Obamacare Architecht: Law Passed Because of Lack of Transparency, "Stupidity" of American Voters

A series of videos have surfaced showing MIT Economist Jonathan Gruber, the man widely credited with crafting President Obama's sweeping healthcare law, admitting that the law was written in a vague and deceptive manner by design to hide costs and that the Affordable Care Act was ultimately passed thanks to the 'stupidity of the American voter'.

As of Friday, the total number of videos circulating of Gruber boasting to audiences about the circumstances under which Obamacare had passed was six. A number of the recently surfaced videos date from 2010 and 2011, while the most recent videos date back to fall of 2013 and there may be even more damning video to come.

In a 2011 conversation about the Affordable Care Act, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, one of the architects of the law more commonly known as Obamacare, talked about how the bill would get rid of all tax credits for employer-based health insurance through "mislabeling" what the tax is and who it would hit.

The issue at hand in this sixth video is known as the "Cadillac tax," which was represented as a tax on employers' expensive health insurance plans. While employers do not currently have to pay taxes on health insurance plans they provide employees, starting in 2018, companies that provide health insurance that costs more than $10,200 for an individual or $27,500 for a family will have to pay a 40 percent tax.

"Economists have called for 40 years to get rid of the regressive, inefficient and expensive tax subsidy provided for employer provider health insurance," Gruber said at the Pioneer Institute for public policy research in Boston. The subsidy is "terrible policy," Gruber said.

"It turns out politically it's really hard to get rid of," Gruber said. "And the only way we could get rid of it was first by mislabeling it, calling it a tax on insurance plans rather than a tax on people when we all know it's a tax on people who hold those insurance plans."

(The White House press secretary said at a press briefing in 2010: "I would disagree with your notion that it is a tax on an individual since the proposal is written as a tax on an insurance company that offers a plan.")

The second way was have the tax kick in "late, starting in 2018. But by starting it late, we were able to tie the cap for Cadillac Tax to CPI, not medical inflation," Gruber said. CPI is the consumer price index, which is lower than medical inflation.

Gruber explains that by drafting the bill this way, they were able to pass something that would initially only impact some employer plans though it would eventually hit almost every employer plan. And by that time, those who object to the tax will be obligated to figure out how to come up with the money that repealing the tax will take from the treasury, or risk significantly adding to the national debt.

"What that means is the tax that starts out hitting only 8% of the insurance plans essentially amounts over the next 20 years essentially getting rid of the exclusion for employer sponsored plans," Gruber said. "This was the only political way we were ever going to take on one of the worst public policies in America."

Unions and employers who object in 2018, he noted, "at that point if they want to get rid of it they're going to have to fill a trillion dollar hole in the deficit...It's on the books now."

Speeches with much more blunt language on Gruber's part had surfaced on conservative blogs and talk radio earlier this week, although the story didn't begin gaining coverage until later on in the week when more videos began surfacing.

The comments were made during the panel sessions at the Annual Health Economics Conference last year.

"This bill was written in a tortured way to make sure CBO did not score the mandate as taxes," he said during a panel discussion at the University of Pennsylvania in October, 2013. "Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the 'stupidity of the American voter' or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass.”

Democrats who were pivotal in passing Obamacare were quick to distance themselves from Gruber. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who cited Gruber's work during the push to pass Obamacare, denied knowing who he was and attempted to downplay his role in crafting the law during a press conference on Friday.

Gruber himself boasted of a 2009 meeting with the President Obama about the healthcare law in a 2012 interview- the White House visitor's log confirms Gruber's visit.

While some pundits have been wondering why these videos didn't surface before the election, their release may have been timed to coincide with something else altogether. The revelations come before the issue of Obamacare is once again before the Supreme Court. This time, the law is being challenged based on subsidies for the 14 states that didn't set up state-run Obamacare exchanges and the Administration's case could very well be undercut by Gruber's statements.

Oregon's 0bamacare Exchange Calls it Quits

The state-run 0bamacare insurance exchange in Oregon- Cover Oregon- that failed to enroll a single person through its online portal after state officials spent more than $130 million has called it quits. Instead, visitors to the Covered Oregon home page will be instructed to go to the Department of Health and Human Service's troubled healthcare.gov website.

State officials determined that additional fixes to the Cover Oregon homepage would cost an additional $78 million. The state of Oregon had initially paid software developer Oracle [NASDAQ- ORCL] to develop the Covered Oregon website while Covered Oregon paid another $3 million for TV, radio and internet marketing that played up Oregon's hipster image.

Cover Oregon received a month-long enrollment deadline extension because of multiple technical glitches in its system.

But fixing the existing system, Cover Oregon officials say, would have meant pouring another $78 million into the growing money pit. Switching to the federal system significantly reduces the cost to around $5 million.

It is still unclear how the state might be able to recoup its exchange funding -- if at all. Cover Oregon was partially financed by a 2.5 percent premium tax on insurers selling the exchange, Cover Oregon technology chief Alex Petit said Thursday.

Petit says he’ll meet with federal health officials early next week to iron out all of the financial details.

Oregon’s exchange, which was touted by the Obama administration in the beginning as a success story, quickly proved otherwise. It was widely seen as the worst of more than a dozen states that developed their own online health insurance marketplaces.

The federal Government Accountability Office has announced an investigation into Oregon's exchange, including looking at whether the federal government can reclaim grant money given to Cover Oregon if taxpayer funds were mismanaged.

While the Obama Administration did a touchdown dance earlier this month over the figure of 7.1 million enrolled in 0bamacare, the President's signature law has suffered a number of setbacks on both the federal level as well as states where 0bamacare received support from state and local officials. Towards the end of 2013, Colorado's state-run 0bamacare exchange failed to meet even half of it's worst-case scenario projections for enrollments. The state of Hawaii spent $120 million to create the Hawaii Health Connector website that only 4300 people enrolled in- averaging more than $28,000 per enrollee.

At the Department of Health and Human Services, embattled director Kathleen Sebelius submitted her resignation shortly after the administration began touting the 7.1 million enrollees number.

Health and Human Services Secretary Sebelius Announces Resignation

Kathleen Sebelius, the former Kansas Governor who was appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services by President Obama and in charge of the disastrous rollout of the healthcare.gov website, announced her resignation on Friday.

Sebelius entered the Cabinet in 2009, three months into Obama’s presidency, as a well-regarded former governor of conservative Kansas. She is leaving after months of intense criticism over the botched rollout last fall of the insurance marketplace.

During the firestorm, Obama made clear to his aides that he would not seek the resignation of his health secretary, and her departure is timed to brighter news for the White House as enrollment soared late last month.

Still, some White House allies said Thursday night that the troubled launch of HealthCare.gov had heightened tensions between Sebelius and the president’s staff members, who had become increasingly mistrustful of the department she led. Some Democrats, meanwhile, had argued privately that someone should be held accountable for the problems with the federal insurance exchange.

According to federal health officials, Sebelius approached Obama in early March and told him that, with the insurance enrollment period ending that month, the time had come for new leadership at HHS, the government’s largest domestic agency.

When the healthcare.gov website launched in late 2013, the White House said their enrollment goal was 7 million. After a problematic rollout of a website that only worked part of the time and was fraught with security problems, both the HHS and White House were mum about enrollment numbers for the last several months. According to some in the White House Press corps, the Administration became increasingly uncomfortable after Sebelius badly fumbled what was supposed to be a sympathetic interview on Comedy Central's The Daily Show in October.

This has also led to speculation that the White House was holding out for any semblance of good news to show Sebelius the door. That opportunity came earlier this month when after months of silence on the actual number of enrollees on the Obamacare website, President Obama held a press conference at the White House, claiming that exactly 7.1 million individuals enrolled through healthcare.gov- although they declined to break down how many of the enrollees had previously had insurance that was cancelled.

The top choice by the White House to replace Sebelius is reportedly OMB director Sylvia Mathews Burwell, who was reportedly responsible for directing the National Parks Service to shut down open-air war memorials during last year's government 'shutdown' (in which an estimated 17% of the federal government had actually shut down).

Report: White House Knew As Far Back As 2010 That Millions Of Americans Would Lose Insurance Coverage Under 0bamacare

According to an NBC report on Monday, The Obama Administration knew that as many as 67% of Americans already insured would lose their coverage once 0bamacare was passed into law as far back as 2010. This runs contrary to President Obama's numerous promises of "If you like your insurance, you can keep it" while stumping for the passage of the law known as the Affordable Care Act in 2009.

Four sources deeply involved in the Affordable Care Act tell NBC News that 50 to 75 percent of the 14 million consumers who buy their insurance individually can expect to receive a “cancellation” letter or the equivalent over the next year because their existing policies don’t meet the standards mandated by the new health care law. One expert predicts that number could reach as high as 80 percent. And all say that many of those forced to buy pricier new policies will experience “sticker shock.”

None of this should come as a shock to the Obama administration. The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date -- the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example -- the policy would not be grandfathered.

Buried in Obamacare regulations from July 2010 is an estimate that because of normal turnover in the individual insurance market, “40 to 67 percent” of customers will not be able to keep their policy. And because many policies will have been changed since the key date, “the percentage of individual market policies losing grandfather status in a given year exceeds the 40 to 67 percent range.”

That means the administration knew that more than 40 to 67 percent of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Yet President Obama, who had promised in 2009, “if you like your health plan, you will be able to keep your health plan,” was still saying in 2012, “If [you] already have health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.”

“This says that when they made the promise, they knew half the people in this market outright couldn’t keep what they had and then they wrote the rules so that others couldn’t make it either,” said Robert Laszewski, of Health Policy and Strategy Associates, a consultant who works for health industry firms. Laszewski estimates that 80 percent of those in the individual market will not be able to keep their current policies and will have to buy insurance that meets requirements of the new law, which generally requires a richer package of benefits than most policies today.

The NBC article drew an immediate and fierce reaction from senior White House staffers on social media.

FACT: Nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans.
— Valerie Jarrett (@vj44) October 29, 2013

Curiously, the NBC story disappeared for awhile on Monday night before re-appearing at a different URL- at first with a key paragraph missing and then with the original content posted.

White House press secretary Jay Carney at first blamed the cancellation notices on 'routine turnover within the insurance industry' and Medicare chief Marilyn Tavenner said it was the insurance industry that was to blame, not the Obama Administration. However, the insurance industry claims that the cancellation notices are being sent out because the current policies aren't in compliance with 0bamacare.

Elsewhere, Senator Mary Landrieu [D- LA] claimed that Democrats had only promised Americans could keep their insurance policies if it was "good insurance".

According to Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Democrats had only promised that Americans could keep their insurance if it was "good insurance."

"We said when we passed that, 'If you had insurance that was good insurance that you wanted to keep it, you could keep it,'" Landrieu said.

She declined to say if she would support a measure to let Americans keep the plans they had in 2013. "I haven't looked at it specifically," Landrieu said.

So first the White House and the Democrats denied that there was any widespread cancellations of insurance policies taking place, but when the reports of previously insured people receiving cancellations notices or being placed into newer, cost-prohibitive policies for the same level of coverage thanks to Barack Obama's landmark healthcare law became too numerous to ignore, the spin was that those policies millions of Americans were losing were crappy to begin with and that the insurance industry was to blame- all while making sure the individual mandate wasn't delayed during this month's government shutdown.
Other Democrat senators, including those up for re-election in red or swing states, declined to comment on the cancellations

Meanwhile, Obamacare Rollout Going As Well As Expected

Or at least as well as I expected.

Where to start? As President Obama and the Democrats are fond of reminding us, 0bamacare is now the law of the land despite efforts to repeal or defund it [including this month's government shutdown- NANESB!].

The botched and error-plagued rollout of the President's landmark achievement has drawn criticism from both parties and is best embodied by the lethargic and seemingly impossible-to-navigate healthcare.gov website- which the most charitable of critics have likened to an experience with all the warmth, efficiency and joy of a 1970s-era DMV visit. Those criticisms may end up being the least of the Democrats' worries, however.

A few weeks into the 0bamacare launch, enrollment numbers are dismal. Contractors for CGI Federal claimed that the $400 million website only underwent minimal testing a few weeks prior to the October 1st launch of Obama's Affordable Care Act- meaning that by law, Americans are required to buy a product or service through a website that doesn't exist.

Interestingly, not even a week after Democrats constantly referred to their Republican colleagues as terrorists, anarchists, hostage-takers and suicide bombers for even the most watered down demands in the budget negotiations where they sought a delay in the individual mandate, some Democrats are petitioning President Obama and the department of Health and Human Services for....a delay in the individual mandate of 0bamacare. Tellingly, many of these Democrats will be facing an uphill campaign in Republican-leaning states or districts where 0bamacare is unpopular to begin with in 2014.

Meanwhile, instead of demanding any sort of accountability from HHS head Kathleen Sebelius, other Democrats- including the President- apparently thought that the GOP was magically capable of crashing the 0bamacare website through their mere dislike of the law.

But to treat the healthcare.gov website as the sole problem of the 0bamacare rollout would be misleading. It's believed that more Americans in three states have had their insurance cancelled than Americans in all 50 states have filed applications for coverage through the government's website. Many more Americans who already have insurance have received notices that prices will increase dramatically for coverage under the same policy.

A spokeswoman for California's state-run insurance exchange- Covered California- admitted that there would be 'winners and losers' under 0bamacare- with the 'losers' typically being individuals who were purchasing health insurance for themselves or their families before 0bamacare kicked in. Now the costs have gone up dramatically or they will be dropped altogether by Jan 2014. An article from the San Francisco Chronicle earlier this month points out that a lower 2014 income would qualify an individual to be eligible for insurance subsidies as well- basically encouraging people to earn less in order to qualify for a subsidy for a good or service they were compelled to purchase under threat of fine or imprisonment by the federal government.

While pushing for the law in 2009, President Obama infamously told audiences "If you like your insurance, you can keep it"- a claim that was met with justifiable skepticism at the time.

Labor Unions Start Turning Against Obamacare

In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (R-CA), leaders of three major unions say that the health benefits of their members are now in peril thanks to the implementation of 0bamacare.

The leaders of three major U.S. unions, including the highly influential Teamsters, have sent a scathing letter to Democratic leaders in Congress, warning that unless changes are made, President Obama’s health care reform plan will “destroy the foundation of the 40 hour work week that is the backbone of the American middle class.”

If that’s not bad enough, the Affordable Care Act, if not modified, will “destroy the very health and wellbeing of our members along with millions of other hardworking Americans,” the letter says.

The union leaders point out that the employer mandate incentivizes companies shifting full time employees to part time status by cutting an employees hours to less than 30 a week. A number of employers have already announced they would be cutting back on employees' hours to avoid increased costs under President Obama's healthcare act. The reduced hours also mean reduced pay for the affected employees, who still have to purchase their healthcare under 0bamacare's individual mandate.

Further implementation of the plan will adversely affect group healthcare coverage between union labor and multiple companies within an industry, Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa claims.

Multi-employer plans, also called Taft-Hartley plans, are health insurance benefits typically arranged between a labor union in a particular industry, such as restaurants, and small employers in that industry. About 20 million workers are covered by these plans; 800,000 of Joseph Hansen’s 1.3 million UFCW members are covered this way.

Taft-Hartley plans, they write, “have been built over decades by working men and women,” but unlike plans offered on the ACA exchanges, unionized workers will not be eligible for subsidies, because workers with employer-sponsored coverage don’t qualify.

Obamacare’s regulatory changes to the small-group insurance market will drive up the cost of these plans. For example, the rules requiring plans to cover adult children up to the age of 26, the elimination of limits on annual or lifetime coverage, and the mandates that plans cover a wide range of benefits will drive premiums upward.

But the key problem is that the Taft-Hartley plans already provide generous and costly coverage; small employers now have a more financially attractive alternative, which is to drop coverage and put people on the exchanges, once the existing collective bargaining agreements are up.

Somehow, I suspect Hoffa and the other union presidents knew that 0bamacare would be the massive trainwreck they're saying it is, but were banking on some sort of carve-out or exemption for the unions written into the law. After lobbying tirelessly since 2009 for its passage and implementation and pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the campaign coffers of President Obama and liberal politicians who helped get the law passed, they're just now finding out there is no immunity for them for the law that they so vociferously backed. This leads me to wonder how well squandering hundreds of millions of dollars and years of political capital are going over with the union's rank-and-file workers.

Earlier this month, the White House announced a delay in enforcing the employer mandate provision of the healthcare law. Critics point out that the one year delay is technically illegal and the timing was suspect, pushing the mandate back until after the 2014 mid-term elections. The delay also applies only to businesses, the individual mandate is still intact.

Last month, Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius announced that the White House was in talks with the NFL and NBA to promote the upcoming 0bamacare rollout. By the end of  June, however, the National Football League announced that they would not be promoting 0bamacare. Spokesmen from the NHL and Major League Baseball also confirmed they were contacted by the administration regarding promoting enrollment in the healthcare law, but had yet to meet with any HHS officials.

Illinois Bishop- Obama "Intent on Following a Similar Path" As Hitler, Stalin

The Bishop for the Peoria, IL diocese delivered a homily that featured a stern rebuke of the Obama Administration and the recent Department of Health & Human Services mandate that Catholic institutions provide employees contraceptives and birth control as part of Obamacare.

According to Jenky, the new Health and Human Services (HHS) contraception mandate has put the country on a dangerous path for religious freedom.

“[N]o Catholic institution, under any circumstance, can ever cooperate with the intrinsic evil of killing innocent human life in the womb,” he explained.

“No Catholic ministry — and yes, Mr. President, for Catholics our schools and hospitals are ministries — can remain faithful to the Lordship of the Risen Christ and to his glorious Gospel of Life if they are forced to pay for abortions,” Jenky went on to say.

“The church will survive the entrenched corruption and sheer incompetence of our Illinois state government, and even the calculated disdain of the president of the United States, his appointed bureaucrats in HHS and of the current majority of the federal Senate,” he continued. “May God have mercy on the souls of those politicians who pretend to be Catholic in church, but in their public lives, rather like Judas Iscariot, betray Jesus Christ by how they vote and how they willingly cooperate with intrinsic evil.”

Jenkey recalled in detail other leaders that have “tried to force Christians to huddle and hide,” including Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin.

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services and health care,” he said. “In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama — with his radical, pro abortion and extreme secularist agenda — now seems intent on following a similar path.”

Jenky's criticism of the Administration and HHS is the harshest yet from the Catholic Church. Earlier this month, Cardinal Timothy Dolan stated that the Obama Administration and HHS mandates were a radical intrusion into the lives of the faithful in an interview with CBS News' Face the Nation.

A Chicago native, Jenky was appointed as the 8th Bishop of Peoria in 2002. Jenky's homily appears over at the Catholic Post in its entirety [lest anyone think the Bishop is too quick to go Godwin, keep in mind that the Obama Administration is basically demanding that the Catholic Church no longer adhere to their beliefs in order to fall into compliance with the 0bamacare mandate- NANESB!].

Coincidentally, the pivotal vote in 2010 for Obamacare came from supposedly pro-life Catholic Democrat Representative Bart Stupak. The Administration assured the Northern Michigan Democrat that federal money wouldn't be used to fund abortions or contraceptives at the time. Within weeks of 0bamacare passing, Stupak announced he wouldn't seek re-election as a number of potential challengers emerged from the woodwork. A surgeon from the upper peninsula named Dan Benishek eventually won Stupak's former seat.

Pelosi Hails President Obama's "Courageous" Decision to Compel Catholic Institutions To Provide Birth Control

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi lauded the Obama Administration's earlier decision not to exempt faith-based hospitals, universities and schools from a mandate in 0bamacare that would require them to provide free contraceptives and birth control for employees, despite such actions going directly against Catholic doctrine.

Pelosi's justification of the Administration and HHS ruling on January 20th seems to primarily consist of 'Well all the cool kids are doing it!'.

"I'm going to stand with my fellow Catholics in supporting the administration on this. I think it was a very courageous decision that they made and I support it."

[I swear, if this woman went out of her way to patronize and insult Muslims as much as she did Catholics, she would need round-the-clock protection and have to shack up with Salman Rushdie- NANESB!].

Instead of any sort of exemption for a religious institution, the Obama Administration and Department of Health and Human Services decided that they would simply get an additional year to fall into compliance with their mandate [which just happens to be AFTER an election year; President Obama would rather jab a stick in that hornet's nest after he's done running for re-election- NANESB!].

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius defended the administration's most beneficent decision, claiming that it "strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services."

While the decision didn't come as a surprise to organizations like the American Council of Bishops, they still expressed disappointment with the ruling.

The delay was no consolation to Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan, archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,” he said. “The Obama administration has now drawn an unprecedented line in the sand.”

However, Catholic and evangelical groups have stressed that their concern over the mandate isn't logistical, but rather philosophical.

The final regulation, however, keeps the conscience clause narrow: Only organizations that are faith-based and primarily employ those of the same faith are eligible for the exemption.

It does, however, give a nod to religious groups’ concerns, allowing faith-based nonprofits an extra year to begin covering contraceptives. White House officials explained the decision as regulatory in nature, rather than responding to the philosophical objections that religious organizations had raised.

“We know that a lot of these organizations may be large organizations, there are approval processes that require the approval of boards,” an administration official told reporters on a call this afternoon. “The transitional period responds to those concerns.”

Interesting how HHS granted a number of waivers to President Obama's allies in the labor union movement but there will be no exemption for Catholic or Evangelical institutions by this Administration.

Some Catholic Bishops have already stated that they will not comply with the contraceptive mandate in 0bamacare.

Bishop Olmstead is fighting the mandate from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that forces charities, schools or hospitals with a religious affiliation to provide birth control coverage as part of its health plan -- even if birth control goes against their religious beliefs.

“This is contrary as to who we are as Americans. Liberty, freedom is very much as to why we began as a nation,” said Bishop Thomas Olmstead on News Talk 550 KFYI.

He and other catholic leaders across the country are fighting the Obama administration on the issue of birth control as a mandatory part of an employee health insurance. Churches would be exempt, but not other religious institutions.

He says the issue is being “forced down their throats.”

“The health department is trying to define who religious institutes. Catholic charities, hospitals, colleges are not religious institutions, but who gives the government the right to define religious institutions?”

Even if one is inclined to believe that birth control and contraceptives should be given out like little packs of M&Ms at Halloween, how exactly is the HHS's mandate not in direct violation of the 1st amendment?

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.

Or does the first amendment no longer apply because the Catholic Church and other faiths' stance on birth control and contraception is outdated and no longer 'cool'?

Waiver Mania! HHS Awards Over 200 Obamacare Waivers Including High-End Businesses in Congresswoman Pelosi's District, Entire State of Nevada

Pelosi getting pointers on governing from Bashr Al Assad, circa 2007

Still taking what's been described by some as a 'victory lap in a clown car' over the successful raid on Bin Laden's Pakistani compound, the Administration quietly announced on Friday that the Department of Health & Human Services had granted more than 200 additional waivers for HR 3590, also known as Obamacare.

The Obama administration approved 204 new waivers to Democrats’ healthcare reform law over the past month, bringing the total to 1,372.

The waivers are temporary and only apply to one provision of the law, which requires health plans to offer at least $750,000 worth of annual medical benefits before leaving patients to fend for themselves. Still, Republicans have assailed the waivers as a sign of both favoritism and of major problems with the law.

“The fact that over 1,000 waivers have been granted is a tacit admission that the healthcare law is fundamentally flawed,” Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said in March. Upton is one of three House committee chairmen who has used new oversight powers to investigate the annual limit waivers.

Of the 204 new waivers issued by HHS, at least 38 went to upscale San Francisco resturants, hotels and nightclubs in Congresswoman Pelosi's disctrict. According to the Daily Caller, this is in addition to 27 new waivers for healthcare or drug companies and 31 waivers for unions in San Francisco.

Also given a partial waiver from 0bamacare- the entire state of Nevada after it appeared as though implementation would force insurance companies doing business in the Silver State to pull up stakes and leave.

Interestingly, while Harry Reid was an ardent backer of 0bamacare in the US Senate, his son Rory Reid was running for governor of Nevada last year. Rory had claimed that the healthcare legislation could end up hurting Nevada during a gubernatorial debate in October 2010.

Waivers, Requests for Exemptions Mark 1-Year Anniversary of 0bamacare Being Signed Into Law.

Today marks the one year anniversary of President Obama signing HR 3590- better known as 0bamacare- into law after months of contentious public debate and last minute wrangling. [I don't know about you, but I for one was tired of stepping around all the corpses of people without adequate healthcare who collapsed and died in the middle of the sidewalk- NANESB!]

The bill passed the US Senate on Christmas Eve and squeaked through the House of Representatives by a 217-212 margin in March 2010 after a bloc of reportedly pro-life Democrats caved in exchange for a worthless piece of paper in the form of an executive order.

By and large, the Democrats who voted for 0bamacare found themselves out of a job when voters went to the polls in November 2010. Meanwhile, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has been issuing a steadily increasing number of waivers- many of them going to unions, school districts or municipalities. The Lonely Conservative is reporting that the number now exceeds 1000 waivers (including the State of Maine) with more to come.

In addition to the waivers, a number of Federal judges have declared parts of the law or the entire thing unconstitutional. More than half the states in the union are actively seeking to block implementation of 0bamacare.

Perhaps the most glaring example of unmitigated chutzpah comes from Conressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY 9)- who reportedly has is interested in running for mayor of New York City. Weiner was one of 0bamacare's most strident and obnoxious cheerleaders in the debate leading up to it's passage in Congress. However, one year later Congressman Weiner is having second thoughts saying that his office was looking into whether or not a waiver for New York City would be feasible.

Hmm....a waiver? Interesting. Why not some slight modifications to this otherwise flawless gem you were pom-pom shaking for, Congressman Weiner [heh heh.....I said....ah, nevermind- NANESB!]. Unless you were for the bill (as a Congressman) before you were against the bill (as a Mayoral candidate).

Perhaps by this time next year, Congress can completely cut off funding for this thing, or like cap & trade, this monstrosity will languish thanks to legal challenges and key provisions being blocked or de-funded. I suspect this very issue will be an albatross around the neck of the Democrats who voted for this and are running for re-election in 2012.

Federal Judge in Florida Rules 0bamacare Unconstitutional; 500 MORE waivers granted by HHS

A U.S. Judge in Pensacola, FL struck down the Healthcare Act as being unconstitutional on Monday, presenting the biggest challenge yet to the partisan bill that was signed into law last year. The ruling on Monday was more sweeping in scope than a December ruling in Virginia that declared the individual mandate to exceed Congressional authority, as Judge Roger Vinson was hearing the case where 26 states filed suit against HR 3590.

"Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications," Vinson wrote.

Referring to a key provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, he sided with governors and attorneys general from 26 U.S. states, almost all of whom are Republicans, in declaring it unconstitutional.

"Regardless of how laudable its attempts may have been to accomplish these goals in passing the Act, Congress must operate within the bounds established by the Constitution," the judge ruled.

The ruling came after the House of Representatives passed a bill to repeal HR 3590 and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued 500 new healthcare waivers.- this brings the total number of 0bamacare waivers to over 700.

A good number of the entities that have successfully obtained waivers from HHS include many of the same labor unions who supported the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. This naturally begs the question of why they would seek an exemption from legislation they had been so supportive of.