no insurance at all. Those with individual insurance are also slightly less likely to agree (79%) that adults and children with pre-existing coverage should not be denied coverage, compared to those with employer-sponsored plans (86% adults; 85% children) and Medicare (82% adults; 83% children).

When asked to rate how important 11 different aspects of health insurance are, over nine in ten Americans say access to the doctors, hospitals and services they need is important (91%) while nine in ten say coverage for prescriptions (90%) and availability of insurance if they have a pre-existing condition (90%) are important. Those who have employer sponsored health insurance are more likely than those with insurance they have purchased themselves to say each of the 11 aspects is important when it comes to health insurance. Some of the larger differences are seen when looking at coverage for prescriptions (95% vs. 76%), coverage for preventative care (93% vs. 74%), and coverage for wellness programs (84% vs. 65%).

Additionally, when asked which two things are most important when it comes to health insurance, one aspect rises to the top – two in five Americans say one of the two most important aspects is access to the doctors, hospitals and services they need (39%). The next three are financial as about one-quarter of U.S. adults say financial protection from major health crises (27%), lower out of pocket costs (26%), and low premiums (24%) are most important.

“The importance of health insurance to the American consumer cannot be understated regardless of the opinion issued by the Supreme Court,” said Debra Richman, Senior Vice President of Healthcare Business Development & Strategy at Harris Interactive. “This is especially true for consumers who individually purchase health insurance plans, a market of growing significance to health insurers. It will be imperative for health insurers to increase their focus on how those in the individual market ‘consume’ health insurance, including what plan features they prefer, and what they will and conversely will not choose to buy. Financial protection from major health crises, access to providers, convenience, and quality will be key factors as individual health consumers make purchasing decisions, despite how the Supreme Court rules on the individual coverage mandate.”

The article Employers Should Not Provide Healthcare, Americans Say appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

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!.

Health care was a major issue at the November 9 Republican presidential debate hosted by CNBC titled, “Your Money, Your Vote: The Republican Presidential Debate.” With each Republican presidential candidate stating that they would repeal ObamaCare, the debate gave them the opportunity to address the steps to reform health care once elected to office.

Ron Paul, who has had previous experience in the medical field as a doctor, addressed the issue by stating that the solution to heath care was to get the government out of the business altogether. He stated that there should be the right to “opt out of ObamaCare,” as well as any health care program to bring health care back to patient-doctor relationships.

Paul also discussed the need for patients to have medical savings accounts, which would drive down the prices on major medicines. Rick Perry believes that Medicare should allow more options for people to choose from. He also said that the best solution was to send money to the states and have them decide on what program fits best for their state.

Mitt Romney, who is currently taking the lead in recent polls, has received criticism in the past on his stance on health care. His plan is often referred to as “RomneyCare” because of its similarities with ObamaCare. During the debates, he responded that he would appeal ObamaCare and the solution would also be to send money to the states and allow them decide which health care plans are best for their state.

Romney also stated that Americans should be allowed to purchase their own insurance, instead of being forced to receive it through their company. He also agreed with Paul, saying that health care should work like a market so that Americans have a stake in the quality of their insurance. Michele Bachmann also held the same stance. She also maintained her true “malpractice liability reform” stance.

Newt Gingrich stated that there was a need to restore patient-doctor relationships, as well as turn over the funds to the state level so that they can craft a plan, similar to what John Huntsman indicated. Gingrich then stated that there has to be more concentration and funding for research on brain science.

By finding cures for many leading diseases and illnesses, people wouldn’t have to pay for such federal programs. Senator Rick Santorum thought that many other candidates lacked his experience in the health care field, and that other candidates such as Romney were not consistent in their plans.

He stated, “I was always for having the government out of the health care business and for a bottom-up, consumer-driven health care, which is different than Governor Romney and some of the other people on this panel.” Though each candidate has different plans for repealing ObamaCare, health care will continue be a hotly debated topic in future debates.

The article GOP’s Alternative Solutions to Healthcare appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.