Comments and observations on social and political trends and events.

Saturday, August 15, 2009

ObamaCare: Extensive Links Compiled by Robert Bidinotto

Although Robert Bidinotto is not actively blogging (unfortunately) he is still posting great stuff on his Facebook account. Robert has complied an extensive listing of sites related to the debate over the pending health care bill. Below is his posting.

To friends who oppose ObamaCare:

You will find this information useful in the coming weeks. Please forward it to others.


Text of HR 3200, the main House bill: (Note that each section listed is a link to the text in that section)

Text of the initial Senate bill:


Here is Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) June 15 letter to Sen. Ted Kennedy analyzing his Senate committee version of the healthcare legislation, which proposes “health insurance exchanges.” It concludes that this would add one trillion dollars to existing federal deficits over a decade, with a net decrease in the number of uninsured of only 16 million out of the 47 million currently claimed to be uninsured:

Here is the CBO’s more recent letter, demolishing the argument that “preventive medicine” and “wellness” options will lower the overall costs of Obamacare. In fact, says the CBO, these measures will raise costs:

Here is the CBO’s July 17 assessment of H.R. 3200, one of the House bills, projecting a net deficit increase of $239 billion over ten years, with far greater costs after 2019. This analysis, of course, is limited solely to financial cost considerations; it says nothing of the other onerous, coercive provisions of the bill, including skyrocketing taxes on “the rich,” and “employer mandates” on small businesses. Nor does it discuss the inevitable negative impact of the legislation on the supply of healthcare (e.g., doctors, hospitals, etc.):

Here is the CBO’s June 16 letter to two senators, which outlines more generally the budget impact of an expanding federal role in healthcare, after factoring in increased subsidies and universal coverage. Pages 2-3 of the supporting document say this would lead to a “permanent increase of roughly 10 percent in the federal budgetary commitment to healthcare,” and actually “cause national spending on healthcare to increase.” The CBO then assesses an array of potential cost-saving mechanisms. However, some of the most fruitful of these—i.e., changing the tax-exempt status of employer-provided health insurance, and tort reform—have already been taken off the table by congressional Democrats. Nor will the current rush to pass legislation give Congress enough time to properly weigh and assess these options and determine their likely unintended consequences. The potential for real long-term savings is thus bleak, and the CBO projections of budget-busting long-term cost increases remain:


A section-by-section analysis and critique of major provisions in House bill 3200:

“Five Freedoms You’d Lose Under ObamaCare,” from Fortune magazine

A concise presentation, in Time magazine, of basic internal contradictions in ObamaCare claims:,9171,1914973-1,00.html

A systematic refutation of numerous claims made by President Obama during his New Hampshire “town meeting” on healthcare:

An article explaining that what Democrats are advocating is not insurance, but the elimination of the basic principles of insurance, as such -- and the substitution of a new governmental welfare entitlement for insurance:

A brief compilation of comparative medical care statistics from the U.S., Canada, and Great Britain, demolishing many myths about the alleged superiority of nationalized healthcare:

Links to statements by leading Democrats and prominent Obamacare supporters, all acknowledging that various “public option” proposals, including the “co-op” and “insurance exchanges,” are mere stepping stones toward the eventual implementation of “single-payer” nationalized healthcare, and the elimination of private healthcare insurance:


Barney Frank:

Obama, Frank, and Cong. Jan Shakowsky

Writers in the liberal Huffington Post

A senior editor of The New Republic

A Washington Post editorial staff member raises serious, non-exaggerated concerns about the “end-of-life counseling” provision in the House bill:


A Washington Post report quantifying the huge impact of “defensive medicine” in increasing healthcare costs, yet noting the refusal of Democrats and the lawyer lobby to any efforts at tort reform, which could dramatically reduce these unnecessary healthcare costs:

Links to comprehensive information about the various government proposals, and also to a host of free-market alternative plans that Obamacare proponents refuse to consider: (what to do about people with pre-existing conditions)

No comments: