Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

Vox: Pro-Life Movement Winning

0
0
Vox: Pro-Life Movement Winning The left-wing online publication Vox finds the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case to be part of a “deeper trend” in a nation that has made an “unprecedented” turn to a pro-life stance.

Writing at Vox, Sarah Kliff notes that, since 2010, “states have moved aggressively to restrict access to abortion and taken new steps to defund family planning programs. Advocates on both sides of the issue describe the wave of changes as unprecedented.”

Also affirming the success of the pro-life movement is Elizabeth Nash of the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute.

“Abortion access has changed dramatically,” said Nash, who referred to the current Supreme Court as “much more hostile.”

“The debate at the federal level affected what happened at the state level, and accessing abortion is much more difficult in 2014 than it was in 2009,” she said.

Kliff views the high court’s decision to strike down a Massachusetts law that created a 35-foot buffer zone around abortion clinics, and its ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, whereby individuals do not lose their religious freedom when they open a family business, as further evidence of pro-life victories.

“Ever since Roe v. Wade found a legal right to abortion in 1973, the United States has had a strong pro-life movement that has pursued more stringent abortion regulations,” writes Kliff. “In the 1980s and 1990s, states pioneered spousal notification laws and 24-hour waiting periods prior to abortions.”

Observing events that helped drive the pro-life movement, Kliff identifies the passage of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), which fired up a national debate about abortion and its coverage in health insurance plans, and, six months later, the 2010 mid-term elections, which gave Republicans control of the House and a majority of governorships, as pivotal.

Kliff notes the frustration pro-life organizations experienced with the so-called Obamacare “compromise” in which it was agreed health insurance plans would cover abortions but be prohibited from using taxpayer funds to pay for the procedures.

Charmaine Yoest, president of Americans United for Life, agrees Obamacare was the turning point.

"The frustration level with all the back-room dealing that lead to the Affordable Care Act's passage was high," Yoest said. "There was a real sense of betrayal and a sense that the system was broken, so I think that was rocket fuel for us."

Acknowledging that Barack Obama was an ardent supporter of abortion, the pro-life movement took its message to the states and the courts.

Kliff observes that between 2011 and 2013 an unprecedented 205 abortion restrictions were passed in the states, “more than the entire 30 years prior.” According to national pro-life organization Operation Rescue, 87 facilities ceased performing surgical abortions in 2013 alone.

In addition, new state laws that require abortionists to have admitting privileges at local hospitals are seen by pro-choice advocates as “a backdoor way of driving clinics out of business if the local hospital refuses to provide the necessary admitting privilege,” writes Kliff.

"Over the last three years we've been involved in over 70 pieces of legislation that have come to passage," Yoest said. "It's really broad-based and, when you look at the clinic regulations and some other things, it doesn't all come back to the Affordable Care Act."

Kliff writes that the pro-life movement has also succeeded in “targeting birth control funding.”

“In 2011, New Hampshire cut its family planning budget by 57 percent and Texas reduced spending by two thirds,” she explains. “Montana killed funding for family planning altogether.”

Nevertheless, she states, “Even with the Hobby Lobby decision, Obamacare will still expand no-cost birth control to millions of women with health insurance coverage.”

Kliff notes that though states have not passed as much pro-life legislation this year, advocates for life are continuing their work following three years of success.

"We think [the Hobby Lobby decision] gives us a stronger legal foundation moving forward on defending conscience rights," Yoest said. "This year was an off year at the state level, but there's still a lot more room to go." Reported by Breitbart 16 hours ago.

Congressional Panel Accused Of Leaking Insider Information, Refuses To Comply With Probe

0
0
Congressional Panel Accused Of Leaking Insider Information, Refuses To Comply With Probe It was back in April 2013, when the WSJ reported of a peculiar surge in various health insurance stocks that came moments after a report from Height Securities, a Washington-based investment-research firm that ferrets out policy news and analysis for investors, correctly predicted the Obama administration would reverse course on big spending cuts that would have hit health insurers. The note was released about 15 minutes before markets closed on Monday, April 1, leading to the following surge in the biggest Obamacare beneficiaries.

Needless to say, it is quite clear that non-public info was leaked by US legislators to a "expert network" consulting company, which in turn further propagated the information to its own clients, making them profits of up to 8.6% in milliseconds. As the WSJ summarized at the time, "The resulting stock surge is one of the most dramatic examples in recent years of how tips and insights from Washington's burgeoning political-intelligence business can drive trading on Wall Street, potentially leading to big profits for those in the know."

It took the SEC 14 months to finally figure out there may have been something illegal with this setup and as the WSJ followed up three weeks ago, "prosecutors are gathering evidence for a grand-jury probe into whether congressional staff helped tip Wall Street traders to a change in health-care policy, an indication the long-running investigation has entered a more serious phase."



Public documents show federal law-enforcement officials and the Securities and Exchange Commission are seeking records and other evidence from the House Ways and Means Committee and a top congressional health-care aide, Brian Sutter, staff director of the committee's health-care subpanel.

 

The SEC sent subpoenas to the House committee and Mr. Sutter seeking documents and testimony in the matter, according to documents made public by Rep. David Camp (R., Mich.), who is the committee chairman, and Mr. Sutter.

 

*Separately, the Justice Department issued a subpoena to Mr. Sutter to compel him to testify before a federal grand jury at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to Mr. Sutter's public disclosure, which was included in the congressional record per House rules*. Committee officials wouldn't say whether Mr. Sutter has testified. A spokesman for the Ways and Means Committee, speaking for Mr. Sutter, declined to comment.



Furthermore, the SEC went to court June 20 to enforce subpoenas it issued as it sought information related to a probe *into whether Sutter leaked material nonpublic information about Medicare reimbursement rates to Mark Hayes, a lobbyist at Greenberg Traurig LLP.*

As Reuters reported previously, the SEC said Hayes spoke with Sutter the same day that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services announced reimbursement rates for the Medicare Advantage program. The regulator said *Hayes then emailed the brokerage firm Height Securities, which shortly afterward sent its clients a "flash alert" suggesting the deal could help insurance companies such as Humana and Health Net*, leading to the surge shown above.

In brief: what Sutter did is effecitvely leaking material non-public information which ultimately made its way to paying clients of Height, and nobody else, allowing them to generate quick, and substantial profits. The information had not been made public yet to the general public.

What is unknown is whether Sutter and other members of the House Ways and Means committee also traded concurrently on this non-public information, making some whopping profits in the process too. And it appears that is precisely how Sutter et al want to keep it.

According to Reuters, *the Ways and Means panel said on Friday it should not have to comply with a federal regulator's demand for documents sought for an insider-trading probe involving the staff director of a subcommittee and a lobbyist.*



The House Ways and Means Committee argued in a court filing *that U.S. District Judge Paul Gardephe in New York should deny the Securities and Exchange Commission's attempt to subpoena documents from the committee and its healthcare subcommittee staff director Brian Sutter.*

 

The SEC went to court June 20 to enforce subpoenas it issued as it sought information related to a probe into whether Sutter leaked material nonpublic information about Medicare reimbursement rates to Mark Hayes, a lobbyist at Greenberg Traurig LLP.

 

The committee's filing called the SEC subpoena "*a remarkable fishing expedition for congressional records." It said the U.S. Constitution shields the panel and Sutter from being compelled to testify or produce documents.*



Wait, the Constitution protects leakers of material, non-public inside information, disseminated to curry favor with various paying clients and lobbyists, and to further one's career, not to mention paycheck? Maybe the committee can point to just what page in the constitution they are looking at as we can't seem to find this particular section. We even checked the amendments - it's missing there too.

As Reuters concludes, "the dispute between the House committee and the regulator *could test the boundary of the SEC's powers to compel the legislative branch of government to cooperate with its enforcement of the federal securities laws*."

Spoiler alert - we are happy to reveal the answer already: the SEC's "powers to compel" will be found null and void, because while as we already noted recently while central bankers are clearly above the law, so are those who actually make it: because when it comes to insider trading, US Congress is happy to dole out fire and brimstone on all those who abuse their fiduciary responsibility or happen to prove the strong form of the EMT, but when it comes to Congress, it's look but don't touch, and certainly don't investigate.

After all corrupt Congressmen have only a few years in which to become rich, and if abuse of insider trading laws is what it takes, so be it. Reported by Zero Hedge 2 hours ago.

Mexico Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Market Worth $22.5B & $5.4B by 2020 Says a New Report at ReportsnReports.com

0
0
ReportsnReports.com adds, “CountryFocus: Healthcare, Regulatory and Reimbursement Landscape – Mexico,” to its store. The report is an essential source of information and analysis on the healthcare, regulatory, and reimbursement landscape in Mexico.

Dallas, Texas (PRWEB) July 05, 2014

The healthcare market of Mexico has significant potential for growth. The increasing elderly population, prevalence of non-communicable diseases, improvements in regulatory guidelines, government support for the healthcare sector, and the North American Free Trade Agreement, which assures its members protection of intellectual property rights, provide the impetus for the growth of the Mexican pharmaceutical market.

The pharmaceutical market was valued at approximately $10 billion in 2008, and is projected to reach approximately $22.5 billion by 2020 at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 7%. In 2010, the Mexican pharmaceutical market was the 14th largest pharmaceutical market in the world, and second in Latin America after Brazil (Daiichi Sankyo, News Release, August 2, 2011).

Order or purchase a copy of this report at: http://www.reportsnreports.com/Purchase.aspx?name=291512

The prevalence of non-communicable disease is increasing due to the increasing elderly population, which accounted for approximately 7% of the population in 2013, as well as changes to food and lifestyle habits. The government has been successful in implementing steps needed to achieve universal healthcare coverage, such as reforms in the System of Social Protection in Health (Sistema de Protección Social en Salud). In 2012, approximately 56 million people in Mexico were covered by Public Health Insurance (Seguro Popular, PHI) (Bristol, 2014; OECD, 2011). The rest of the population uses either social security coverage for healthcare or private healthcare insurance.

Regulatory regulations have attracted significant investment in Mexico’s pharmaceutical industry. The pharmaceutical sector had a cumulative Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) of $2.9 billion from 2005 to 2012. In 2012, Mexico received a total of $981M in FDI in pharmaceutical sector. The US, Luxemburg, Ireland, Canada, and Japan were main investors in the Mexican industry. The share of multi-national companies in Mexico is high, compared with the share of domestic companies in the total pharmaceutical market. The leading multi-national companies are Pfizer, Merck, Sanofi, and Novartis, the leading domestic players are Genomma Lab Internacional and Laboratorios Liomont.

The Mexican medical device market was valued at $2.8 billion in 2008, and is projected to grow at a CAGR of 5.7% to an estimated $5.4 billion in 2020. Ophthalmic devices (15.4%), nephrology and urology devices (14.8%), and orthopedic devices (14.5%) were the major segments in the medical device market in 2013. The key challenges being faced by the medical device industry in Mexico are Mexico’s dependency on the US for the import of devices and low expenditure on R&D by the domestic sector.

Complete Report Available at: http://www.reportsnreports.com/reports/291512-countryfocus-healthcare-regulatory-and-reimbursement-landscape-mexico.html

The Mexican regulatory authority provides a transparent and strong regulatory environment with a shorter lag time to facilitate the approval of pharmaceutical products and medical devices.

In Mexico, the Federal Commission for Protection against Health Risks (Creación de la Comisión Federal para la Protección contra Riesgos Sanitarios, COFEPRIS), working under the guidance of the Ministry of Health (Secretaría de Salud, Salud), is the main regulatory authority for pharmaceutical products and medical devices. Marketing authorization of new drugs and medical devices requires the execution of good laboratory practices and satisfactory compliance reviews for safety, efficacy, and quality of drugs by COFEPRIS and Salud. To manufacture pharmaceutical products in Mexico, the major requirement is a Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) certificate, which is provided by COFEPRIS after inspection of the establishment and review of the relevant documents. COFEPRIS also regulates the exports and imports of pharmaceutical products in Mexico.

Increasing access to healthcare facilities through an open, premium-based system is driving healthcare services in Mexico, and high out-of-pocket payment is a major concern.

The Mexican government provides easy access to healthcare facilities to the population through its high number of primary care services, hospitals, and national specialty institutions with highly sophisticated medical care. The primary care centers are prevalent in rural as well as urban areas to provide healthcare services.

In 2012, the share of public healthcare expenditure in Mexico was valued at 52%, while the private expenditure share was at 48% (World Bank, 2014r). The share of healthcare expenditure shows the high Out-of-Pocket (OOP) payment system in Mexico. The Mexican population enjoys public healthcare coverage either through social coverage for healthcare or federal- and state-funded services. The major social insurances are the Mexican Social Security Institute (Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, IMSS) and the Institute of Security and Social Services for State Workers (Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales de los Trabajadores del Estado, ISSSTE). The state-and federal-funded public insurance is covered under PHI and Oportunidades. In 2012, IMSS and ISSSTE covered more than 50% of the population of Mexico (Knaul et al, 2012).

Explore more reports on the Healthcare industry at: http://www.reportsnreports.com/market-research/healthcare/ .

About Us:

ReportsnReports.com is an online market research reports library of 350,000+ in-depth studies of over 5000 micro markets. We provide 24/7 online and offline support service to our customers. Reported by PRWeb 2 hours ago.

Fla. teen cancer survivor lobbies Capitol Hill

0
0
A 14-year-old southwest Florida cancer survivor is lobbying lawmakers on Capitol Hill to fund Medicaid and other children's programs.

Tony Colton recently joined more than 25 patients and families from across the country for the Children's Hospital Association's advocacy day.

Colton spoke with U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., and representatives Gus Bilirakis, Vern Buchanan, Kathy Castor and David Jolly about Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.

Tony has been a patient at All Children's Hospital patient since 2011, after being diagnosed with clear cell sarcoma of the kidney, a rare pediatric cancer.

Tony and his family urged lawmakers to fund these specialty programs.

Nearly 70 percent of patients at All Children's Hospital are Medicaid recipients. Reported by Click Orlando 19 hours ago.

Religious Schools, Nonprofits Hope for SCOTUS Strikedown of HHS Mandate

0
0
Religious Schools, Nonprofits Hope for SCOTUS Strikedown of HHS Mandate Religious schools and nonprofits that are outside the scope of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case are preparing for what Politico calls a “Hobby Lobby repeat,” by readying requests for the high court to hear their cases as well.

The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down Obamacare’s HHS mandate in the case of Hobby Lobby applies to “closely held” for-profit companies in which the religious beliefs of owners prevent them from offering contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs to their employees in their health insurance plans.

According to Jennifer Haberkorn at Politico, however, by fall, the justices are expected to have at least several requests from Catholic schools and other nonprofits that would like to have the HHS contraceptive mandate struck down for them as well.

The Obama administration claims to have made an “accommodation” for nonprofits to get around the HHS mandate, which was enacted as part of Obamacare in January of 2012 by then-Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, an unelected official who was not answerable to American citizens. Because of this, religious groups and nonprofits are faced with taking another route regarding their arguments, even though the so-called “accommodation” is meaningless to them.

According to the Obama administration’s announcement of the “accommodation,” nonprofits with religious objections to the HHS mandate may get around it by informing their health insurance plan administrator that they would not be paying for contraception. Health insurers would then be required to provide the birth control and abortion drug coverage for employees at no charge.

As Politico states, “the White House said the change put contraception an additional step away from religious nonprofits and equally balanced their objections and the goal of ensuring women can obtain preventive health services.”

However, as nonprofit, pro-life organization Priests for Life addressed the White House’s announcement:



The "accommodation" announced on February 10, even if implemented, does not change the moral or legal problems involved in the mandate. Whoever pays for the objectionable services, and whoever speaks to the employees about them, coerced cooperation is still in place, namely, that the employer still has to provide an insurance plan that covers these immoral activities. We want the freedom to provide insurance to our employees that does not cover immoral activities.

The mandate speaks of a year's extension given to certain objecting groups to "adapt" to the rule, without any provision for changing the rule. We do not need a year or a moment to consider what we will do. The rule is unjust. You don't adapt to injustice, you oppose it.



Because of the so-called “accommodation,” religious groups have not been successful in lower courts in challenging the contraceptive mandate.

Injunctions were denied for the Diocese of Nashville and the Michigan Catholic Conference, both of which lost their suits in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in June. Both of these entities could appeal to the Supreme Court. Similarly, the University of Notre Dame’s petition was rejected by the 7th Circuit, and the school has asked the high court for time until October for an appeal.

However, on Monday, the same day the Supreme Court released its decision in the Hobby Lobby case, the 11th Circuit Appeals Court issued an injunction providing EWTN Global Catholic Network with a reprieve from enforcement of the HHS mandate. In addition, five Catholic institutions in Wyoming and Wheaton College in Illinois were also granted last-minute relief from the mandate.

Advocates of the HHS mandate believe Justice Anthony Kennedy has already indicated that he is supportive of an accommodation that does not require an employer with religious beliefs against contraception to directly pay for birth control and abortion-inducing drugs.

“That accommodation equally furthers the government’s interest [in providing access to contraception] but does not impinge on the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs,” Kennedy wrote in his concurring opinion in the Hobby Lobby decision.

Opponents of the contraception mandate, however, point to the majority opinion in which Justice Samuel Alito appeared to suggest that the government might provide and pay for contraception itself.

“The court pretty clearly said what the government can do,” said Daniel Blomberg, an attorney at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which argued for Hobby Lobby and is representing other nonprofit institutions with challenges. “The government can set up its own system and set up contraceptive coverage for anyone who wants it.”

Should the high court decide to consider the issue of whether Obamacare’s contraceptive mandate applies to nonprofits, it would likely do so in the fall and hear oral arguments in a case in the winter. Reported by Breitbart 12 hours ago.

Supplemental healthcare policies may relieve some worries

0
0
Nicholas Lazzarini has a pretty good health insurance policy. But as a self-employed dancer, he says he worries about becoming sick or injured and incurring extra costs. "Unless you're on a TV show, you don't have coverage," says the 29-year-old from Van Nuys. Reported by L.A. Times 6 hours ago.

Silicon Valley Still King of Venture Capital

0
0
Silicon Valley in northern California remained the center of the earth for venture capital in the second quarter of 2014 according to PitchBook data. Of the $21.6 billion of venture capital (VC) investment worldwide, $9 billion, or 41.6%, went into 374 deals in what is referred to as the San Francisco Bay Area. Overall, VC funding was at the highest level in 14 years.

For VC entrepreneurship, there is Silicon Valley and then there is everybody else.  The entire continent of Europe came in second place by completing $2.6 billion in VC deals, followed by New York City with $1.4 billion and the Northwest with just $800 million.

The Silicon Valley bell cow deal for the quarter was “Uber,” based in San Francisco, a company that has developed mobile applications that connect passengers with drivers of vehicles for hire and ridesharing services. In dozens of cities around the world, the Uber app allows personal luxury cars to be reserved by sending a text message or using a mobile app. The location of the reserved car can be tracked by customers from their cell phone. 

Founded as UberCab, by May 2011 the company was subject to a cease-and-desist letter from its home town San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency for operating an unlicensed taxi service, and a legal demand from the California State Public Utilities Commission for operating an unlicensed limousine dispatch. The company has also been sued and restrained by government agencies in cities around the world. But the company changed its name, paid fines and settled some complaints.

The company’s founder, Travis Kalanick, is no stranger to business litigation and government regulatory problems. In 1996 at the age of 21 years old, he had started the peer-to-peer movie sharing website Socur.com and gained 250,000 active users. But he was shut down when 30 media companies sued for $250 billion in copyright infringement. He quickly started another company and sold it for $19 million in 2007. 

Uber closed on $1.2 billion in fourth round VC raise-up on a stunning $17 billion valuation. The money is all the more impressive, given the company has few tangible assets because all of its taxi/limo Lincoln Town Cars, Cadillac Escalades, BMW 7 Series, and Mercedes-Benz S550 sedans are independently owned and Uber just rents miles driven.

Silicon Valley had three other VC-backed companies in the billionaire valuation club that closed funding deals.  Airbnb, the vacation room rental site, was valued at $10.3 billion; Pinterest, the picture book marking site, was valued at $4.9 billion; and LendingClub, the crowd funded small lender, was valued at $3.7 billion. No other region had a billion dollar deal. The next closest was New York City’s Oscar Health Insurance, the Google Map-style doctor-finder and self-diagnosis site, was valued at $720 million.

Although Silicon Valley did attract 42% of VC investment dollars, it only accounted for 23.5% of the 1,591 worldwide deals that were funded with VC money in the second quarter. Although Europe had long been in disfavor by VC investors because of high regulations, high taxes, was a perception of a non-entrepreneurial society; they were second in deals closed at 302.   

Allot of naysayers are claiming that the Silicon Valley tech culture has to start fading, but their continued venture capital dominance means that investors are still bullish on the creativeness and zeal of the Silicon Valley wonder-kids. 

From July 15^th to July 29^th, Chriss Street will be teaching “Entrepreneurship and Capitalist Business Strategy” at Ho Chi Mihn University in Vietnam Reported by Breitbart 5 hours ago.

Does Hobby Lobby Signal The End Of Employer Sponsored Health Insurance?

0
0
The headline question above is simply one of many that cascade quickly from the Supreme Court's majority decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby last Monday. Reported by Forbes.com 1 hour ago.

Doctor Speaks Out Against Feds Silencing Medical Staff on Border

0
0
Doctor Speaks Out Against Feds Silencing Medical Staff on Border HOUSTON, Texas--Early in July it was revealed that doctors and nurses were allegedly threatened with arrest if they disclosed any information about the diseases discovered in federal housing facilities for illegal immigrants. Many on the left have claimed that by speaking out about their work at the facilities, medical personnel would be violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which "protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information." But Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet--an experienced physician and nationally recognized speaker--told Breitbart Texas that under the law nurses and doctors are free to speak out. 

"It is not a violation of HIPAA for a doctor or nurse to speak out about a public health concern and not mention a patient's name," Vliet said. "Medical personnel should be free to be interviewed and speak about the kinds of diseases they are seeing and the frequency of them. This would serve the public good and safety--again, it is not a violation of HIPAA."

So far a slew of sicknesses have been brought into the U.S. by the recent tidal wave of illegal immigrants. Breitbart Texas recently reported on an outbreak of scabies in one housing facility for unaccompanied border minors--the infestation was contracted by numerous Border Patrol agents. Other additional illnesses have also been noted. "We are starting to see chickenpox, MRSA staph infections, we are starting to see different viruses," Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol agent Chris Cabrera told ABC 15. 

At this point, it is somewhat unclear how or when the migrants are being checked for illnesses. Omar Zamora of the Rio Grande Valley Border Patrol Sector previously told Breitbart Texas, "We don't screen for diseases. All we are is a processing center, so we don't do that."

Most of the border minors are being kept in overcrowded facilities ridden with poor hygiene; according to Dr. Vliet, this is the ideal condition for a viral outbreak. 

She said, "Many people are trying to diminish the seriousness of this. They say, 'We have these diseases in the U.S.' Well yes, we do, but they've been well controlled, we have good hygiene, and most of our parents keep children home when they're sick. ... It's a very real risk. It could get out of hand very quickly; but since these are common disease that people have heard of, the risk isn't necessarily taken seriously."

Vliet mentioned that chickenpox--one of the illnesses identified within the migrant population--can be deadly and has the potential to spread to the general public. She said, "Chickenpox is highly contagious. What's worse about that is that it's much more severe when adults get it--in older people, it can cause death. It's very serious."

In Vliet's view, nurses and doctors in facilities have the right to speak out about medical dangers--and they should, she said, in order to decrease the chance of illnesses being contracted by the general public. 

It is apparent, however, that the federal government is attempting to hide certain aspects of the border crisis. In June Breitbart Texas reported that Border Patrol agents were threatened with criminal charges for speaking to the press. And one month earlier, in May, Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) ordered agents not to speak to reporters regarding the 36,000 convicted criminal illegal immigrants that were released onto U.S. soil.

"We were given specific instructions not to comment on that report," Greg Palmore, a Texas-based ICE spokesman, told Breitbart Texas. He was referring to the  report by the Center for Immigration Studies that outlined the criminals' release. 

Follow Kristin Tate on Twitter @KristinBTate. Reported by Breitbart 2 hours ago.

Federal Judge To Weigh GOP Senator's Obamacare Lawsuit

0
0
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A federal judge will hear arguments this week on whether to toss a U.S. senator's lawsuit challenging rules that force congressional members and their staffs to obtain government-subsidized health insurance through small business exchanges.

Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin contends that senators, representatives and their employees aren't eligible for the exchanges under the federal health care law because they work for a government that employs millions. He also argues that premium subsidies that congressional members and staffers receive will foster resentment among his constituents. Republicans have spent years railing against President Barack Obama's health care reform law, known as the Affordable Care Act. Johnson isn't attacking the act itself, focusing instead on rules imposing the act on Congress. But he's using the lawsuit as a mechanism to complain more broadly about what he sees as Obama unilaterally rewriting the act.

"This lawsuit offers a landmark opportunity to re-establish the balance between the executive and legislative branches of government," Johnson said in a statement last month.

Government attorneys have asked U.S. District Judge William Griesbach to throw the case out of court. They argue Johnson hasn't shown how the rules hurt him or his staff.

"This allegation ... describes an abstract injury that might or might not occur depending on how third parties (Senator Johnson's constituents) perceive and react to (the) regulations," U.S. Justice Department attorneys wrote.

Griesbach, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, has scheduled a hearing for Monday in Green Bay to consider dismissing the lawsuit.

The dispute stems from language Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, inserted into the act during debate. Under those provisions, the only health care plans the federal government can offer to congressional members and staffers must come through an exchange. That means members and staffers must leave their old government health plan, which subsidized 75 percent of their premiums through tax-free contributions.

Grassley's move was a political ploy designed to force the act's Democratic supporters into the same situation as uninsured Americans. But the problem is that congressional members and staffers make too much money to qualify for government subsidies other exchange users can receive, stoking fears that staffers would flee for the private sector because they wouldn't be able to afford full premiums.

Enter the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. An arm of Obama's administration, it published rules in October 2013 stating the only health insurance plans available to congressional members and staffers must be offered through the small business exchanges but allowing them to continue receiving the premium subsidies they got under their old plan.

Johnson filed the lawsuit in January, demanding a judge invalidate the rules. Federal employees can't legally use small business exchanges because they're limited to people who work for businesses with fewer than 100 employees, he contends. What's more, he says, the rules hurt his credibility with constituents because the government's premium contributions put him "in a privileged position."

Dozens of Republican House and Senate members have rallied behind Johnson, arguing in court filings the rules are another example of Obama trying to change the law on his own. They point to a number of administration moves in addition to the congressional rules, including postponing requirements that employers supply workers with health insurance and extending subsidies to people who obtain insurance through federally established exchanges even though the act says only those who go through state-built exchanges are eligible for help.

"The remedy to address ... unpopular laws is through their repeal or modification by Congress, not through the President turning those laws on-and-off," they wrote.

Government attorneys say those points don't matter because Johnson lacks standing to sue.

"These principles do not fall away merely because a Member of Congress is accusing the Executive Branch of acting unlawfully," they wrote.

If Johnson prevails the rules would be invalidated. The provisions in the act would then apply to the senators, representatives and staffers' health care coverage. They could enter exchanges for individuals sans subsidies or they could seek insurance elsewhere on their own.

If congressional members don't like that prospect, Johnson's attorney, Rick Esenberg said, they can amend the act or raise staffers' pay. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.

How Hobby Lobby Undermines All Americans' Freedom

0
0
The Supreme Court's recent decision in the Hobby Lobby case demonstrates that the court, at least the five justices who voted in favor of Hobby Lobby, has little concern for, and probably little understanding of, women's health care. By ruling that corporations, on the grounds of the alleged religious views of their owners, can deny women access to some forms of contraception, the court set a horrible precedent that if followed will endanger the health and lives of many American women.

The Hobby Lobby ruling may at first seem like a victory for the minority of Americans who think that both abortion and contraception should be illegal, and for those who believe that the US should operate more as a theocracy than a country where state and church are separate. However, the ruling not only is terrible news for women seeking a guarantee of good healthcare through their employer, but also for anybody who believes in personal freedom.

In the US, where health insurance is linked to employment, health insurance is part of the compensation package. When most Americans are about to start a new job, or choosing between two or more jobs, one of the first questions they ask is about the quality of the health insurance they will get. In most cases, health insurance varies because some companies offer plans with lower co-pays, better dental care or things like that. Firms that deny dental care are doing it because of concerns about costs, not because they have an ethical or religious problem with healthy teeth. Hobby Lobby is doing something different, denying women access to some forms of health care because of the personal beliefs of the people who run the company.

This decision raises the question of whether the Supreme Court will next rule that employers can tell workers how to spend the money they earn at their jobs. This sounds a bit extreme, but in a very real way that is precisely what the court just did. By limiting how workers can use some of their compensation, the court, despite its own assertions that it was not setting a precedent, opened the door for further limitations. If Hobby Lobby can tell people how they can or cannot use their health care benefits, why can't they also tell people they can't, for example, use their salaries to, for donate to pro-choice political candidates or pro-marriage equality causes? The answer, one would think, would be obvious, but the recent court decision makes it considerably less clear.

The Republican Party has long, if not always sincerely, repeated a mantra of individual freedom, but the Hobby Lobby decision, in which all five justices who formed the majority were appointed by Republican presidents, undermines that. A central belief of all Republican politicians is that Americans should have a right to do what they want with, and keep as much as possible of, their hard-earned money. The Supreme Court made a big move against that idea this week, but the outrage from the Republican side has been absent.

Conservative opposition to healthcare have consistently argued that decisions about health care should be made by patients and doctors, not by the government. The death panel hysteria that Sarah Palin unleashed on the American people a few years ago took that point to a nutty extreme. After last week, conservatives who support Hobby Lobby should probably change their position and argue that health care decisions should be made not by a patient's doctor, but by a patient's employer. Similarly, for supporters of the Hobby Lobby decision, the new mantra of individual freedom should now be that Americans should be allowed to do whatever they want with their hard earned money, as long as their boss approves, but somehow that seems an unlikely campaign slogan for Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio.

The Hobby Lobby decision is about women's health care and individual freedom, but it also another sign of the consolidation of power by big corporations in the US. It is now legal for corporations to deny workers important medical services, and redefine their compensation packages, simply because, religious claims aside, they want to. During a very tenuous recovery in which real wages have not recovered, unemployment remains high and economic uncertainty on the part of working Americans is an enormous problem, the Supreme Court just gave more rights to corporations while taking wealth, as health care benefits are a form of wealth, out of the hands of working Americans. Reported by Huffington Post 3 hours ago.

Texas Legislators Promise Action Against CPS Caseworker

0
0
Texas Legislators Promise Action Against CPS Caseworker HOUSTON, Texas--Angel Linthicum Cook testified during a hearing this past week that something must be done to hold Child Protective Services (CPS) caseworkers and foster parents accountable for lying, deception, and cover-ups. Texas legislators who listened to her and her children’s’ testimony were appalled by what they heard calling the actions of CPS caseworkers and others “criminal.” 

Legislators serving on the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission promised to take action. Rep. Harold V. Dutton, Jr., said it was the worst thing he has heard or seen in state government during his 30 years as a State Representative. He said that he had “never heard a story so bad, so egregious, that it just almost incites a rage in me. This is government at its worse.”

The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (TDFPS) is presently going through review by the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission. The Commission is taking testimony from members of the public. Testimony about the horrors that have occurred because of CPS actions have been elicited.

Mrs. Cook and her children testified about how CPS caseworkers lied about the facts in the case, and were “too lazy” to research the prior history of the children while they were in their biological mother’s care. The Cooks had voluntarily decided to care for them and later adopted them.

Once their children were removed by CPS, the caseworker also allegedly intentionally kept the identification and existence of family members away from the judge even though Mrs. Cook has nine siblings and even more extended family members willing to care for their children. It is the law that if children are taken into CPS care the judge must first consider if there are family members who can take the children.

The Cooks became the kinship parents of two children who were the children of her husband’s half-sister. One of the children was an infant; the other one was a 2-year-old who, unbeknown to them, was HIV positive. The child had handprints, scars, bruises and cuts on his body when the biological mother left them with the Cooks. He also had anal warts.

The biological mother, Amanda Lunsford, was trying to evade CPS authorities in two states and dropped the children off at the Cook’s home in 2010. Lunsford was later arrested but the men that sexually abused the children have not been found. Cook told Breitbart Texas that the biological mother left her 6-week-old and her 2-year-old brother in a tent where the 2-year-old was sexually abused.

The Cooks notified CPS that Lunsford abandoned the children at their home and CPS went to court to have these children placed in the Cook’s care. CPS did not help the Cooks in any way. They were not given any financial assistance, health insurance, mental health, or any other assistance. The sexually abused HIV positive 2-year-old was suffering from Attachment Disorder, Reactive Disorder, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. The young child would shake when men entered the room.

The HIV positive child died as a result of his disease in 2013. This is when the trouble with CPS began. CPS did not tell the coroner about the prior CPS history on the biological mother, and the caseworker did not tell the coroner that the child had HIV.

Mrs. Cook told Breitbart Texas that the CPS caseworker called Mrs. Cook a “baby killer,” hid the child’s HIV status from the court, and hid records of Lunsford’s former run-ins with CPS from the judge. Mrs. Cook went from weighing 170 pounds to just 112 pounds in one month. She could not keep any food down.

CPS kept the Cook’s seven children from them for 377 days. The children were all placed in separate foster homes, and three of them became victims of sexual abuse and physical violence while in foster care. The Cooks who are in a lower income bracket, had to sell property to defend themselves and get their children back. Mrs. Cook is a stay-at-home mom. So far, they have spent $126,000.

The testimony of Mrs. Cook and her two sons at the Commission hearing details just some of the terror that the family suffered:

Mrs. Cook said she testified, and her children testified, because she wanted to “hold [CPS] accountable like they do us.” She also wanted others to feel freer to speak out about violations of parental rights, and abuses suffered by children in foster care. The Cooks had a limited time to speak at the hearing so there was no time to detail all of the violations that the family say occurred.

The Cooks’ 11 and 13-year-old sons testified that they and all of their siblings were taken from their loving home, and from the only church, school, and community, they had ever known. The 11-year-old testified he was told that if he reported his sexual abuse, he would never see his family again. The caseworker also told the boy that his parents did not love him.

The 11-year-old testified that he and his seven and 12-year-old brothers had to sign forms that said they would not talk about what happened while in foster care. They were placed in a home with a total of 14 children. The 13-year-old was placed in a behavioral risk foster home even though he did not suffer from behavior problems. He was placed with children that were 16 to 18 years of age and he was separated from his siblings. He was sexually and physically abused by foster children who were staying there.

There were also alarms on the door to the bedrooms which would go off if the boys tried to leave their bedrooms at night. The younger brother was forced to wet his pants. The 11-year-old testified that he told the foster parents that his 12-year-old brother, who had a heart condition, was being sexually fondled. The foster parents did nothing about it. A month later, the abuser began sexually abusing him. He testified that he was sexually violated almost 50 times while in the foster home.

The interview with Mrs. Cook by this Breitbart Texas journalist and an examination of her Facebook page has revealed even more horrors. Cook said that police reports were filed reporting rocks being thrown thru their windows, gasoline poured around their home, and of being chased down and run off the road while driving in July 2013.

The Cooks have suffered public shame, and harassment, as a result of CPS taking their children. Someone painted “child killer” in red paint around their front door. They have received death threat notes at their home. A source told this reporter that the caseworker is a suspect.

The Cooks finally had their children returned to them after an agreement was negotiated with CPS. They have been forced to put their two youngest children into daycare even though their religious views provide that they should take care of their own children. Mrs. Cook has always been a homemaker. The ordeal is not over because the agency still has temporary managing conservatorship of their children. Under Texas law, the agency must either have a final trial to get custody or dismiss the case by October.

After hearing the testimony, the Chairwoman of the Committee, Senator Jane Nelson, thanked the Cooks for testifying. She also told them, “It is our job to listen to you and hear what you are saying and to do our best to fix what you are telling us is broken .... We are most grateful and the lesson that you are telling us is about telling the truth is very important and ultimately it will pay off. I am so sorry that you went through what you went through.”

Texas State Senator Brian Birdwell said, “This is the kind of thing that gets to leadership yesterday.” The Senator compared the abuses suffered the Cooks to a death penalty case. He asked whether the state had a way of compensating victims who had to spend money defending themselves and were later exonerated. Birdwell also asked whether Health and Human Services and TDFPS had a mechanism for reviewing charges like this against an agency employee.

Other members of the Commission include Rep. Four Price, Vice Chair, State Rep. Cindy Burkett, Senator Juan “Chuy” Hinojosa, Senator Dan Patrick, Rep. Larry Gonzales, Senator Charles Schwertner, Dawn Buckingham, M.D., and Tom Luce. Ken Levine serves as Director.

TDFPS told Cook at the hearing that they would speak to her afterwards. Angel Cook told Breitbart Texas that “regarding what they told me after the hearing – nothing - they said someone will call me. A lady did call but nothing came of it, my kids’ abuse still remains unreported.” Mrs. Cook also said she has video surveillance of harassment by CPS that occurred after the hearing. The supervisor was fired after the Cooks testified. The CPS caseworker still works for the Department.

The Commission has issued a Staff Report which is intended to serve as a compilation of all recommendations and action taken by the Sunset Advisory Commission. Public comments are also posted on the Commission’s website. At this time, the response posted by Kyle Janek, the Commissioner of Health and Human Services, and the Commissioner of TDFPS, John Specia, do not address the concerns raised by the legislators during this hearing. 

The Commission website contains a link for receiving comments from the public.

The Cooks will be back in Austin to testify before the Commission on July 25th. Breitbart Texas will continue to follow the case.

Follow Lana Shadwick on Twitter at LanaShadwick2. Shadwick is a former family court associate judge and lawyer for TDFPS. Reported by Breitbart 28 minutes ago.

Woman with epilepsy separates from husband of 33 years to keep health insurance lost to Obamacare-Medicaid coverage gap

0
0
Linda and Larry Drain make too little money to qualify for a subsidy to help cover their insurance premiumsMeanwhile, Tennessee has refused to expand Medicaid Reported by CapitalBay 1 day ago.

Politico: Even Liberals Want Obamacare Employer Mandate Repealed

0
0
Politico: Even Liberals Want Obamacare Employer Mandate Repealed The unpopular, job-killing Obamacare provision that forces businesses with 50 or more employees to pick up the tab for workers' health insurance or face a hefty tax has now lost support from even liberals, Politico Magazine reported Sunday.

Liberals ranging from President Barack Obama's own former press secretary Robert Gibbs to the liberal Urban Institute and Commonwealth Fund say ditching the employer mandate makes sense and would reduce "distortions" in the labor market. Moreover, as they note, most large businesses already provide health insurance; the provision is only expected to increase coverage by 200,000 nationwide. Furthermore, Obamacare's employer mandate compliance requirements layer costly and onerous compliance hurdles on job creators.

Chris Jennings, who helped the Obama White House with its Obamacare implementation, concedes that the employer mandate has become a "political irritant." Jennings added, "The issue really becomes, 'Do we need it or do we not need it?' It's complicated to enforce; it is somewhat burdensome to employers. But it does contribute to the underlying financing of the law."

Even David Cutler, one of Obamacare's architects, has said doing away with the onerous employer mandate is "not a huge deal."

Still, the Obama administration and Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) continue to stonewall GOP-led efforts to remove the costly, job-killing mandate. The reason: Politico notes that the employer mandate is expected to bag from $46 billion to over $100 billion in tax penalties and fees to help fund Obamacare over the next ten years. Unions also support the unpopular provision.

According to the Investor's Business Daily Employer Mandate Scorecard, 429 employers have already slashed tens of thousands of worker hours and jobs to avoid getting hit with Obamacare's employer mandate.

Obama has already delayed the employer mandate's implementation twice to avoid electoral backlash for Democrats. Whether the Obama White House will join the growing chorus of liberals who now side with Republicans in opposing the employer mandate remains to be seen.

Obamacare remains deeply unpopular nationally. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, just 40% of American now support Obama's signature legislative achievement.

Voters head to the polls in 121 days. Reported by Breitbart 1 day ago.

Why Obamacare Is Pushing Up Health Insurance Premiums

0
0
Why Obamacare Is Pushing Up Health Insurance Premiums Now that Obamacare has been enacted, Americans across the nation are seeing their health insurance bills spiking, leading to what has been a documented slide in full-time hiring, a drop in consumer discretionary spending, not to mention stagnant and declining real wages. In short: a broad economic contraction (yes, yes, who could have possibly foreseen this).

But how is it that insurers set their prices? As Bloomberg explains, insurers are calculating what to charge for health plans in 2015, which is no simple task. Actuaries can’t easily forecast how often the millions of new Obamacare enrollees will go to a doctor. New federal rules and expensive drugs will also increase costs. Wrong guesses could wipe out profits.

Here is a quick and dirty way to understand why premiums are going up.

*1. Cost of claims*

This one’s easy. Insurers know what they paid in claims for the previous year and use it as a basis for the year to come.

*2. Benefit changes*

Past payouts are no longer a reliable predictor, though, especially with so many new Obamacare patients. And doctor visits will increase, because plans that didn’t cover maternity care and mental health must do so under the health-care law. That will bump up the premiums of some plans.

*3. Rising prices*

Actuaries adjust for what they call medical trend, or how fast the cost of care* is rising. From 2014 to 2015 it’s expected to rise as much as 6.8 percent. That includes changes in cost (the price of an MRI) and utilization (how many MRIs are performed).
 
* One tough thing to anticipate is how much new drugs will cost. Doctors are flocking to prescribe Sovaldi, a cure for hepatitis C with an $84,000 price tag. The drug cost UnitedHealth $100m in the first quarter of 2014—a sum the company called “a multiple of what we expected.”

*4. Risk pool*

Demographics help insurers estimate what it will cost to cover their customers. Older people typically need more care, and women of childbearing age are more expensive to insure than men*. These costs are built into plans.
 
* In some states, including Louisiana and Mississippi, enrollment on healthcare.gov by women accounted for almost 60% of sign-ups. That could drive up rates if insurers haven’t planned for it.

*5. Provider networks*

Health insurers can negotiate better rates from medical providers by promising to steer them more patients. They can also save money by avoiding expensive providers.

*6. Geography*

Insurers can vary premiums based on location. Medical care is more expensive in some rural areas where there are fewer doctors and in places with less competition.

*7. Reinsurance*

Obamacare set aside $10 billion in 2014 to help insurers cover higher-than-expected claims in the law’s first year. That pool shrinks to $6 billion in 2015. Insurance companies will make up the difference by raising prices on some plans.

*8. Taxes and fees*

Insurers will pay $11.3 billion in fees in 2015 to fund Obamacare programs. That’s about 3 percent of premiums, up slightly from 2014.

*9. Profit and risk load*

Insurers plan for 3 percent to 5 percent profit. More uncertainty may prompt them to increase their risk load, a cushion against unexpected losses.

Source: BusinessWeek Reported by Zero Hedge 1 day ago.

Cheap Health Insurance From Non-Exchange Providers Now Viewable at Insurer Website

0
0
Cheap health insurance for U.S. adults from non-exchange providers is now available to review at the QuotesPros.com website. All less expensive plans are offered at http://quotespros.com/health-insurance.html.

Midland, TX (PRWEB) July 06, 2014

American citizens who were unable to capitalize on the discounts from exchange providers for health insurance after the deadline passed this year can now gain entry to the Quotes Pros website for discounts. Packages for cheap health insurance from non-exchange providers are viewable from http://quotespros.com/health-insurance.html.

The inexpensive policies that are now delivered in real time for annual pricing can help adults in all states in the U.S. to explore the real costs of individual or family plans. Because the search platform requires no health records information, adults can receive a general quote by zip code instead.

"The exchange providers in the health insurance industry participating in government regulated programs still provide discounts to consumers who missed the deadlines for affordable health care this year," said a Quotes Pros source.

The policy finder now programmed to allow exploration by simple zip codes has the ability to produce special rates for different policies that consumers can find useful. The health packages are now mixed in with life, renters and auto insurance plans that are underwritten by top agents throughout North America.

"The discovery of actual pricing for insurance packages is one of the benefits any system user receives while accessing our programmed database of providers available," said the source.

The Quotes Pros company is also supporting small business owners this year by categorizing business insurance rates that are viewable. Commercial delivery companies and other agencies seeking company related insurance products can view availabilities at http://quotespros.com/business-insurance.html.

About QuotesPros.com

The QuotesPros.com company provides a dedicated platform on the Internet for reviewing and buying insurance packages from top companies. The innovative features this company has programmed over the past two years has helped to promote the independent quotation system now offered. The QuotesPros.com company has a staff of company experts who are responsible for the accuracy of the system and ensuring satisfaction for all adults accessing the price content. Reported by PRWeb 20 hours ago.

Kelsey National Corporation Appoints Avery Smith President

0
0
Kelsey National Corporation, which is celebrating 50 years in the health, dental, disability, and life insurance industry, today announced the appointment of long-term Director of Business Development Avery Smith to the role of President.

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) July 07, 2014

Kelsey National Corporation (KNC) and its affiliate HealthInsurance.com, Inc., provide private exchanges that enable comparison shopping by those under age 65 for health insurance and dental insurance as well as retiree exchanges for dental and vision insurance. Kelsey National today announced the appointment of Avery Smith to the position of President. Smith, formerly KNC’s Director of Business Development, has been with the company since 2004, beginning as Customer Service Manager. He has held the position of Director of Business Development for the past 7 years.

“Avery’s leadership within KNC over the past decade has amply prepared him to lead the business forward successfully,” said Mark Kelsey, CEO, Kelsey National Corporation. “Avery has mastered the ins and outs of our business and the benefits industry, and we are confident in his ability to lead KNC through this game-changing period with his characteristic good humor and positive outlook,” Kelsey said.

In his history with Kelsey, Smith spearheaded the creation of an online platform that helped thousands of Medicare participants easily purchase Part D Prescription Drug Coverage. He also worked closely to create a private exchange, which has been endorsed by eight Fortune 500 companies for their part-time and seasonal employees to purchase health insurance.

In addition, Smith was instrumental in the creation of http://www.YourDentalExchange.com, a private exchange that helps seniors who are losing group coverage sign up for dental and vision insurance plans with no waiting periods.

Smith’s promotion comes during Kelsey’s 50th Anniversary year. “KNC was incorporated in 1964, and has worked hard to earn a great reputation with its partners and customers,” Smith said. “We are all proud of KNC’s legacy as a responsible and nimble company that is known for exceeding customer expectations, and I personally look forward to continuing that tradition.”

In his new role, Smith also has strategic plans for the future of KNC. “As the U.S. health, dental, and vision insurance industry continues to evolve, Kelsey is well positioned to offer a broad variety of self-service exchange-type solutions to employers, benefit consulting houses, and associations of all sizes due to its extensive experience building online dental, health, vision, and other types of insurance marketplaces,” he said.

“As we look to the future,” Smith said, “we will continue to focus on building elegant and robust solutions for our partners, offering innovative products, and delivering the type of first-rate services and experiences that will keep Kelsey’s customers coming back.”

About Kelsey National Corporation

Based in Los Angeles, CA, Kelsey National Corporation (KNC) is an experienced marketer and administrator of insurance products for individuals, corporations, and associations across the United States. KNC offers unique solutions that can solve the paradigm of health care coverage for our partners by helping their members or employees make better insurance choices, including http://www.HealthInsurance.com, which empowers small businesses and individuals to make informed health insurance decisions, and http://www.DentalInsurance.com, an online exchange platform for dental insurance and discount dental plan comparison shopping. Reported by PRWeb 12 hours ago.

The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol Review | The Unbreakable Secret to Curing Autoimmune Disorders for Good – Vinamy.com

0
0
The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol is a new product created by Julia Liu and is a system designed for people suffering from and wanting to cure for good their autoimmune disorders. A complete review on the site Vinamy.com points out whether or not this program is effective.

Seattle, WA (PRWEB) July 07, 2014

One of the last remaining mysteries know to modern medicine is the presence of the autoimmune disease, a blanket term applied for specific ailments which are caused by a person’s immune system attacking its very own cells. While knowledge about autoimmune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis or multiple sclerosis have increased by leaps and bounds ever since the 21st century, many scientists are still unable to find a cure for these.

However, there is a secret technique to curing autoimmunity, and the knowledge comes from a former sufferer of the autoimmune disease lupus, Julia Liu, who is currently working as a full-time health specialist. Thanks to her experiences as a former lupus sufferer, she has published The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol a way to let fellow autoimmune sufferers like her know that their conditions can indeed be cured.

Specifically, The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol provides such practical techniques and tips one need for curing autoimmune diseases like:·     Managing one’s condition effectively without using any kind of harmful drugs or invasive surgeries
·     Identifying the root causes of one’s autoimmune disorder
·     Eliminating common symptoms associated with autoimmune disorders within two months
·     Recognizing the link between diet and one’s autoimmune disorder
·     Avoiding the “chemicals” which cause autoimmune diseases to become worse

David Fisher, a writer from Vinamy.com, says that The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol is “a product of all the hard work that (author Julia Liu) poured out researching for the ‘definitive’ cure for autoimmune diseases of all kinds.”

The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol comes with six bonuses which can be downloaded for free along with the main kit, which are:

·     Natural Detox
·     Boost your Metabolism and Peel the Fat Off
·     Back Door to the Health Insurance System
·     PMS to PPD: Understanding the Phases of the Female Human Body
·     At Peace At Home: Ultimate Guided Relaxation Manual
·     Nostrum of Herbal Remedies

Furthermore, Julia Liu also offers a chance for users to enter a one-on-one counseling session with her if people decide to purchase The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol.

In addition, a policy of a 60-day money-back guarantee is also observed if users choose to return the product within the designated time frame if they are not satisfied with the result.

For a full review of The Autoimmunity Bible & Norton Protocol, users could visit the website: http://vinamy.com/the-autoimmunity-bible-and-norton-protocol-tolerance-and-autoimmunity-review/.

To get more details about the product or its author, get a direct access to the official site. Reported by PRWeb 10 hours ago.

Obamacare's next threat: A September surprise

0
0
Most state health insurance rates are scheduled to be approved by early fall, and will likely rise. Reported by Politico 9 hours ago.

Americans Mourn Loss of Economic Independence

0
0
Americans devoted Friday to celebrating independence. Flags and fireworks, picnics and pledges of allegiance abounded.

But there’s no liberty and justice for all if Americans aren’t economically independent.  Low wages, debts and dim prospects all subjugate. This is the condition of a shocking number of Americans as income inequality rises. And their economic desperation and subordination occurred by design. 

CEOs and right-wing one percenters purchased legislation and court decisions that diverted the nation’s wealth to their penthouses. And despite their promises, not a dime trickles down to the workers whose labor created the wealth and whose productivity has risen even as their wages have not. The decision of the right-wing majority on the U.S. Supreme Court last week in the Harris v. Quinn case is another example of the one percent’s unrelenting erosion of the 99 percent’s economic independence.
This decision makes it harder for 28,000 home care workers in Illinois specifically, but others across the country as well, to collectively bargain for better wages, benefits and working conditions.

That’s exactly what the one percent wanted. The harder it is for the 99 percent to collectively bargain, the easier it is for the one percent to take everything. In this particular case, the one percenters include some of the richest people in the world, the Koch brothers and the Walton family, who fund the National Right to Work (for less) Legal Defense Foundation (NRTW), which bankrolled the lawsuit.

Home care workers, whose lives are devoted to aiding disabled adults, were paid minimum wage in Illinois a decade ago. Job dissatisfaction was high, as was turnover. Shortages of these workers forced the state to institutionalize infirm adults, a significantly more expensive and less satisfactory living arrangement.

Then in 2003, the state took steps that enabled home care workers to join the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and collectively bargain. Their wages rose to $12.25 an hour. They got health benefits and training. Turnover declined. The state estimates it has saved $632 million because fewer adults went to institutions.

The same was true in Washington state, where home care workers joined SEIU in 2002. Collective bargaining provided them with wage increases of 40 percent, health insurance, paid time off and mileage reimbursement. And like Illinois, Washington saved money because fewer disabled adults ended up in nursing homes.

This solution was great for the vast majority of everyone involved, taxpayers, workers and disabled adults. Here’s what one of those adults, Rahnee Patrick, told a National Public Radio reporter:

"I had a personal assistant come to me at 5 o'clock in the morning in my house. She rode an hour in the snow, from the North Side of Chicago. Why was she so dedicated? Not because I'm lovely, but because she gets a really good wage, and the wage came from the unions being able to collectively bargain. I can actually go to work, and it's because of her being able to pay her own bills that I'm able to pay my bills.”

Workers say it was a godsend. Dorothy Glenn received $1 per hour when she began caring for her disabled sister in 1972 after taking her out of an Illinois institution where she’d been badly injured. Glenn got no health insurance and no training. She recounts that when she asked for a raise, the state told her that if she didn’t like the pay, she should put her sister back into the nursing home.

“I felt like my sister and I were living in the shadow, and we had no voices,” Glenn told Think Progress reporter Bryce Covert. She said she got a voice when she was able to join the SEIU. “It dramatically changed my life,” she said. The difference is 28,000 workers bargaining collectively with the state instead of one. “As long as we keep our numbers, we have the power,” she explained.

The pay increases and health insurance benefits secured by collective bargaining gave economic independence to tens of thousands of home care workers in Illinois and in states across the country. Their work provided them with sufficient income to pay their bills, support their children, buy an Independence Day picnic spread. Collective bargaining meant they no longer had to depend on the government for health insurance or on food banks for dinner.

Economically independent workers are less easily manipulated and mistreated. That is exactly the opposite of what right-wing one percenters want. What was good for tens of thousands of home health workers was bad for greedy one percenters. So they searched for a way to thwart the system that worked well for workers, invalid adults and the state.

They found it in a handful of home care workers who didn’t want to pay the fair share fee that  was charged to those who benefitted from collective bargaining but declined to join the union.

The NRTW group volunteered to use Koch brothers and Walton family money to pay for a lawsuit seeking legal sanction for these workers to freeload, to reap the benefits of collective bargaining but shirk paying any part of its costs. That’s the genesis of the Harris v. Quinn case.

The NRTW scheme works like this: legalize freeloading to lower revenues available for collective bargaining, and thus diminish workers’ ability to secure better wages and benefits. This robs workers of economic independence.

The right-wing majority on the Supreme Court sided with right-wing one percenters. They ruled that a state can’t require home care workers to pay a fair share. They ruled for weaker collective bargaining and less economic independence.

And they ruled for higher income inequality. That is exactly how it has played out for the past century. As collective bargaining rose in the United States from 1918 to 1958, income inequality declined. And as collective bargaining declined from 1958 to 2008, income inequality skyrocketed.

Illinois home care worker Dorothy Glenn said there’s power in numbers. For many workers, only that power can achieve for them liberty and justice for all.  Reported by Huffington Post 7 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images