Disrupting the Narrative of the New Left, its allies in Academia, Hollywood and the Establishment Media, and examining with honesty the goals of cultural Marxism and the dangers of reactionary and abusive political correctness.
THE NARRATIVE AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
“Threats to freedom of speech, writing and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect and, unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen.”-George Orwell
Enrollment in Obamacare's health insurance exchanges has proven to be a somewhat difficult process amidst technical glitches and delays. Aside from the issues associated with actually purchasing health care, once an individual gets a quote for health insurance on an exchange, is the premium higher or lower than before?
Our research finds that for many states, the insurance on health exchanges will cost more than existing insurance. This study illustrates that the general experience for individuals shopping on the exchange is that of increasing premiums from what was available to them prior to implementation of the exchanges. Many families and individuals will face this reality as they apply for coverage, and the implications of experiencing sticker shock are important to consider if enough people choose not to sign up for coverage for various reasons.
Individuals in most states will end up spending more on the exchanges. It is true that in some states, the experience could be the opposite. This is because those states had already over-regulated insurance markets that led to sharply higher premiums through adverse selection, as is the case of New York.Many states, however, double or nearly triple premiums for young adults. Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas, and Vermont see some of the largest increases in premiums.
Obamacare will leave many people paying more for their health insurance. The healthcare.gov website is learning to crawl, with additional data trickling in. However, based on information already released by HHS, states, and insurance plans, the claims of savings on premiums for the average participant is a fantasy.
For the past few months, members of Congress and their staffs have been discussing behind closed doors the worrying proposition that they will be forced off their popular health insurance program and onto the federal insurance exchanges set up under Obamacare. In other words, be forced to live by the same laws they passed for the rest of us.
Currently congressional staffers have 75% of their healthcare insurance paid by taxpayers, but if their Cadillac Congressional healthcare plan is ended and staffers are pushed into ObamaCare, many Congressional employees fear that their insurance costs will increase by thousands of dollars a year. This cost, many say, will force them to quit working in Washington.
Now the Dear Leader is promising to fix it all for them.
Lawmakers and staff can breathe easy — their health care tab is not going to soar next year.
The Office of Personnel Management, under heavy pressure from Capitol Hill, will issue a ruling that says the government can continue to make a contribution to the health care premiums of members of Congress and their aides, according to several Hill sources.
Just Wednesday, POLITICO reported that President Barack Obama told Democratic senators that he was personally involved in finding a solution.
Obama's involvement in solving this impasse was unusual, to say the least. But it came after serious griping from both sides of the aisle about the potential of a "brain drain." The fear, as told by sources in both parties, was that aides would head for more lucrative jobs, spooked by the potential for spiking health premiums.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also confirmed a deal, saying "I'm glad it's done," according to Roll Call.
Some Republicans have joined Democrats in efforts to exempt staffers from ObamaCare, but not all. Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina recently said that Congress should have to live with the same law that everyone else does.
"I have no problems with Congress being under the same guidelines," Burr said. "I think if this is going to be a disaster - which I think it's going to be - we ought to enjoy it together with our constituents."
A spokesperson for the House Ways and Means Committee chaired by Republican Dave Camp of Michigan echoed Sen. Burr's sentiment.
"If the ObamaCare exchanges are good enough for the hardworking Americans and small businesses the law claims to help," the spokesperson said, "then they should be good enough for the president, vice president, Congress and federal employees."
Why should the people's representatives get special treatment? Maybe they should have read the health law more carefully before they voted for it. Regardless, it would be a disservice to millions of hard-working Americans and their families for the Obama Regime or Congress to jam through special favors rather than repeal an unpopular, unworkable, and unaffordable law.
With less than two months left until enrollment opens for ObamaCare's insurance exchanges, now is the time for Americans to speak out against the unfair political maneuverings and out-of-control spending within ObamaCare.
Today
is what feminist groups have dubbed “Equal-Pay Day,” their day to raise
awareness of how women are regularly paid less than men for the same
work. Women, they claim, have had to work this long into 2013 to make up
for last year’s wage gap.
The problem for “Equal-Pay Day” fans is that the premise of this pseudo holiday is bogus.
Women
actually aren’t paid 77 percent for doing the same job. Take three
minutes to watch this video just released by the Independent Women’s
Forum which explains the statistics behind the wage gap and tells women
the good news that they aren’t doomed to be victims of the patriarchy:
It’s the choices that we make that will primarily determine how much we
earn.
Why is it important to highlight these falsehoods? Because this myth has already resulted in legislation, namely the deliberately mislabeled Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. This law, rammed through a Democrat-controlled Congress, was never really about equal pay for equal work.Obama himself admitted it in the second presidential debate. And Joe Biden admitted it as well a couple of days later.
Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that the law actually restricts female employment opportunities by discouraging companies from hiring women due to concerns about expensive and frivolous law suits. Far from being a genuinely pro-woman piece of legislation, it is rather a gift to trial lawyers (always big donors for Democrats), intended to help them file lawsuits and collect their fees.
As a piece of social legislation designed to improve women's wages in comparison to men, the Lilly Ledbetter Act is more likely to result in fewer employed females because firms fear potential litigation, adverse publicity from such cases, and the amount of resources they would have to devote to defending themselves against such claims.
You get the idea. To further debunk the myth, I need to point out that women in tech make more money and land better jobs than men. And here is a list of American cities where single women (between the ages of 22 and 30) without children earn more than their male counterparts.
Do you know what we do care about? The economy and how it affects not only ourselves but our families. Not surprisingly, Obama wants to talk about everything but the economy. Yes, Dear Leader got himself reelected, but the people are starting to wake up. I just wish it had been sooner!
