Expert Testifies to Congress that Obama’s ‘Ignoring Laws’ Could Lead to Overthrow of Government

During a congressional committee hearing about the constitutional limits imposed on the presidency and the implications of President Barack Obama’s disregard for implementing the Affordable Care Act as written, one expert testified that the consequences of the president’s behavior were potentially grave. He said that the precedent set by Obama could eventually lead to an armed revolt against the federal government. 

On Tuesday, Michael Cannon, Cato Institute’s Director of Health Policy Studies, testified before a congressional committee about the dangers of the president’s legal behavior.

“There is one last thing to which the people can resort if the government does not respect the restrains that the constitution places on the government,” Cannon said. “Abraham Lincoln talked about our right to alter our government or our revolutionary right to overthrow it.”

RELATED: Jonathan Alter Links Egyptian Military’s Overthrow Of Muslim Brotherhood To Promise Of Obama

“That is certainly something that no one wants to contemplate,” he continued. “If the people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the laws then they will conclude that neither are they.”

“That is a very dangerous sort of thing for the president to do, to wantonly ignore the laws,” Cannon concluded, “to try to impose obligation upon people that the legislature did not approve.”

Watch the clip below via C-SPAN 2:

Via: Mediaite.com

Continue Reading....

Obamacare Ads Steer Clear From Discussing Penalties

The state and federal health insurance exchanges created under Obamacare are touting the benefits of coverage but largely steering clear of discussing the penalty for not signing up. 

The avoidance of penalty talk is by design rather than default, reports The New York Times, noting that operators say market research has showed that consumers are more likely to respond to positive messages than to the threat of punishment.

"We feel that the carrot is better than the stick," Larry Hicks, a spokesman for Covered California,  told the newspaper. "This is a new endeavor. We want people to come in and test our wares."

Officials at Enroll America, a nonprofit agency promoting the new exchanges, agreed. 

Sophie Stern, a senior policy analyst for the agency, told the Times, "That doesn't mean that the penalty or the mandate isn't an important piece of the law from a policy perspective. But from a messaging perspective, this is what we find resonates best."

But there is another side to downplaying the penalty: The so-called tax is difficult to enforce. As Forbes contributor Roberton Williams explained,  "If you owe a penalty, you're supposed to pay it with your income tax return. But there's not much the IRS can do if you don't pay. They can't put you in jail or garnish your wages. In fact, about the only way the IRS can collect is if you're due a refund. They can deduct the penalty from this year's and future refunds."

"It might be that they want to be positive," Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, said to the Times, referring to exchange operators. "But it's also the case that an informed customer is not their best customer."

There is also the question of whether it would cost more to buy insurance than to pay the penalty, which in 2014 is $95 per adult, or 1 percent of their income, and half that for children under 18. 

Via: Newsmax
Continue Reading.....

Deep cuts to country's food stamp program start Friday

WASHINGTON –  Forty-eight million Americans will have their food stamps benefits slashed starting Friday, when a recession-era boost in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistant Program expires.

The move to cut back benefits will be the first wide-scale change to the program affecting nearly every single participant. The 13.6 percent cut comes out to about $36 a month less for a family of four getting government assistance or $420 a year, according to the Department of Agriculture.

Since 2000, the costs for the plan have increased more than 358 percent.

Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, cites lax eligibility requirements as one of the reasons behind the increase.

Enrollment in the food-stamp benefits also rose during the 2007-2011 recession.

Many anti-poverty groups have warned that cutting the program will leave millions of Americans vulnerable.

"People are living at the margins," Ellen Vollinger, legal director and SNAP advocate at the Food Research and Action Center, an anti-hunger organization, told Reuters. "It's not an abstract metric for people. It's actual dollars to keep food in the refrigerator."

The slash in the program also means less money for discount grocers, dollar stores and gas stations that rely on low-income shoppers.

SNAP is the largest anti-hunger program in the country.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading.....

ORGS FILING SUIT AGAINST HHS MANDATE DEBUNK BIDEN'S DEBATE DEFENSE

In a statement released on Friday, the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty announced that some of the leading Catholic institutions in the United States are filing a brief in support of the Becket Fund’s appeal to the D.C. Circuit on behalf of Wheaton College and Belmont Abbey College as they challenge the HHS mandate.

The Becket Fund represents many of the religious institutions and Catholic organizations currently suing the Obama administration over the mandate that requires all employers, including religious institutions, to provide free contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients to all their employees through their health insurance plans. In its press release, the Fund indicates that The Catholic University of America, the Catholic Archbishop of Washington, D.C., and Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. have all urged the courts, in their brief, to address the violation of religious liberty as presented in the HHS mandate.

According to the Becket Fund, the brief filed by these Catholic institutions “comes less than one day after the Vice President of the United States stated” during his debate with Congressman Paul Ryan:

[L]et me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer for contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.

“But the facts are exactly the reverse,” asserted Kyle Duncan, General Counsel of the Becket Fund. “Under the mandate, nearly every Catholic hospital, charity, university, and diocese in the United States—along with millions of institutions of other faiths—must refer for, must pay for, and must act as a vehicle for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs. If they do not, they face millions in fines. That is a fact.”

In addition to the Catholic institutions, thirteen states, The Cato Institute, the American Civil Rights Union, The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, The American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Center for Law and Justice, and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, among others, have also filed on Friday on behalf of Wheaton and Belmont Abbey colleges.

Currently, there are now over 35 separate lawsuits that challenge the HHS mandate.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...