Greg Corombos of Radio America and Charlie Cooke of National Review cheer the arrest of a California state senator who pushed for gun control but was busted for arms trafficking. They also explain why the effort of Senate Democrats to pass a media shield law is actually an effort to limit free speech. And they react to Harry Reid’s assertion that people aren’t signing up for Obamacare because they don’t know how to use the internet.
‘Rules Mean Nothing to This Administration’
Just days after Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told Congress there would be no extension of the Obamacare enrollment deadline, the administration is offering an additional two weeks to anyone who begins the enrollment process by the end of the month.
“This is really one of the most audacious changes so far because several committees in Congress have been looking at all these delays and all these changes. Secretary Sebelius was asked point blank, ‘Will you extend the deadline past the March 31 enrollment date?’ And she said, ‘No, we will not,'” said Galen Institute President Grace-Marie Turner.
“In a separate hearing she said, ‘We don’t believe we have legal authority to do that.’ But that’s what they’ve done anyway. So they’re basically going before Congress that people have until March 31. Clearly, they’re not getting the enrollment they wanted. Therefore, they’re going to ask people, ‘Well, did you try to enroll? Did you have any trouble? If so, then we’ll extend the deadline for you. Rules mean nothing to this administration,” said Turner.
After initially stating that seven million sign-ups were needed, the administration has lowered the target goal to six million and stated that over five million have signed up. However, neither Sebelius nor any other administration official will confirm how many Americans have actually paid their first month’s premium. Sebelius says she doesn’t know because private insurance firms have that data. Turner isn’t buying it.
“I don’t believe that she doesn’t know. She hides behind the fact that they don’t have any way of knowing that. Part of it is because the website is still not built as far as being able to allow people to pay. But I think if they knew and that were a big number, we would hear about it,” said Turner, who says House Republicans are now going directly to the insurance companies to determine how many enrollees have actually paid their premiums.
So will a short extension of the enrollment deadline to mid-April give the administration enough time to attract the number of people they need to meet their target?
“I don’t think it’s going to make that big of a difference because most of the people who are uninsured, which is the whole reason we passed this all, are saying, ‘I don’t want this insurance. It’s too expensive, high deductibles, it’s too much of a hassle.’ So they’re not going to be insured and I think that’s going to be a big problem for them,” said Turner, who says the administration also refuses to disclose how many people are enrolling for the first time and how many are enrolling because they lost their existing coverage due to Obamacare.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid postulated on Wednesday that many people are failing to sign up due to their lack of internet savvy.
“There are some people who are not like my grandchildren who can handle everything so easily on the Internet, and these people need a little extra time,” said Reid. “We have a lot of people just like this through no fault of the Internet, but because people are not educated on how to use the Internet.”
“That’s not quite as bad as calling the American people liars when they say that they’ve been harmed by Obamacare, but it shows how completely out of touch Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is with the real world and what real people are dealing with in trying to figure out how to deal with these exchanges,” said Turner.
Turner noted there are many other avenues by which people could sign up than through healthcare.gov but Americans just don’t like the product.
Three Martini Lunch 3/26/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review react to the Democrat favored to win a U.S. Senate seat in Iowa telling donors in Texas that a vote for him can prevent an Iowa farmer from becoming chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. They also have a lot of fun with the new ad of a Republican Senate candidate in Iowa proudly announcing she castrated hogs when she was young. And they shake their heads as the Obama administration arbitrarily extends another Obamacare deadline.
Employers Should Have to Pay for Abortions?
The Supreme Court may be more inclined to defend the religious freedom of employers against the government’s contraception mandate after Solicitor General Donald Verrilli told justices that business owners would have no freedom to reject mandates to cover abortions.
Justices and lawyers also sparred over whether businesses actually have religious freedom and whether striking down the mandate makes women second-class citizens.
The notable abortion exchange between Verrilli and Justice Anthony Kennedy came during oral arguments in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius, two cases linked by the companies’ owners objecting to the Department of Health and Human Services requirement that businesses fully cover the contraception costs for their employees. That mandate includes coverage of abortafacient drugs, also known as the “morning after pill.”
Family Research Council Senior Fellow for Legal Studies Cathy Ruse was in the gallery during oral arguments and said that was the most remarkable moment in the court session today.
“This was actually the most exciting part of the oral argument this morning, when Justice Kennedy asked the government’s lawyer, ‘So under your argument, corporations could be forced to pay for abortions, that there would be no religious claim against that on the part of the corporation. Is that right?’ And the government’s attorney said yes,” said Ruse.
“You could hear a pin drop and I think that stunned Justice Kennedy. Since he’s always the swing vote, you want to stun him in a way that pushes him over to your side of the column,” she said.
Before the arguments reached that stage, a robust debate took place over whether businesses actually have religious freedom or whether those are only enjoyed by individuals. Ruse says she believes the majority of justices are sympathetic to the companies and their owners on that question.
“Chief Justice Roberts raised the point that corporations can actually file racial discrimination claims. So he said if a corporation can have a race why can’t it have a religious claim? The government’s attorney didn’t really have an answer for that,” said Ruse.
“I think a majority of justices believe that families who incorporate do not have to give up their religious freedom rights when they incorporate to do business,” she said.
The more liberal justices made two arguments in defense of the mandate. First, they contend that striking down the mandate would allow employers to weed out any medical provision they want, leading to health care chaos as every company would have their own plans. Hobby Lobby attorney Paul Clement rejected that fear, noting that every case filed under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act has to go to court and not every claim will survive.
Second, Verrilli and the liberal justices posited women would essentially be second-class citizens if employers could single out contraception coverage for removal from their health plans.
“Paul Clement’s reaction was brilliant so I’d like to adopt it as my own. If in fact the government has a compelling interest in providing free abortion-inducing drugs to all women in America. That’s their goal and that’s what they’re doing with this. There are other ways to accomplish that goal without religious companies who have a religious objection to that,” said Ruse.
“For instance, the government could simply provide insurance for these abortafacient drugs themselves. The government could do it through Title X clinics or another way. The government could provide subsidies or fund the providers of these items so that the women could get them for free from the provider, so he pointed out several ways the government could accomplish their goals without having to dragoon religious family-based companies into doing something that violates their religion,” said Ruse.
While Ruse is “cautiously optimistic” about the court’s ruling, she does fear the liberal wing of the court will try to cobble together a majority that would just tell religious employers to drop their health coverage altogether and let their employees navigate the heath care exchanges. A decision is expected in June.
Three Martini Lunch 3/25/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review see a lot of political upside in Bill Maher encouraging Democrats to stand up and oppose the Second Amendment. They also react to news that General Motors covered up a fatal defect in Chevrolet Cobalts for years while receiving taxpayer bailout dollars. And they have fun discussing the items for sale in the Democrats’ online store.
‘Our Constitution Needs More Defenders’
Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot Shak Hill is bracing for two uphill fights in his quest to win a U.S. Senate seat in Virginia, but says the Constitution needs more defenders and he is ready to fight for it.
Hill served nine years in the Air Force and rose to the rank of captain. He served as flight commander for the Presidential Wing at Andrews Air Force Base. He now runs a business, is father to six biological children and has also provided a home for dozens of foster children.
He was an early entry into the 2014 race to challenge incumbent Democrat Mark Warner. As if that weren’t enough of a political challenge, Hill was recently joined in the GOP field by former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie, a candidate with huge advantages in networking, name recognition and fundraising potential.
Hill says his reasons for staying in the race are the same ones for entering in the first place.
“When I was an officer in the military, just like many other military members I raised my right hand and I promised to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies. I’m 49-years-old right now and I see that our Constitution needs more defenders now than at any time in my life. Whether it’s the NSA or the IRS or other scandals (like) Benghazi, we’re having a constitutional crisis right now,” said Hill.
“I want the American dream for my family. I want it for the foster children I’ve been a parent to. I want it for your children and just our prosperity. We’re losing it and I knew I needed to do something about it. Running for the United States Senate and unseating Mark Warner and firing Harry Reid is exactly why I’m joining in the fight and why I’m going to win in Virginia,” said Hill.
So what issues would he pursue most passionately if elected?
“We’ve got to get back our Fourth Amendment rights. That’s a personal rights issue. We are having too much authority ceded to the federal government, as far as going to the NSA and as far as the IRS having the opportunity to look into our medical records. I mean can you imagine someday if an IRS agent knocks on your door and says, ‘Ma’am, Sir, show me proof of your medical insurance. That’s where we’re heading and this is an abomination,” said Hill.
Hill is one of four Republicans vying for the nomination, which will be decided in a state party convention in June. Hill is endorsed by retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin and by the pro-Second Amendment Gun Owners of America. Gillespie, however, is endorsed by a long list of prominent Republicans, including former U.S. Senator and Gov. George Allen and State Sen. Mark Obenshain, who very narrowly lost last year’s statewide race for Virginia attorney general.
Hill says he is not daunted because he knows he is the better candidate for the party and the commonwealth and he believes voters will ultimately respond to his message rather than one from the GOP establishment.
“They do not want a quintessential, twenty year-plus, inside-the-beltway lobbyist. They want somebody who’s got real world experience, somebody who’s defended our Constitution, worn the uniform that keeps and makes our country free,”said Hill.
“What I’m finding as I go around the state, they are rejecting the notion that he is the nominee to be coronated. If you want a very good lobbyist, I would probably hire Ed Gillespie or his firm, but he’s mortally flawed as a candidate,” he said.
According to Hill, state and national Democrats are already assembling an ad campaign that will highlight Gillespie’s lobbying record, including his work years ago for disgraced energy giant Enron and also for collecting some two million dollars in fees while representing the families of those killed in the terrorist bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988.
“So instead of talking about Mark Warner’s votes to use taxpayer dollars for sex selection abortions, instead of talking about Mark Warner’s vote to give us Obamacare and pushing cap and trade, we’re going to be talking about Ed Gillespie,” said Hill. “We need to have somebody that can make Mark Warner run on Mark Warner’s record. That’s me. If we do that, we win.”
Most voters are aware of Warner’s votes on health care and cap and trade, but why is Hill focusing on sex selection abortions? He says Democrats are sure to play the “War on Women” card again in 2014 and he believes the best counter is to aggressively point out what he sees as extreme positions that Sen. Warner holds on abortion.
“Let’s push Mark Warner where he’s most vulnerable. Mark Warner has a war on girls and it’s killing them. He’s doing that because of his extreme position on abortion. Not only is he in favor of allowing gender selection abortions but he’s in favor of allowing the gruesome late-term abortion up to and including the day of natural delivery. That is extreme,” said Hill.
Three Martini Lunch 3/24/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are encouraged that statistics guru Nate Silver sees Republicans taking the Senate majority in this year’s midterm elections. They also recoil at news that aborted and miscarried babies were incinerated at many different hospitals in Britain, some of them to provide energy. And they shudder at numerous reports suggesting NSA leaker Edward Snowden is actively helping Russia avoid U.S. intelligence efforts.
The End of Employer-Based Health Plans?
One of President Obama’s key advisers in drafting the healthcare legislation that is now law says Obamacare will eventually spell the end of employer-based health plans.
Experts from both sides of the aisle aren’t upset by the idea of removing employers from the health care equation, however both sides are also skeptical that Obamacare will have the effect Emanuel predicts.
Emanuel is quoted in The New York Times saying that a few blue chip companies will be the tip of the movement but that many other firms will quickly follow suit. In an early March piece for The New Republic, Emanuel explained how the change will happen.
“For the next few years insurance companies will both continue to provide services to employers and, increasingly, compete against each other in the health insurance exchanges. In that role they will put together networks of physicians and hospitals and other services and set a premium. But because of health care reform, new actors will force insurance companies to evolve or become extinct,” wrote Emanuel.
“The accountable care organizations (ACOs) and hospital systems will begin competing directly in the exchanges and for exclusive contracts with employers. These new organizations are delivery systems with networks of physicians and hospitals that provide comprehensive care.” he wrote.
Before experts even consider whether this would be a good idea, they’re largely in agreement that Emanuel is wildly optimistic about how this will play out.
“What’s he sprinkling on his breakfast cereal and where can I get some?” asked David Hogberg, health care policy analyst at the National Center for Public Policy Research.
“It basically hinges on two things. Number one, the Obamacare exchanges becoming very popular and very effective. At this point, I don’t see any of that in the future. The second is the Cadillac tax on high-end employer-based health plans coming into effect in 2018. That itself is a pretty thin reed to hang this on. That’s going to effect big employers and a lot of union plans,” said Hogberg.
“I suppose there’s no such thing as an unstoppable political coalition but big employers and unions together, that would come about as close as you can get,” he said.
Emanuel also argues that employers are looking to get out of their health care role anyway, and this would be the perfect avenue. That also has Hogberg scratching his head.
“Why didn’t they do that before Obamacare. Before Obamacare they didn’t have to pay a $2,000 fine. What keeps companies in employer-based plans is that employees demand it. It’s part of the compensation package and the reason employees demand it is that there’s this huge tax break for it. As long as it’s tax-free and employees demand it, it doesn’t matter so much what companies want to do,” said Hogberg.
“I really don’t see much in Dr. Emanuel’s argument that is at all convincing,” said Hogberg.
I’ll Be Watching You
As the depth of the NSA’s surveillance on the American people is revealed and now Congress and the CIA are fighting over surveillance on the work of lawmakers, the Capitol Steps roll out their parody of an already creepy 1980s classic in “I’ll Be Watching You”. Our guest is Steps impressionist Mark Eaton.
Three Martini Lunch 3/21/14
Greg Corombos of Radio America and Jim Geraghty of National Review are pleasantly surprised to see a Jimmy Fallon skit slamming Obamacare and Obama’s handling of Ukraine. They also shake their heads as Nancy Pelosi insists reporters refer to Obamacare as the Affordable Care Act. And they slap their foreheads at how cable news is covering the missing Malaysian plane and one channel even brought in a psychic.