Hat tip to Mark Levin for pointing out the story.
The Associated Press is reporting that the Obama administration has ordered Humana, one of the largest insurers of American seniors, to stop communicating with their clients with respect to Mr. Obama’s push for socialized medicine:
The Humana mailer focused squarely on the Medicare Advantage program.
“While these programs need to be made more efficient, if the proposed funding cut levels become law, millions of seniors and disabled individuals could lose many of the important benefits and services that make Medicare Advantage health plans so valuable,” it said.
It urged seniors to sign up with Humana for regular updates on the, and encouraged them to contact their lawmakers in Washington.
In ato Humana, HHS said the government is concerned that the mailer “is misleading and confusing” partly because the company’s lobbying campaign could be mistaken for an official communication about .
HHS ordered the company to immediately halt any such mailings, and remove any related materials from its Web site. In the letter, the government also said it may take other action against Humana.
Anyone with a shred of common sense knows that if Humana had come out in favor of the President’s so-called “reform” there would not have been a word from HHS, even if (like the administration’s statements) it was misleading or dishonest.
The definition of fascism from dictionary.com hits the nail on the head with respect to the Obama administration:
fascism – a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism
The Obama administration is obviously “forcibly supressing opposition and criticism” to their health care takeover, and that last word perfectly describes the latest tactic of the Left in America: when losing the argument, scream racism.
Max Baucus, the statist Senator from Montana who may be enjoying his last term in the Millionaire’s Club, spews his broken-record propaganda while trying to explain why he wants to muzzle contradictory viewpoints:
The insurance company profits stand in the way of improving Medicare for seniors.we released … strengthens Medicare and does not cut benefits,” said Baucus. “From lower , to free , to better treatment for chronic conditions, seniors have so much to gain from — and I’m not going to let
There they go again with their tired but predictable weak class warfare rhetoric about profits. That is statist propaganda from someone who either does not understand economics or simply depises the free enterprise system. If you want to know the truth about profits in the health care industry, check out this article from the American Enterprise Institute. Responding to Nancy Pelosi’s statement that insurances companies “are the villains in this”, AEI argues:
If so, they’re not very competent villains. Despite all the hype, the health-insurance industry’s profit margins remain modest. On average, health insurers deliver a profit of less than 4 cents for each dollar of sales.
Health insurance’s profit margin is lower than that of the soft-drink industry, which competes ferociously through advertising. It is lower than that of the fast-food industry, which lures customers with dollar menus and supersized meals. It is far lower than that of the beer industry, with its profit margin of 18 percent. And it’s not just foodstuffs that earn higher profits than health insurance: Some 85 industries have higher profit margins.
Democrats point out that insurers’ profits approached $13 billion last year. “I mean, they are making so much money it is just ridiculous,” said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W. Va.). But Rockefeller, who owes his own substantial fortune and–let’s face it–his seat in Congress to his great-grandfather, the oil magnate John D. Rockefeller, should know that any large industry will generate significant profits simply by virtue of its size, even if its profit margin is small. Yet the margin is what matters. Large industries divide profit among millions of investors, each of whom is seeking a decent return on his money.
These statist morons (or evildoers, you be the judge) used the same tired rhetoric about the oil companies, and politicians like Baucus are either ridiculously ignorant or are intentionally deceitful. The moral of this story is also contained in that AEI article:
The problem with health care isn’t excessive profits; it’s excessive costs. The U.S. health system encourages overconsumption, with some experts estimating that up to 30 percent of health spending is wasted. But the question of profits remains important for two reasons.
First, you can often judge politicians’ intentions on issues you don’t understand–which, for most of us, includes the vast majority of health-care policy–by their truthfulness on issues you do understand. If their strategy is based on a claim that is so easily disproved, what will they do in areas you can’t check? Second, the profit margins in private health insurance should give us pause regarding the public option, which would ostensibly be run as a non-profit.
Assuming that the only difference between the public option and private insurance is the need to deliver a profit, the public option would cost only about 4 percent less than private-sector coverage.
Any reasonably skeptical person knows that the Democrats do not care at all about your health care or its costs. They simply want more control over you as government dependence is their raison d’etre, their reason for being. Virtually every otherwise inexplicable action by the Democrats makes sense once you realize that everything that the Democrats do is driven by their desire to make you more dependent on them.