B.O.H.I.C.A. Pt. II

Keith Hennessy at his eponymously-named blog has a .pdf link to the Obamacare bill that was leaked over the weekend. KH provides the breakdown, here. No real surprises… everything we’ve come to expect from government-managed health care is in full effect, it’s just that now it is all a terrifyingly real legislative possibility.

The first thing that struck us is the breadth and scope of power the Treasury Dept. and HHS have assumed for themselves in administering Obamacare which, incredibly, includes establishing a tax that one would pay if one is not enrolled in a “qualified” health insurance program. And to think that we were under this Constitutionally-induced delusion that only Congress could levy taxes.

Here’s another point that defies logic:

4. Health insurance plans could not charge higher premiums for risky behaviors: “Such rate shall not vary by health status-related factors, … or any other factor not described in paragraph (1).” Smokers, drinkers, drug users, and those in terrible physical shape would all have their premiums subsidized by the healthy.

The very thing that sets at the heart of our own health care reform, the ability to customize your health care plan (choosing what you do/do not want covered) coupled with the insurer having the freedom to assess risk on an individual basis, is completely neutered.

And no big government plan would be complete without the following - an aspect of the program that will, of course, be completely free of political influence-peddling, favor-seeking and graft:

15. The bill would create a new pot of money for state gateways to pay “navigators” to educate people about the new bill, distribute information about health plans, and help people enroll. Navigators receiving federal funds “may include … unions, …”

Good to see that “community organizers” and the like will be getting in on the action.

Forgetting for a moment the issue of the enormous outlay of tax dollars just to cover everybody that Obamacare desires to bring in under this big tent, what is left out of the bill is who is going to foot the bill for the massive bureaucracy that will be required to administer Obamacare. But we think we all know who that will be.

Please check out the link - it's a good read.

B.O.H.I.C.A. (UPDATED)

(UPDATE #1): Representative Alan Grayson (D-Florida) who wrote the Pay for Performance Bill was on Neil Cavuto's show two days ago. In this 8-minute clip, he is unable to even give a range of what pay or bonuses would be deeemed "excessive" seeming content that he did his civic duty by leaving it to the Treasury Department to sort out as it sees fit. While some may argue that companies receiving government funding should be subject to some compensation oversight may have a point, the vagueness in which these laws are written is a blank check for political chicanery and leverage. Afterall, even we can come up with a range of definitions for arbitrary.

Embed no workie, please click here for video.





After quietly backing off continued efforts to back tax at 90% the AIG bonuses Congress is looking for other ways to demonstrate to the public that via massive extension of power, they are really on the public’s side.

The new legislation, the "Pay for Performance Act of 2009," would impose government controls on the pay of all employees -- not just top executives -- of companies that have received a capital investment from the U.S. government. It would, like the tax measure, be retroactive, changing the terms of compensation agreements already in place. And it would give Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies.

In addition, the bill gives Geithner the authority to decide what pay is "unreasonable" or "excessive." And it directs the Treasury Department to come up with a method to evaluate "the performance of the individual executive or employee to whom the payment relates."

This arrangement will be sure to attract the best and brightest: A two-time tax cheat will be determining pay rates. A job in the financial sector is sounding more and more like a civil servant job.

But continuing on the theme of never wasting a crisis, it wouldn’t be D.C. if there wasn’t some… a lot of politics involved:

Rep. Alan Grayson, the Florida Democrat who wrote the bill, told me its basic message is "you should not get rich off public money, and you should not get rich off of abject failure." Grayson expects the bill to pass the House, and as we talked, he framed the issue in a way to suggest that virtuous lawmakers will vote for it, while corrupt lawmakers will vote against it.

"This bill will show which Republicans are so much on the take from the financial services industry that they're willing to actually bless compensation that has no bearing on performance and is excessive and unreasonable," Grayson said. "We'll find out who are the people who understand that the public's money needs to be protected, and who are the people who simply want to suck up to their patrons on Wall Street."

Did you catch that? If you are not onboard with the most radical expansion of governmental power since the New Deal, then you are without virtue. If you are not down with the overarching plan of the One then you are somehow lacking moral fiber. Assent is patriotic.

And lastly:

After the AIG bonus tax bill was passed, some members of the House privately expressed regret for having supported it and were quietly relieved when the White House and Senate leadership sent it to an unceremonious death. But populist rage did not die with it, and now the House is preparing to do it all again.

Having been effectively told to stand down, the pitch fork-wielding nightriders are back.

Yep, we’re in good hands