Welcome to Obamacare: "What good is coverage if you can’t use it?"

Do tell.

"What good is coverage if you can’t use it?" That's the question asked by a lady named Thinn Ong, who signed up for Obamacare. From San Francisco's CBS News affiliate:

"MOUNTAIN VIEW (KPIX 5) – While open enrollment for coverage under the Affordable Care Act is closed, many of the newly insured are finding they can’t find doctors, landing them into a state described as 'medical homelessness.'

Rotacare, a free clinic for the uninsured in Mountain View, is dealing with the problem firsthand.

Mirella Nguyen works at the clinic said staffers dutifully helped uninsured clients sign up for Obamacare so they would no longer need the free clinic.

But months later, the clinic’s former patients are coming back to the clinic begging for help. 'They’re coming back to us now and saying I can’t find a doctor,' said Nguyen.

Thinn Ong was thrilled to qualify for a subsidy on the health care exchange. She is paying $200 a month in premiums. But the single mother of two is asking, what for?

'Yeah, I sign it. I got it. But where’s my doctor? Who’s my doctor? I don’t know,' said a frustrated Ong.

Nguyen said the newly insured patients checked the physicians’ lists they were provided and were told they weren’t accepting new patients or they did not participate in the plan..."

"Dr. Kevin Grumbach of UCSF called the phenomenon 'medical homelessness,' where patients are caught adrift in a system woefully short of primary care doctors.

'Insurance coverage is a necessary but not a sufficient condition to assure that people get access to care when they need it,' Grumbach said.

Do tell, again. Gee, you mean the magic word "insurance" does not mean people will get health care? The poor lady is worse off than before: FORCED to pay 200 bucks a month for nothing. Welcome to Obamacare. I do like that "necessary but not sufficient", though. Sounds like the good Doctor studied with the Angelic Doctor.

Those who can’t find a doctor are supposed to lodge a complaint with state regulators, who have been denying the existence of a doctor shortage for months.

Meanwhile, the sick and insured can’t get appointments.

'What good is coverage if you can’t use it?' Nguyen said."

Obama's refusal to vote for the "Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act"

Via Fr. Z.

 

Sojourners' Receiving Money from George Soros?

We first became concerned about the Sojourners when we learned that they, in conjunction with the Jesuit founded Alinskyite organization PICO, produced the “Health Care Tool Kit: A Guide to the Health-Care Reform Debate.” Our concern was that PICO was co-opting Catholic parishes to their cause.

Today, there is an interesting story in the National Review by Jay C. Richards. Please make sure to read the whole thing.

Excerpts:

"Why Is Jim Wallis Denying that He Receives Grants from Deep-Pocketed Leftists like George Soros?

In World magazine on July 17, Marvin Olasky called on “progressive evangelical” Jim Wallis to come clean and admit that he is not a non-partisan, as he likes to claim, but rather a devoted man of the Left. Olasky reported that Wallis’s organization, Sojourners, had received grants from George Soros’s foundation, the Open Society Institute (OSI), and had lent Sojourners’ mailing list to the Obama campaign.

Now, it isn’t news that both Sojourners and Wallis are friends of the Left; I explored the connections in my book Money, Greed and God, and others have connected the dots as well. But were Wallis and Sojourners actively involved with secular left-wing mega-donors and with the election machinery of the Left? After reading Olasky’s piece, I decided to look into the charges, and I now strongly suspect that Olasky is onto something that merits further inquiry.
Among the documents I now have are pages from the OSI website that list two grants to Sojourners — one for $200,000 in 2004, “To support the Messaging and Mobilization Project: Engaging Christians on the Importance of Civic Involvement,” and one for $25,000 in 2006, “To support a branding assessment” for the purpose of merging “Sojourners and Call to Renewal into one organization.” I have physical copies of these pages, which is good, because these pages seem to have disappeared from the OSI website (I’m sure that’s just a coincidence)....

According to Sojourners’ 990s (go here and search for “Sojourners” in “DC”), their total assets went from $513,896 in 2002 to $4,615,468 in 2009. Call me skeptical, but I’d be willing to bet that this windfall didn’t all come from humble readers of Sojourners magazine. If in fact Wallis did get money from Soros and various other left-wing foundations, what I don’t get is why Wallis doesn’t just say, “Sure, we get (or have gotten) money from left-wing foundations. We differ on a few points but agree on a host of important issues.” Instead, we’re getting cagey denials and disappearing webpages."

Overwhelming Rejection of Obamacare in Missouri

The people continue to show good sense--let's hope Washington gets the message.

Proposition C is passing by a landslide in Missouri. With 3303 out of 3354 precincts reporting, the tally is 662,910 (71.5%) Yes and 264,217 (28.5%) NO.

The "Fair Ballot Language" from the Missouri Secretary of State decribes a "yes" vote on Proposition C as doing this: "A “yes” vote will amend Missouri law to deny the government authority to penalize citizens for refusing to purchase private health insurance or infringe upon the right to offer or accept direct payment for lawful healthcare services. The amendment will also modify laws regarding the liquidation of certain domestic insurance companies."

The full text of Proposition C is here.

Nancy Pelosi Honored by her Church

Her real church, Planned Parenthood. That can be said because when forced to support either Planned Parenthood or the Catholic Church on the preeminent moral issue of our time, the legalized murder of the young, Pelosi chooses Planned Parenthood.

Pelosi is being honored as we speak. The Hill's Washington Scene has the story, and promises photos tomorrow. LifeSiteNews has more.

Protect Life Act Petition

Tom Peters and the young people over at Catholic Vote Action have created a petition asking the members of the Catholic Health Association (Carol Keehan et al) to to support the Protect Life Act, a bipartisan efforto ensure no federal funds will go to abortion or abortion-related services.

You can sign by going here.

"Unborn children at the taxpayer's expense"

Jack Smith's "quote of the day" is from the great Archbishop Wenski of Miami.

"...we weren't willing to go for health care reform under (just) any conditions. Basically we have said that health care reform means that it should be accessible to everybody and nobody should be killed. And this Obamacare does not make it accessible to everybody and it allows for people to be killed, mainly unborn children at the taxpayer's expense."

Jack's story (with links to the original article) is here.

Obamacare: JUST SAY NO! PART II

From Tom Grenchik, writing for the USCCB. H/t to the Hercules of the Catholic blogosphere, Jack Smith.

I think "line in the sand" is an unfortunate metaphor. Sand is a little shifty and so are politicians.

Lines in the Sand
By Tom Grenchik

As members of Congress head home for their August recess, we now have a better picture of where everyone stands on health care reform. While the U.S. bishops support genuine health care reform, there is a clear line in the sand between our bishops and some congressional leaders.

On July 17, Bishop William Murphy, Chairman of the bishops’ Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, wrote to Congress saying: “The USCCB looks forward to working with you to reform health care successfully in a manner that offers accessible, affordable and quality health care that protects and respects the life and dignity of all people from conception until natural death.” Then Bishop Murphy drew a line, declaring that “no health care reform plan should compel us or others to pay for the destruction of human life, whether through government funding or mandatory coverage of abortion.”

Some seemed surprised at this, since abortion was not specifically mentioned in draft health care bills until recently. Those with longer memories may recall that the Medicaid statute doesn’t mention abortion either, but it was funding 300,000 abortions a year in the 1970s until we put a stop to that with the Hyde amendment. In any case, numerous amendments to keep abortion out of health care reform have been defeated in committee, and it is now apparent that some leaders have every intention of threatening the health care reform process by forcing Americans to accept abortion mandates and/or fund unlimited abortion in their health coverage.

Cardinal Justin Rigali, Chairman of the U.S. Catholic bishops’ Committee on Pro-Life Activities, followed up with a July 29 letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, declaring that “much-needed reform must not become a vehicle for promoting an ‘abortion rights’ agenda or reversing longstanding current policies against federal abortion mandates and funding.” The Cardinal urged Committee members to preserve longstanding federal policies that prevent government promotion of abortion and respect conscience rights.

But Bishop Murphy and Cardinal Rigali are not the only ones drawing lines. Millions upon millions of American Catholics are with them. Earlier this year, dioceses across the country broke all previous records by ordering more than 34 million postcards so their parishioners could urge Congress to “retain laws against federal funding and promotion of abortion.” Now that members of Congress are heading home, they need to be reminded of this message at the local level, in the context of health care reform.

As Congress takes its vacation, various proposals have been left behind. These proposals need to be examined to see how well they provide accessible, affordable and quality health care and how they impact immigrants and the poor. But one thing is certain. The bills approved so far by House and Senate committees include mandated abortion coverage and abortion funding, and that is a line we can never cross.

Now is the time to take action. Contact congressional members through e-mail, phone calls or FAX letters. E-mails can be sent by visiting www.usccb.org/prolife and clicking on the Health Care Reform Action Alert. You can also call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121, attend town hall meetings in your local district, or call the local offices of your representative and senators. Full contact info can be found on Members’ web sites at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.

The message is simple: “Support genuine health care reform that respects the life and dignity of all. A fair and just health care reform bill must exclude mandated coverage for abortion, and uphold longstanding laws that restrict abortion funding and protect conscience rights.”

With all respect, I can't agree. I can't agree with that.

Democratic legislators will receive that message, and then vote anyway for the healthcare package, including abortion coverage, based on the "Support genuine health care reform..." part of the first sentence.

I think Sarah Palin, writing on Facebook today, has a far better grasp of the situation:

"As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil...

We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back."

Just tell your legislator "VOTE NO ON HEALTH CARE REFORM."

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

“You are terrifying us”

From Peggy Noonan's column of yesterday:

"And really, (the Congressmen's) shock is the first thing you see in the videos. They had no idea how people were feeling. Their 2008 win left them thinking an election that had been shaped by anti-Bush, anti-Republican, and pro-change feeling was really a mandate without context; they thought that in the middle of a historic recession featuring horrific deficits, they could assume support for the invention of a huge new entitlement carrying huge new costs.

The passions of the protesters, on the other hand, are not a surprise. They hired a man to represent them in Washington. They give him a big office, a huge staff and the power to tell people what to do. They give him a car and a driver, sometimes a security detail, and a special pin showing he’s a congressman. And all they ask in return is that he see to their interests and not terrify them too much. Really, that’s all people ask. Expectations are very low. What the protesters are saying is, “You are terrifying us.”

Is that fear irrational? Look at the projected deficits--from the White House and Congressional Budget Office's own figures:

Is that fear irrational? With a 1,000+ page bill that no Congressman has read, but which a majority appear ready to vote for? and that will have the government taking over your health care?

God Bless the Knights!

The concluding paragraphs of today's Resolution by the Knights of Columbus at their meeting in Arizona:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Knights of Columbus reaffirms its commitment to unconditional support for the right to life and full protection in law for every human being from conception to natural death; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that we strongly oppose any effort to repeal the Hyde Amendment and other restrictions on taxpayer funding for abortions in the United States, and oppose any health care reform legislation that does not explicitly exclude abortion coverage for any health insurance plan, public or private; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that we call upon legislators everywhere to adopt legislation protecting the religious conscience rights of doctors, nurses and other medical professionals, guaranteeing their right to refuse to participate in abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide or any other practice that is destructive of innocent human life or that conflicts with their sincerely-held religious beliefs; and

FURTHER RESOLVED, that we reaffirm our long-standing policy of not inviting to any Knights of Columbus event, persons, especially public officials or candidates for public office, who do not support the protection of unborn children against abortion or who advocate the legalization of assisted suicide, euthanasia and other violations of the right to life, and of not allowing such persons to rent or otherwise use facilities over which we have control, and of not bestowing on them honors or privileges of our Order of any kind, inviting them to serve as honorary chairpersons of events, celebrations or committees, speak at Knights of Columbus events, or hold any office in the Knights of Columbus.

h/t "The Catholic Key"

Obama Tells the Truth

He wants socialized medicine. Drudge posted an edited version of this, and the foolish White House gave it publicity by claiming it gave a "false impression."

Well, here it is uncut. Judge for yourself.

Abortion Coverage in the Obamacare plan

Hey, Tim Ryan. Hey, Catholics United. Hey Catholics in Alliance.

If you really did not want abortion funded in the House Obamacare bill, why didn't you just cut and paste the language that is currently in the health plans for Federal Employees:

This is from the "Blue Cross and Blue Shield Federal Employees Plan" as it exists today:

Section 6. General exclusions – things we don’t cover

"Services, drugs, or supplies related to abortions, except when the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term, or when the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest;"

This is from the "APWU-Health Insurance for Postal and Federal Employees and Retirees" as it exists today:

Section 6. General exclusions -- things we don't cover

"Services, drugs, or supplies related to abortions, except when the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term, or when the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest."

This is from the National Association of Letter Carriers Heath Plan, as it exists today:

Section 6. General exclusions -- things we don't cover

"Services, drugs, or supplies related to abortions, except when the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term, or when the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest."

Just copy the language. It is quite clear, no confusion at all.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Obamacare: JUST SAY NO!

I've come to the conclusion that the only thing to do is to oppose Obamacare lock, stock and barrel. I believe the Catholic focus on whether or not the plan funds abortion, includes conscience protection, permits euthanasia, etc., is misguided. I believe that when Obama says these things are "distractions," he's telling his supporters: don't worry about it--just help me get it passed. He's taking a page from Stalin, who thought Churchill and Roosevelt were idiots for demanding unconditional surrender in WWII. Stalin said: just get your enemy to lay down his arms, then you can make it unconditional--and Stalin did, and the Democrats will. For heaven's sake, a California Catholic hospital has already been forced by the courts to do a boob job on a transsexual! Does anyone think that when the government controls all health care that Catholic hospitals or doctors (or you or me) will have even the limited freedom they have now?

On Sunday, Mark Steyn:

"The president needs to get something passed. Anything. The details don’t matter. Once it’s in place, health-care “reform” can be re-reformed endlessly. Indeed, you’ll be surprised how little else we talk about. So, for example, public funding for abortions can be discarded now, and written in — as it surely will be by some judge — down the road. What matters is to ram it through, get it done, pass it now — in whatever form."

Well, abortion funding is in the bill now, anyway. Still, I see no reason to think Mr. Steyn is wrong. If it is removed from the bill, it will be added later.

Once government heath care exists, it will be impossible, short of some disaster or miracle, to get rid of it. There will be enormously powerful interests created that will prevent any change--except for enlarging it. It will be like government education, which everybody knows doesn't work, but which cannot be changed. The last time school vouchers were on the ballot in California, public sector unions, led by the California Teachers Association with $26,366,491, contributed over $30 million to defeat the measure. And the money these groups use to defend government education was your money, taxpayers money!

Clifford Assness, writing on July 22:

"Perhaps the best example of the destructive 'public option' is our nation’s schools. Here we clearly have a government provided 'public option' competing with (and in fact dominating in size) private schooling. But, is it fair? Does it work well? Not by a long-shot....

"With a “public option” things inevitably would go the horrific way of our public schools. Instead of existing to please customers (patients and students, respectively) the “public option” in schools exists largely to benefit empowered stakeholders of the system (health administrators and unionized school employees, respectively), who will shamelessly pretend to give a darn about sick people and children. Watch the analogy play out if we go this route in health care. It will be like looking in a funhouse mirror and seeing a doctor where you used to see a teacher. All else will be the same."

Did you know that more Americans than Canadians are satisfied with their health care? Here's a good rundown on how our current system stacks up against those in other countries.

I work with a priest who had to wait 18 months for a hip operation in Canada--in pain every day. I believe they were hoping he would die before they had to perform the operation. That's our future if Obamacare passes.

Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney

Party of Death Gets Their Wish: Taxpayer Funded Abortion in the Healthcare Bill

From the AP:

"Dems win approval of health bill in committee

WASHINGTON – In a triumph for President Barack Obama, Democrats narrowly pushed sweeping health care legislation through a key congressional committee Friday night and cleared the way for a September showdown in the House.

The 31-28 vote in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, along party lines, was weeks later than either the White House or Democratic leaders had hoped....

On a vote that crossed party lines, abortion opponents failed in an attempt to bar insurance plans that offer abortion services from accepting customers with government subsidies. The vote was 31-27."

Steve Ertelt at LifeNews has more:

"Congressional Committee Defeats Another Attempt to Limit Abortion in Health Care"

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- After defeating one pro-life amendment Thursday night and adopting a phony ban on abortion funding, the House Energy and Commerce Committee on Friday afternoon defeated another amendment to limit abortion in the House health care restructuring bill.

Rep. Joe Pitts, a Pennsylvania Republican, would ensure taxpayer dollars do not pay for abortions or subsidize health insurance plans that include abortion.

"We want an explicit exclusion in the bill to prevent any taxpayer funding from paying for abortions," Pitts told his colleagues. "Anything else is wrong, and contrary to overwhelming popular opinion.”

Though Pitts received support from most Republicans and a handful of pro-life Democrats, he could not gather enough votes to overcome the pro-abortion Democrats who control the committee.

The panel voted 31-27 against the amendment.

Douglas Johnson, the legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said the rejection of the amendment "underscores that H.R. 3200 would drastically change federal policy, channeling massive new federal subsidies to health plans that pay for abortion on demand, including a national plan that will be offered by the federal government."

Party of Death Votes Abortion Coverage into HealthCare Bill

From the AP:

"Abortion measure passes, then fails, in House

WASHINGTON — An anti-abortion amendment to a sweeping health overhaul bill was voted down in a House committee late Thursday — a dramatic reversal just hours after the measure initially was approved.

The amendment said health care legislation moving through Congress may not impose requirements for coverage of abortion, except in limited cases. It was approved in the Energy and Commerce Committee after conservative Democrats joined Republicans to support it.

But committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., invoked House rules that allowed him to bring up the amendment for a second vote, despite Republican objections.

This time, one conservative Democrat — Rep. Bart Gordon of Tennessee — changed his vote from "yes" to "no." And a second conservative Democrat who hadn't voted the first time — Rep. Zack Space of Ohio — voted "no."

It was enough to take down the amendment on a 30-29 vote."