President <a href="http://dailywire.com/topic/biden-administration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Joe Biden</a> announced that <a href="http://dailywire.com/topic/health-insurance" target="_blank" rel="noopener">health insurance</a> signups via HealthCare.Gov surged to a new record this year.
Created by the Affordable Care Act, a signature Obama administration legislative package often referred to as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/obamacare" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ObamaCare</a>, the website facilitated more than 11.5 million Americans seeking insurance between November 1 and December 15, marking an 18% increase since the same period last year. Enrollment for the website, which serves as a private health insurance marketplace and offers subsidies for Americans who earn between one and four times the federal poverty line, remains open.
“I promised to lower costs for families and ensure that all Americans have access to quality affordable health care,” Biden remarked in a <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/12/27/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-record-2022-healthcare-gov-enrollment/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">statement</a> from the White House. “In recent days, we received further proof that our efforts are delivering record results and bringing families the peace of mind that comes with health insurance.”
Biden added that four in five Americans who obtain health insurance through the Affordable Care Act can expect to pay less than $10 per month; the Inflation Reduction Act extended benefits that were slated to expire by the end of the year.
The number of non-elderly Americans who did not have health insurance amounted to 27.5 million last year, according to an <a href="https://www.kff.org/uninsured/issue-brief/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">analysis</a> from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Biden added that his administration is “working to make health care a right, not a privilege.” While many leftists believe that health coverage is one of many positive rights, under which others are obligated to take an action on behalf of another individual, many conservatives contend that no such right exists and favor a negative rights framework, under which the government or other individuals cannot infringe upon specific liberties.
The report from the White House comes as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/medicaid-enrollment-to-hit-100-million-include-nearly-one-third-of-americans" target="_blank" rel="noopener">enrollment</a> for Medicaid, which provides health care to low-income families, approaches 100 million people, or nearly one-third of the population, according to an analysis from the Foundation for Government Accountability.
“Our research and data show as welfare enrollment increases, workforce participation decreases,” Foundation for Government Accountability Data and Analytics Director Hayden Dublois remarked in a <a href="https://thefga.org/press/fga-launches-countdown-clock-to-100-million-on-medicaid/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">press release</a>. “We’re in the midst of a nationwide workforce crisis, yet the Biden administration is pushing policies to entice people into government dependency at record levels while limiting opportunities to achieve the American Dream.”
National healthcare expenditures were equivalent to approximately 18% of economic output last year, according to a <a href="https://www.cms.gov/research-statistics-data-and-systems/statistics-trends-and-reports/nationalhealthexpenddata/nhe-fact-sheet#:~:text=NHE%20grew%202.7%25%20to%20%244.3,17%20percent%20of%20total%20NHE." target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, while the two programs respectively cost $901 billion and $734 billion.
A recent <a href="https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Paying-Americans-Not-to-Work.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">study</a> from the Committee to Unleash Prosperity likewise found that unemployment insurance and the “dramatic recent expansion of ObamaCare subsidies” can <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/some-families-with-no-one-working-can-receive-up-to-six-figures-of-welfare-in-three-states" target="_blank" rel="noopener">exceed</a> the national median income in 24 states for families with two parents and two children, even with the end of supplemental programs originally passed during the lockdown-induced recession. Such families in Washington can receive more than $122,000, while families in Massachusetts and New Jersey can reap more than $117,000 and $108,000 in annualized benefits respectively.
“The federal government and the states offer a wide array of more than two dozen programs that provide cash assistance or in-kind benefits to low-income families. These ‘safety net programs’ are designed to keep families out of poverty,” the authors wrote. “But the expansion of assistance, especially in subsidized health insurance to families with children and no parents working, can mean that families can earn as much or more income from receiving government assistance than the median household does from working.”

Joe Biden, Barack Obama

ObamaCare Website Signups Soar To New Record Under Biden

ObamaCare Website Signups Up Under Biden

Biden Administration

Executive

Health

Health Care

Health Insurance

Obamacare

U.S.

A federal judge in Texas ruled against the Biden administration&#8217;s extension of the Affordable Care Act&#8217;s discrimination provisions to include gay and trans-identified people.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk filed a <a href="https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/zjvqjkqyopx/11112022health_biden.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">26-page decision</a> on Friday, finding that the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which bars workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and &#8220;gender identity,&#8221; does not apply to the 2010 health care law.
&#8220;Title IX&#8217;s ordinary public meaning remains intact until changed by Congress, or perhaps the Supreme Court,&#8221; said Kacsmaryk.
The ruling by Kacsmaryk came in a class action lawsuit by two doctors represented by the America First Legal Foundation, alleging HHS misinterpreted Bostock. They sued after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said in May 2021 it would interpret Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act, which prohibits healthcare providers from discriminating on the basis of sex, as extending to sexual orientation and gender identity.
Kacsmaryk said the Supreme Court&#8217;s 6-3 finding that Title VII&#8217;s prohibition against sex discrimination included gay and trans-identified workers did not warrant the same conclusion under Title IX&#8217;s text.
When Congress adopted the Affordable Care Act in 2010 during former President Barack Obama&#8217;s tenure, they could have included “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” in the text, but “chose not to do so,” said Kacsmaryk.
​&#8221;Congress limited Section 1557’s protections to those afforded by other federal statutes – including Title IX. Because Title IX does not protect ‘sexual orientation’ or ‘gender identity’ status, neither does Section 1557,&#8221; Kacsmaryk wrote. ​
Kacsmaryk has ordered both parties to submit “proposed judgments” within 10 days of his order.
Upon entering office, President Joe Biden signed a sweeping executive order, “Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation,” which attempted to reinterpret the prohibition on discrimination based on sex — which is found in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 — to include discrimination based on sexual orientation and one’s &#8220;gender identity.&#8221;
&#8220;The <a href="https://womansplaceuk.org/2021/02/07/bidens-executive-order/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">problems</a> with this [Executive Order] arise with its misinterpretation of Bostock and the disregard of biological sex and the sex-based rights of women and girls.&#8221; said <a href="https://callieburt.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dr. Callie Burt</a>, an Associate Professor at Georgia State University in the Department of CJ and Criminology and Center for Research on Interpersonal Violence (CRIV). &#8220;The Biden administration appears to subscribe to a worldview where gender identity should take precedence over sex.&#8221;
&#8220;This interpretation would have significant ramifications for women and girls in education, females incarcerated in federal prisons and detention centres, and the like,&#8221; said Burt. &#8220;This would represent the ‘undoing’ of women’s sex-based rights in favour of gender self-ID.&#8221;

Judge holding gavel, close-up

Texas Judge Blocks Biden’s Interpretation Of Title IX

Texas Judge Blocks Biden’s Title IX Inclusion Of Gender Pseudoscience

Biden Admin

Courts

Judge

Politics

Texas

Title IX

A federal judge in <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/texas" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Texas</a> struck down a provision in the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/obamacare" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Affordable Care Act</a> that requires employers and insurers to cover <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/hiv" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HIV</a> prevention drugs, ruling that the requirement opposes the religious freedom of some Christian-led companies.
Judge Reed O&#8217;Connor&#8217;s ruling on Wednesday could have far-reaching consequences for the act popularly known as Obamacare.
“Braidwood has shown that the PrEP mandate substantially burdens its religious exercise,” he <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22276105-braidwood-v-hhs-opinion" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote</a>. &#8220;The burden thus shifts to Defendants to show that the PrEP mandate furthers a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. Defendants have not carried that burden.&#8221;
The case, Braidwood Management Inc. et al. v. Becerra, included six individuals and two businesses that challenged the preventive care mandates under the Constitution and Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act prohibits any government agency from substantially burdening an individual’s religious practice. The plaintiffs argued that the coverage of the drug opposed their religious convictions as they did not desire to encourage same-sex behavior.
The drug targeted in the lawsuit is preexposure prophylaxis, popularly called PrEP. The drug was recommended by the Department of Health and Human Services in 2019 to help prevent HIV infection for those at high risk, forcing health insurance plans to cover it.
The drug reportedly reduces the risk of contracting HIV from sex by roughly 99% and from drug injection by about 74%. The drug is taken primarily by men who have sex with men, but also by heterosexual individuals who may be at high risk for the disease, <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/prep.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">according to</a> the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Survivors of sexual assaults are also sometimes prescribed PEP (postexposure prophylaxis).
O’Connor also stated in the ruling that the task force’s system for deciding which services should be fully covered under the Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional. The ruling opposed some additional preventive services covered under the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, including colorectal and other cancer screenings, depression screenings, and hypertension screenings.
Carl Schmid, executive director of the HIV+Hepatitis Policy Institute, told Roll Call that he expects the case will be appealed.
“Preventive services covered by private insurance plans without cost-sharing, such as HIV testing, hepatitis B and C testing, and PrEP, are all critical and well-established public health preventive services that must continue,” he said in a <a href="https://rollcall.com/2022/09/07/federal-judge-rules-hiv-drug-mandate-violates-religious-freedom/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">statement</a>. “To single out PrEP, which are FDA approved drugs that effectively prevent HIV, and conclude that its coverage violates the religious freedom of certain individuals, is plain wrong.”
The ruling follows a 7-2 Supreme Court ruling in June 2021 to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-rejects-republican-ags-challenge-to-obamacare-over-lack-of-standing-to-sue" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reject</a> a challenge to the Affordable Care Act from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and 17 other Republican attorneys general.
The attorneys general argued against the constitutionality of the law’s individual mandate, its prohibition on lifetime benefit caps, and its guarantee of protection for individuals with pre-existing conditions.

HIV prevention drug

Federal Judge Rules Against Obamacare Coverage Of HIV Prevention Drugs

Freedom of Religion

Former President Barack Obama complained on Tuesday that his administration had been forced to deal with &#8220;misinformation&#8221; when it came to the Affordable Care Act — and then came dangerously close to repeating the misinformation he had helped to spread.
Obama was on hand for President Joe Biden&#8217;s rollout of his plan to expand Obamacare, as Reuters <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/obama-returns-white-house-tout-healthcare-law-with-biden-2022-04-05/">reported</a>:
<blockquote>Obama jokingly referred to Biden as &#8220;vice president&#8221; before correcting himself, inspiring a salute from Biden, then offered broad praise of the Affordable Care Act, whose passage he described as a &#8220;high point&#8221; of his time in office.
&#8220;If you can get millions of people health coverage and better protection, it is, to quote a famous American, a pretty &#8230; big deal,&#8221; Obama said to hoots of laughter from the crowd, referencing an off-color Biden remark picked up by a hot mic when the law was signed.
</blockquote>
But Obama also noted that there were a few clouds surrounding the Affordable Care Act — which became law in 2010 — and he blamed Republicans for stirring up doubt and spreading &#8220;misinformation&#8221; about what the law would actually do.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Obama says &quot;There was a lot of misinformation flying around&quot; when Obamacare was going through Congress.
I can think of one: &quot;If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/x03tUoWMAK">pic.twitter.com/x03tUoWMAK</a>
&mdash; Greg Price (@greg_price11) <a href="https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1511403547602165762?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 5, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Because the majority of Americans did have health care, some people naturally worried that they would lose what they had,&#8221; Obama said. &#8220;The media was skeptical of past failures, there was a lot of misinformation, to say the least, flying around. And it&#8217;s fair to say that most Republicans showed little interest in working with us to get anything done.&#8221;
The former president did not mention his own part in <a href="https://dailywire.com/news/obama-lies-republican-predictions-about-obamacare-ben-shapiro/">spreading misinformation</a> about the law, as Greg Price noted in his tweet: &#8220;I can think of one: &#8216;If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it.'&#8221;
Obama alluded to the fact that some Americans had been concerned that they might lose their health care plans or be forced to choose new doctors — both of which turned out to be well-founded fears — but he did not mention the numerous times that he had falsely assured the people that was not the case.
In fact, Obama repeated the false claim &#8220;if you like your doctor/health care plan, you can keep your doctor/health care plan&#8221; so many times that Politifact awarded it with the auspicious title &#8220;Lie of the Year&#8221; in 2013.
As Politifact <a href="https://www.politifact.com/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/">reported</a>:
<blockquote>It was a catchy political pitch and a chance to calm nerves about his dramatic and complicated plan to bring historic change to America’s health insurance system.
&#8220;If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,&#8221; President Barack Obama said — many times — of his landmark new law.
But the promise was impossible to keep.
So this fall, as cancellation letters were going out to approximately 4 million Americans, the public realized Obama’s breezy assurances were wrong.</blockquote>

Former President Obama Joins President Biden At White House To Mark Passage Of The Affordable Care Act

Obama Complains ‘Misinformation’ Surrounded His Health Care Plan — He’s The One Who Told The ‘Lie Of The Year’

Barack Obama

Readers-Pass—Johnson—X-Times-The-Left-Refused-To-Take-No-For-An-Answer–And-Won

5 Times The Left Refused To Take Voters’ No For An Answer — And Won

Abortion

Constitution

Illegal Immigration

Readers Pass

Same-Sex Marriage

The Supreme Court ruled 7-2 Thursday to reject a challenge to the Affordable Care Act from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and 17 other Republican attorneys general on the grounds that the Republican AGs did not have standing to challenge the Constitutionality of the law&#8217;s individual mandate, its prohibition on lifetime benefit caps, and its guarantee of protection for individuals with pre-existing conditions.
&#8220;The states had argued that the law&#8217;s individual mandate was unconstitutional once it no longer carried a penalty because it had been justified as falling under the congressional power of taxation,&#8221; <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-upholds-obamacare-law-dismissing-challenge-from-states">Fox News reported</a>. &#8220;They also claimed that the rest of the law could not survive without the mandate.&#8221;
The two other provisions, the state AGs argued, could not exist without an individual mandate that required all Americans to purchase health insurance in some form.
The Court did not rule on the questions the Republican AGs posed and did not make a determination on whether the Affordable Care Act &#8212; also known as &#8220;Obamacare&#8221; &#8212; was itself constitutional; the Court ruled that the AGs did not have legal standing to sue the federal government to force a decision on the law&#8217;s Constitutionality.
&#8220;We do not reach these questions of the Act’s validity, however, for Texas and the other plaintiffs in this suit lack the standing necessary to raise them,&#8221;  Justice Stephen Breyer, who wrote for the seven-justice majority, said in the opinion.
The Court rationalized its decision, ruling that the Republican AGs had not suffered specific harm from the provisions they challenged and that American taxpayers were not in danger from the individual mandate because &#8220;Congress has reduced the penalty for failing to buy health insurance to zero,&#8221; according to CNN.
&#8220;[W]e conclude that the plaintiffs in this suit failed to show a concrete, particularized injury fairly traceable to the defendants&#8217; conduct in enforcing the specific statutory provision they attack as unconstitutional,&#8221; Breyer wrote in his decision for the majority. &#8220;They have failed to show that they have standing to attack as unconstitutional the Act&#8217;s minimum essential coverage provision.&#8221;
Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the ruling, suggesting that the Court had used the concept of standing to sidestep their responsibility to rule on ObamaCare&#8217;s Constitutionality.
&#8220;Today’s decision is the third installment in our epic Affordable Care Act trilogy, and it follows the same pattern as installments one and two,&#8221; Alito wrote in the dissent. &#8220;In all three episodes, with the Affordable Care Act facing a serious threat, the Court has pulled off an improbable rescue.&#8221;
&#8220;No one can fail to be impressed by the lengths to which this Court has been willing to go to defend the ACA against all threats,&#8221; Alito added in a veiled swipe at a previous decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts. &#8220;A penalty is a tax. The United States is a State. And 18 States who bear costly burdens under the ACA cannot even get a foot in the door to raise a constitutional challenge.&#8221;
&#8220;So a tax that does not tax is allowed to stand and support one of the biggest Government programs in our Nation&#8217;s history. Fans of judicial inventiveness will applaud once again,&#8221; Alito added. &#8220;But I must respectfully dissent.&#8221;
The ruling may make it more difficult to challenge the Affordable Care Act in the future. The Court&#8217;s decision essentially blocks AGs and some individual plaintiffs from raising concerns about the law.

US-POLITICS-HEALTH-INSURANCE-JUSTICE

Supreme Court Rejects Republican AGs’ Challenge To ObamaCare Over ‘Lack Of Standing’ To Sue

Supreme Court

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden claimed falsely on Thursday night that not one American lost their private health insurance from the Affordable Care Act (ACA), known as Obamacare.
Biden repeated what the left-leaning fact-checker PolitiFact rated its 2013 “Lie of the Year” on a stage in Nashville during the second and final presidential debate of the 2020 campaign. Biden was responding to a question on his own health care plan, which includes much of the same structure as Obamacare, when he launched into an erroneous defense of the ACA.
“The idea that I want to eliminate private insurance, the reason why I had such a fight with 20 candidates for the nomination was I support private insurance,” Biden said. “That’s why I didn’t, not one single person with private insurance would lose their insurance under my plan, nor did they under Obamacare. They did not lose their insurance unless they chose they wanted to go to something else.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Joe Biden claims that not one person lost their insurance under Obamacare <a href="https://t.co/l7ddT2NwO7">pic.twitter.com/l7ddT2NwO7</a>
&mdash; Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) <a href="https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1319458973452554241?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
PolitiFact rated the claim that not a single person was pushed off private insurance under Obamacare as its 2013 “Lie of the Year” largely because members of the Obama administration, including former President Obama, continued to repeat the falsehood while promoting the landmark health care law.
<a href="https://www.politifact.com/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/">PolitiFact</a> wrote in part:
<blockquote>It was a catchy political pitch and a chance to calm nerves about his dramatic and complicated plan to bring historic change to America’s health insurance system.
&#8220;If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,&#8221; President Barack Obama said &#8212; many times &#8212; of his landmark new law.
But the promise was impossible to keep.
So this fall, as cancellation letters were going out to approximately 4 million Americans, the public realized Obama’s breezy assurances were wrong.
Boiling down the complicated health care law to a soundbite proved treacherous, even for its promoter-in-chief.  Obama and his team made matters worse, suggesting they had been misunderstood all along. The stunning political uproar led to this: a rare presidential apology.
For all of these reasons, PolitiFact has named &#8220;If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,&#8221; the Lie of the Year for 2013. Readers in a separate online poll overwhelmingly agreed with the choice.</blockquote>
Earlier in the debate, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/president-trump-on-pandemic-we-cant-lock-ourselves-up-in-a-basement-like-joe">President Trump</a> hit Biden for the former vice president’s noticeable absence from the campaign trail in the closing weeks of the election. Prior to Thursday night’s debate, Biden had spent the last five days largely cloistered in his home in Delaware.
“We can’t lock ourselves up in a basement like Joe does. He has the ability to lock himself up,” Trump said, referring to Americans continuing to live amid the pandemic. “I don’t know, he’s obviously made a lot of money some place, but he has this thing about living in a basement. People can’t do that. By the way, I, as the president, couldn’t do that. I’d love to put myself in the basement or a beautiful room in the White House and go away for a year and a half until it disappears. I can’t do that.”

Joe Biden

Biden Repeats Version Of PolitiFact’s ‘Lie Of The Year’: If You Like Your Plan, You Can Keep Your Plan

2020 Election

Donald Trump

PolitiFact

During the vice presidential debate on Wednesday night between Vice President Mike Pence and California Democratic Senator Kamala Harris, Harris decided to frighten Americans about health care, claiming that if an American was ill and had a pre-existing condition or was young enough to be insured on their parents’ health insurance, the Trump-Pence administration was “coming for you.”
Harris ranted, “If you have a preexisting condition, heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer, they’re coming for you. If you love someone who has a pre-existing condition, they’re coming for you. If you are under the age of 26 on your parents’ coverage, they’re coming for you.&#8221;
Earlier in the debate, Pence had stated, “The difference here is President Trump and I trust the American people to make choices in the best interest of their health. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris consistently talk about mandates, and not just mandates with the Coronavirus, but a government takeover of healthcare, the Green New Deal, all government control. We’re about freedom and respecting the freedom of the American people.”
Just prior to her claim of the Trump administration “coming for you,” Harris claimed that the success of the economy pre-Covid-19 was due to the Obama-Biden administration, saying the “Trump-Pence administration wants to take credit when they rode the coattails of Joe Biden’s success for the economy that they had at the beginning of their term. Of course, now the economy is a complete disaster, but Joe Biden on the one hand did that. On the other hand, you have Donald Trump who has reigned over a recession that is being compared to the Great Depression.”
“On the one hand, you have Joe Biden who was responsible with President Barack Obama for the Affordable Care Act, which brought healthcare to over 20 million Americans and protected people with preexisting conditions,” she continued. “And what it also did is it saved those families who otherwise were going bankrupt because of hospital bills they could not afford. On the other hand, you have Donald Trump, who is in court right now, trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act, which means that you will lose protections if you have preexisting conditions. If you have a preexisting condition, heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer, they’re coming for you. If you love someone who has a pre-existing condition they’re coming for you. If you are under the age of 26 on your parents’ coverage, they’re coming for you.
Pence fired back, “Well. I hope we have a chance to talk about healthcare because Obamacare was a disaster, and the American people remember it well.”
As The Hill <a href="https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/437401-poll-few-americans-believe-they-have-personally-benefitted-from?rnd=1554410733">reported</a> in 2019, a Hill-Harris poll found that only 14% of respondents felt their health care costs had gone down because of Obamacare:
<blockquote>Few Americans believe their health care situation has been improved by key components of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA), according to a Hill-HarrisX poll released Thursday.
Across party lines, most registered voters contacted for the March 30-31 survey said major provisions of former President Obama&#8217;s signature health care law either had no real impact on them or had made things worse.
Forty-eight percent of respondents said the ACA had not impacted their monthly insurance premium costs, while 46 percent said their premiums were worse compared to before the law. Just 14 percent of respondents said they were better off.
When asked about the health care reform&#8217;s effect on co-pay fees, 41 percent said they were worse off, and 35 percent said they were not impacted. Only 13 percent said the ACA improved those costs.
Forty-one percent said their access to medical service providers is the same as it was before the ACA, while 16 percent said it is better. Thirty-four percent said things are worse in terms of access.</blockquote>

Kamala Harris And Mike Pence Participate In Vice Presidential Debate

Kamala Rants: If You Have A Pre-Existing Health Condition, Trump ‘Coming For You’

Kamala Harris

Mike Pence

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) claimed during an interview on Monday that women in the United States might be returning to a time when “being a woman is a pre-existing medical condition” due to President Donald Trump nominating Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
&#8220;You’re a devout Catholic,&#8221; MSNBC&#8217;s Andrea Mitchell said. &#8220;What’s your reaction to that? Is there a risk that Democrats not attack this nominee for her religious views and stick to where she might stand as a judge?&#8221;
&#8220;Yeah, well the president is trying to, as usual, deflect attention from the fact as we have all spoken out very clearly,&#8221; Pelosi. &#8220;The reason the president is in a hurry to make this appointment and have this justice in place, no matter who it would be, no matter who it would be, is because on November 10th the oral arguments start on the Affordable Care Act, which he has committed to overturn, that&#8217;s why he&#8217;s in court, to overturn your pre-existing condition benefit.&#8221;
&#8220;And so, this is &#8230; some people make the &#8216;oh, well Garland.&#8217; No, Garland, Scalia died in February,&#8221; Pelosi ranted. &#8220;Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, when she died 10 states were already voting in our country. So, okay, we don&#8217;t want to get involved in the process, but understand why they were so disrespectful, it&#8217;s their attitude, but also your pre-existing condition.&#8221;
&#8220;If your child is on your policy, forget about it. If you are a woman, return to a time when being a woman is a pre-existing medical condition,&#8221; Pelosi claimed. &#8220;I can, as a mother of five, I can speak with some authority on that subject. If your family is availing itself of long-term care by way of Medicare, forget Medicaid, forget about it. This is kitchen table concerns, whether its health or financial health, they&#8217;re out to get you and that&#8217;s why they&#8217;re in such a hurry, even as people were voting when Ruth Bader Ginsburg went to her reward.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Nancy Pelosi: We are &quot;returning to a time when being a woman was a pre-existing medical condition&quot;
&#8230;what? <a href="https://t.co/InRdXrliS7">pic.twitter.com/InRdXrliS7</a>
&mdash; Chris Martin (@chrisjdmartin) <a href="https://twitter.com/chrisjdmartin/status/1310616691756408833?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 28, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Barrett, 48, gave her acceptance speech over the weekend at the White House after being introduced by the president. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-amy-coney-barrett-gives-acceptance-speech-after-being-nominated-to-supreme-court">Transcript</a> of her statement below:
<blockquote>I am deeply honored by the confidence that you have placed in me, and I am so grateful to you and the first lady, to the vice president and the second lady, and to so many others here for your kindness on this rather overwhelming occasion.
I fully understand that this is a momentous decision for a president, and if the Senate does me the honor of confirming me, I pledge to discharge the responsibilities of this job to the very best of my ability. I love the United States, and I love the United States’ Constitution. I am truly humbled by the prospect of serving on the Supreme Court. Should I be confirmed, I will be mindful of who came before me. The flag of the United States is still flying at half-staff in memory of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to mark the end of a great American life. Justice Ginsburg began her career at a time when women were not welcome in the legal profession—but she not only broke glass ceilings, she smashed them. For that, she has won the admiration of women across the country, and indeed, all over the world. She was a woman of enormous talent and consequence, and her life of public service serves as an example to us all.
Particularly poignant to me was her long and deep friendship with Justice Antonin Scalia, my own mentor. Justices Scalia and Ginsburg disagreed fiercely in print without rancor in person. Their ability to maintain a warm and rich friendship despite their differences even inspired an opera. These two great Americans demonstrated that arguments, even about matters of great consequence, need not destroy affection. In both my personal and professional relationships, I strive to meet that standard.
I was lucky enough to clerk for Justice Scalia, and given his incalculable influence on my life, I am very moved to have members of the Scalia family here today, including his dear wife Maureen. I clerked for Justice Scalia more than 20 year ago, but the lessons I learned still resonate. His judicial philosophy is mine, too. A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policymakers, and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold. The president has asked me to become the 9th justice, and as it happens, I’m used to being in a group of nine, my family.
Our family includes me, my husband Jesse, Emma, Vivian, Tess, John Peter, Liam, Juliet, and Benjamin. Vivian and John Peter, as the president said, were born in Haiti and they came to us five years apart when they were very young. And the most revealing fact about Benjamin, our youngest, is that his brothers and sisters unreservedly identify him as their favorite sibling. Our children obviously make our life very full. While I am a judge, I’m better known back home as a room parent, carpool driver, and birthday party planner. When schools went remote last spring, I tried on another hat: Jesse and I became co-principals of the Barrett e-learning academy—and yes, the list of enrolled students was a very long one. Our children are my greatest joy even though they deprive me of any reasonable amount of sleep.
I couldn’t manage this very full life without the unwavering support of my husband, Jesse. At the start of our marriage, I imagined that we would run our household as partners. As it has turned out, Jesse does far more than his share of the work. To my chagrin, I learned at dinner recently that my children consider him to be the better cook. For 21 years, Jesse has asked me every single morning what he can do for me that day. And though I almost always say “nothing,” he still finds ways to take things off my plate—and that’s not because he has a lot of free time. He has a busy law practice. It’s because he is a superb and generous husband, and I am very fortunate. Jesse and I have a life full of relationships, not only with our children, but with siblings, friends, and fearless baby-sitters, one of whom is with us today. I am particularly grateful to my parents, Mike and Linda Coney.
I have spent bulk of my adulthood as a Midwesterner, but I grew up in their New Orleans home. And as brother and sisters can also attest, mom and dad’s generosity extends not only to us, but to more people than any of us could count. They are an inspiration.
It is important at a moment like this to acknowledge family and friends, but this evening I also want to acknowledge you, my fellow Americans. The president has nominated me to serve on the United States Supreme Court, and that institution belongs to all of us. If confirmed, I would not assume that role for the sake of those in my own circle, and certainly not for my own sake. I would assume this role to serve you. I would discharge the judicial oath, which requires me to administer justice without respect to persons, do equal right to the poor and rich, and faithfully and impartially discharge my duties under the United States Constitution.
I have no illusions that the road ahead of me will be easy, either for the short-term or the long haul. I never imagined that I would find myself in this position, but now that I am, I assure you that I will meet the challenge with both humility and courage. Members of the United States Senate, I look forward to working with you during the confirmation process, and I will do my very best to demonstrate that I am worthy of your support.</blockquote>

NANCY PELOSI

Pelosi: We’re Returning ‘To A Time When Being A Woman’ A ‘Pre-Existing’ Condition, GOP ‘Out To Get You’

Amy Coney Barrett

Nancy Pelosi

On Tuesday, Attorney General William Barr was questioned at a congressional hearing by Dem. Rep Lucy McBath of Georgia, who attacked him for supporting President Trump’s position against the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and used her own status as a breast cancer survivor to buttress her case. When Barr responded that he had two children of his own who are cancer survivors, McBath cut him off, iterating that his position was “playing politics.”
McBath began her query of the attorney general:
<blockquote>Sir, just a few months ago, in May, you said that you would be taking the president’s position in urging the Supreme Court to overturn the Affordable Care Act. When asked if you will still take that position, even if it means, and I quote, “Stripping millions of Americans of their healthcare in the middle of a pandemic,” you stated that the case would not be argued until October and that the president expects to fix and replace Obamacare with a better system.
Attorney General Barr, let’s be very, very clear: as public health officials and data have shown us, this pandemic is simply not going away. Just last week it was reported that one hospital was planning on sending coronavirus patients home to die due to limited resources to treat them. So we’re still facing an extremely critical and extremely serious situation. And even if you expect the president to figure out a new plan by October, the president has not yet put in place another system, nor is there any guarantee that he will do so by October as you “expect.”
So when you say you expect the president to figure out a new plan, you are taking a risk with millions of Americans’ lives. You are risking the lives of millions. People who will not be covered for preexisting conditions if the Supreme Court agrees with your position. Civil servants in your own department have disagreed with you on this matter. In fact, I’m introducing a statement by one of the lead attorneys on the ACA case, Joel McElvaine, who resigned in protest when your department refused to defend the law as it is required.
In my district, the sixth district of Georgia, congressional district, there are over 300,000 people that have preexisting conditions, and I sir, am one of them: a two-time breast cancer survivor. Our state is continuing to battle hard against a resurgence in COVID-19 cases.
So I’m asking you, sir, not to gamble with American lives. Not to gamble with my life. And I’d like you to confirm that if the president has no other plan in place by October, you will reverse course and drop your position that — I quote you directly — “the entire ACA must fall.”</blockquote>
The attorney general responded by noting that he has two children who are cancer survivors.
&#8220;I have two children who are cancer survivors, so I feel very strongly about this issue as a matter of policy,&#8221; said Barr. &#8220;And I believe that the president’s made clear that he will ensure—&#8221;
But before Barr could finish his response, McBath interjected, &#8220;Sir, please answer my question. Will you stop playing politics with Americans health care in the middle of a pandemic?&#8221;
&#8220;I’m not playing politics,&#8221; said Barr. &#8220;I’m a lawyer. I’m not in charge of healthcare policy.&#8221;
“Will you reverse your course?&#8221; said McBath, shouting over him. &#8220;Will you reverse your course and make sure that millions of Americans like me, that depend on healthcare and treatment to stay alive, will you reverse your course to make sure that we have the ability to be able to live in this country freely with quality healthcare?”
&#8220;People will have the healthcare protection and it will be accomplished either if I lose — if the government loses the case&#8230;&#8221; Barr replied calmly.
&#8220;I take this as a no,&#8221; McBath said, again before he could finish.
&#8220;&#8230;if the Supreme Court strikes it down&#8230;,&#8221; Barr continued.
&#8220;I take this as a no,&#8221; McBath repeated.
&#8220;&#8230;based on history&#8230;,&#8221; said Barr.
&#8220;I’d like to go on,&#8221; said McBath.
<iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?c4895848/user-clip-mcbath" width="512" height="330" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>

George Floyd’s Brother Testifies Before House On Policing And Law Enforcement Accountability

WATCH: Dem Rep. Cuts Off AG Barr When He Notes His Children Are Cancer Survivors

William Barr

The Department of Justice is asking the Supreme Court to strike down the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, as unconstitutional after Congress effectively cut out the individual mandate.
The DOJ filed a brief with the Supreme Court on Thursday, arguing that since Congress negated the penalty for not having health insurance, the law can no longer be justified under the legislature’s power to tax. In 2017, Congress passed a Republican-led tax bill that gutted the ACA’s individual mandate, reducing it to 0% of a person’s income. The new rule took effect last year.
“The entire ACA thus must fall with the individual mandate,” Solicitor General Noel Francisco wrote in the DOJ brief, according to <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-to-invalidate-affordable-care-act-11593148136">The Wall Street Journal</a>. “The individual mandate is no longer a valid exercise of Congress’s legislative authority in light of Congress’s elimination of the penalty for noncompliance.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi released a <a href="https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/62520-3">statement</a> slamming the Trump administration’s move, highlighting the political danger of President Trump attacking Obamacare amid a pandemic and months before he is up for reelection.
“President Trump and the Republicans’ campaign to rip away the protections and benefits of the Affordable Care Act in the middle of the coronavirus crisis is an act of unfathomable cruelty,” Pelosi said on Thursday. “If President Trump gets his way, 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions will lose the ACA’s lifesaving protections and 23 million Americans will lose their health coverage entirely. There is no legal justification and no moral excuse for the Trump Administration’s disastrous efforts to take away Americans’ health care.”
Former President Obama with a Democratic-controlled Congress passed his signature piece of legislation in 2010. The GOP tried and failed to repeal and replace Obamacare in 2017, but lawmakers attached a provision to a tax cut bill later in the year that effectively stripped the ACA of the mandate.
A group of 20 GOP state officials sued the federal government in February 2018 for the courts to strike down the law as unconstitutional. Democratic officials in 17 other states responded in a court filing arguing to keep the law in place. The Trump administration has sided with the plaintiffs against itself. A federal court in Texas sided with the GOP, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, one of the Democratic officials fighting to keep the ACA, issued a statement Thursday responding to the Justice Department’s filing.
“Now is not the time to rip away our best tool to address very real and very deadly health disparities in our communities,” Becerra said, according to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/obamacare-trump-administration-supreme-court.html">The New York Times</a>. “This fight comes at the most crucial time. The death toll from the coronavirus today is greater than the death toll of the Vietnam War.”
The Daily Wire, headed by bestselling author and popular podcast host Ben Shapiro, is a leading provider of conservative news, cutting through the mainstream media’s rhetoric to provide readers the most important, relevant, and engaging stories of the day. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

President Trump

Trump Again Targets Obamacare, Asks SCOTUS To Strike It Down

Department of Justice

Speaking on MSNBC, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the architect of Obamacare, stated that until a vaccine for the coronavirus is ready, with most estimates ranging from 12-18 months, people in the United States should eschew &#8220;conferences, concerts, sporting events, religious services, dinner in a restaurant.&#8221; Emanuel posited that all the “economic pain” such measures would cause must be worth it, arguing, “The truth is we have no choice.”
Emanuel began, “No one is immune to the COVID-19 virus. It threatens all of us. But while we are all experiencing the same pandemic, we are not experiencing it in the same way. The first dividing line is whether you or someone you love has gotten sick. Many Americans have not yet seen firsthand what devastation a positive test can inflict. Another dividing line is whether you have a job that lets you stay at home, working as you juggle child care and video chats.&#8221;
Emanuel said, “60 million Americans are still out there not sheltering in place and instead tirelessly working to keep everything going for the rest of us. You keep the electricity flowing and the internet running, food and groceries moving. You are putting your own health on the line to ensure the rest of us are living as normally as possible. And then there are the tens of millions of Americans who have lost jobs and businesses, or who fear that they&#8217;re just about to. Your anxiety about the virus is coupled with worry over having a paycheck, covering the mortgage, keeping the lights on, and buying food.”
He continued, “Realistically, COVID-19 will be here for the next 18 months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications. I know that&#8217;s dreadful news to hear. How are people supposed to find work if this goes on in some form for a year and a half? Is all that economic pain worth trying to stop COVID-19? The truth is we have no choice.”
Emanuel speculated on the numbers of deaths without physical distancing and like measures, stating, “If we prematurely end that physical distancing and the other measures keeping it at bay, deaths could skyrocket into the hundreds of thousands if not a million. We cannot return to normal until there&#8217;s a vaccine. Conferences, concerts, sporting events, religious services, dinner in a restaurant, none of that will resume until we find a vaccine, a treatment, or a cure.”
He asserted that his perspective was the realistic one:
<blockquote>One thing I&#8217;ve learned as a cancer doctor is that it&#8217;s wrong to paint an overly rosy picture in order to maintain a patient&#8217;s hope. It&#8217;s wrong because it fails. It&#8217;s false. Biology and disease are formidable opponents that inevitably tell us the truth. We cannot relieve the oppression of this pandemic until we are realistic. We need to prepare ourselves for this to last 18 months or so and for the toll that it will take. We need to develop a long-term solution based on those facts. It has to account for what we are losing while this fight goes on, things like schooling and income and contact with our friends and extended family.</blockquote>
He concluded:
<blockquote>The crisis is not going to go away in a few weeks or after the 30-day plan comes to an end. Although COVID-19 is affecting us in different ways, we have to be up to it and fight together.</blockquote>
Video below:
<iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pP3-hE-DrSc" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
Transcription from <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/04/07/ezekiel_emanuel_us_must_stay_locked_down_for_12-18_months_until_theres_a_vaccine.html">Real Clear Politics</a>.

Klick Health Ideas Exchange

WATCH: Obamacare Architect Suggests No Religious Services, Dinner In Restaurants For 12-18 Months

COVID

Ezekiel Emanuel

Menu