United Liberty

We are told that ObamaCare will bring down costs and reduce the budget deficit and all these other wonderful things. Supporters of the bill need only look to Massachusetts to see how wrong they are in those claims.

Massachusetts Treasurer Tim Cahill, a Democrat turned independent, says the health care reform law that passed in his state in 2006 is breaking the budget. He also took some shots at health care “reform” efforts on the national level, which are very similar to the Massachusetts plan:

“If President Obama and the Democrats repeat the mistake of the health insurance reform here in Massachusetts on a national level, they will threaten to wipe out the American economy within four years,” Cahill said in a press conference in his office.

Echoing criticism leveled by congressional Republicans in recent weeks, Cahill said, “It is time for the president, the Democratic leadership, to go back to the drawing board and come up with a new plan that does not threaten to bankrupt this country.”
[…]
Cahill said the law is being sustained only with the help of federal aid, which he suggested that the Obama administration is funneling to Massachusetts to help the president make the case for a similar plan in Congress.

“The real problem is the sucking sound of money that has been going in to pay for this health care reform,” Cahill said. “And I would argue that we’re being propped up so that the federal government and the Obama administration can drive it through” Congress.

If you had any question whether or not President Barack Obama was fulfilling his pledge for transparency, this story should convince you that he worse than George W. Bush:

The review of annual Freedom of Information Act reports filed by 17 major agencies found that overall, the use of nearly every one of the open-records law’s nine exemptions to withhold information rose in fiscal year 2009, which ended last October.

Among the most frequently used exemptions: one that lets the government hold back records that detail its internal decision-making. Obama had directed agencies to stop using that exemption so frequently, but that directive appears to have been widely ignored.

Major agencies cited that exemption to refuse records at least 70,779 times during the 2009 budget year, compared with 47,395 times during President George W. Bush’s final full budget year, according to annual FOIA reports filed by federal agencies. Obama was president for nine months in the 2009 period.

Departments used the exemption even though the Justice Department’s Office of Information Policy, which advises them on FOIA, told them after Obama took office that they could exercise discretion and disclose such records. Doing so “will be fully consistent with the purpose of the FOIA,” it said.

That’s the hope and change we were waiting for.

The folks over at C-SPAN have come up with a way to waste more of my time, launching a website containing every show that has aired since 1987.

Of course, none of the health care negotiations we were promised by President Barack Obama will be on the website. However, they do provide us with a list of memorable moments over the last 23 years that shaped American politics and changed the world, for better or for worse.

It’s hard to say where ObamaCare is going to wind up. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says that Democrats will have the votes by the time they bring the bill to the floor. Rep. John Larson (D-CT), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, says they already have the votes.

Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), who has been counting votes for the majority, told The Hill that the vote could be put off past Easter (April 4th). House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) shot down both Larson and Clyburn, saying that a vote will come “later in the week.”

To top all of this, President Barack Obama is warning House Democrats that he will not support or campaign for them if they cast a vote against this major part of his domestic agenda. Some Democrats may actually welcome this, as they view their re-election to Congress as more important than Obama’s presidency.

It’s also unclear whether Democrats will use the Slaughter Solution (named after House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter). This rule would deem the Senate version of the health care bill passed up passage of the fixes via reconciliation by the Senate. Such a move could provide political cover during campaigns this fall by giving members in tough re-election bids an excuse to say they didn’t cast a vote for ObamaCare.

Moody’s says that the the United States is a step closer to having its credit rating downgraded:

The U.S. and the U.K. have moved “substantially” closer to losing their AAA credit ratings as the cost of servicing their debt rose, according to Moody’s Investors Service.
[…]
Under the ratings company’s so-called baseline scenario, the U.S. will spend more on debt service as a percentage of revenue this year than any other top-rated country except the U.K., and will be the biggest spender from 2011 to 2013, Moody’s said today in a report.

“We expect the situation to further deteriorate in terms of the key ratings metrics before they start stabilizing,” Cailleteau said. “This story is not going to stop at the end of the year. There is inertia in the deterioration of credit metrics.”

The sad state of things is that there is no indication that spending habits are going to be scaled back. As we’ve pointed out here at UL before, the CBO recently reported that the budget deficits over the next ten years will add $9.8 trillion to the national debt.

As recently noted, the longer term picture is even worse. If our credit rating is downgraded, it means the cost of servicing debt will cost more due to the increased risk of loaning us money.

The cost of Washington’s fiscal irresponsibility is destroying this country.

A few months ago, Brett Bittner wrote about a proposal in the Georgia General Assembly that would allow law enforcement to collect the DNA of an individual arrested of a felony. This is obviously troubling as essentially suspends civil liberties for someone that has not yet had their day in court, nor been convicted by a jury of his peers.

It seems that President Barack Obama supports a federal DNA sampling database for individuals suspected of certain crimes, similar to laws already on the books in several states:

[Politico’s Josh] Gerstein posts a televised interview of Obama and John Walsh of America’s Most Wanted. The nation’s chief executive extols the virtues of mandatory DNA testing of Americans upon arrest, even absent charges or a conviction. Obama said, “It’s the right thing to do” to “tighten the grip around folks” who commit crime.

When it comes to civil liberties, the Obama administration has come under fire for often mirroring his predecessor’s practices surrounding state secrets, the Patriot Act and domestic spying. There’s also Gitmo, Jay Bybee and John Yoo.

During debate over legislation that would have required President Barack Obama to begin bringing troops in Afghanistan home by the end of the year, which was overwhelmingly shot down, Rep. John Duncan (R-TN) explained to his colleagues the fiscal and constitutional case for ending military actions in the Graveyard of Empires:

Our friends over at The Liberty Papers have a college basketball bracket running for March Madness. I despise basketball, but despite that, I’ll be playing. You should too.

As you may know, Democrats may try to use the so-called “Slaughter Solution,” a rule that could be inserted in the ObamaCare legislation that would allow the Senate version of the bill to be passed once the fixes are approved by Congress. Essentially, this allows members to vote for the rule and not the bill itself.

Former federal judge Michael W. McConnell writes that this gimmick would be unconstitutional:

To become law—hence eligible for amendment via reconciliation—the Senate health-care bill must actually be signed into law. The Constitution speaks directly to how that is done. According to Article I, Section 7, in order for a “Bill” to “become a Law,” it “shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate” and be “presented to the President of the United States” for signature or veto. Unless a bill actually has “passed” both Houses, it cannot be presented to the president and cannot become a law.To be sure, each House of Congress has power to “determine the Rules of its Proceedings.” Each house can thus determine how much debate to permit, whether to allow amendments from the floor, and even to require supermajority votes for some types of proceeding. But House and Senate rules cannot dispense with the bare-bones requirements of the Constitution. Under Article I, Section 7, passage of one bill cannot be deemed to be enactment of another.

Over at Investors Business Daily, Michael Ramirez provides us with the best description of what Democrats are doing to themselves by pushing ObamaCare: