The Senate began debating President Obama’s health care takeover plan this week. Most of the attention has been placed on several swing-vote Democrats who might oppose the bill. But with the exception of Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-CT), these Democrats will likely find an excuse to support it.

Senators Ben Nelson (D-NE), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), and Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) cannot be counted on to do the right thing. They have made up their minds to vote for the bill if necessary and just need an excuse. If Sen. Lieberman holds firm, President Obama will need one Republican to cross the aisle to provide the 60th vote needed to invoke cloture, cut off debate, and pass the bill.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) is the Republican most likely to support the bill. She voted for it in committee and is currently working to make small changes that could be used to justify her support. Sen. Snowe voted against the bill before Thanksgiving so it’s very important for Americans to thank her for that vote and encourage her to be strong.

Please call Sen. Snowe’s Washington office at (202) 224-5344 or send her an email here.

• Page 94—Section 202(c) prohibits the sale of private individual health insurance policies, beginning in 2013, forcing individuals to purchase coverage through the federal government

• Page 110—Section 222(e) requires the use of federal dollars to fund abortions through the government-run health plan—and, if the Hyde Amendment were ever not renewed, would require the plan to fund elective abortions

• Page 111—Section 223 establishes a new board of federal bureaucrats (the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee”) to dictate the health plans that all individuals must purchase—and would likely require all Americans to subsidize and purchase plans that cover any abortion

• Page 211—Section 321 establishes a new government-run health plan that, according to non-partisan actuaries at the Lewin Group, would cause as many as 114 million Americans to lose their existing coverage

• Page 225—Section 330 permits—but does not require—Members of Congress to enroll in government-run health care

• Page 255—Section 345 includes language requiring verification of income for individuals wishing to receive federal health care subsidies under the bill—while the bill includes a requirement for applicants to verify their citizenship, it does not include a similar requirement to verify applicants’ identity, thus encouraging identity fraud for undocumented immigrants and others wishing to receive taxpayer-subsidized health benefits

• Page 297—Section 501 imposes a 2.5 percent tax on all individuals who do not purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health insurance—the tax would apply on individuals with incomes under $250,000, thus breaking a central promise of then-Senator Obama’s presidential campaign

• Page 313—Section 512 imposes an 8 percent “tax on jobs” for firms that cannot afford to purchase “bureaucrat-approved” health coverage; according to an analysis by Harvard Professor Kate Baicker, such a tax would place millions “at substantial risk of unemployment”—with minority workers losing their jobs at twice the rate of their white counterparts

• Page 336—Section 551 imposes additional job-killing taxes, in the form of a half-trillion dollar “surcharge,” more than half of which will hit small businesses; according to a model developed by President Obama’s senior economic advisor, such taxes could cost up to 5.5 million jobs

• Page 520—Section 1161 cuts more than $150 billion from Medicare Advantage plans, potentially jeopardizing millions of seniors’ existing coverage

• Page 733—Section 1401 establishes a new Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research; the bill includes no provisions preventing the government-run health plan from using such research to deny access to life-saving treatments on cost grounds, similar to Britain’s National Health Service, which denies patient treatments costing more than £35,000

• Page 1174—Section 1802(b) includes provisions entitled “TAXES ON CERTAIN INSURANCE POLICIES” to fund comparative effectiveness research, breaking Speaker Pelosi’s promise that “We will not be taxing [health] benefits in any bill that passes the House,” and the President’s promise not to raise taxes on families with incomes under $250,000

You can RSVP on Facebook.

WHAT:
Town Hall Meeting

WHEN:
Monday, October 12
6:15 PM
(Doors open at 5:45 PM)

WHERE:
Furman University
Timmons Arena
3300 Poinsett Highway
Greenville, South Carolina

NOTES:
Individuals are prohibited from bringing signs and materials into Timmons Arena.

The four stage plan to pass Obamacare has been publicly confirmed and is ready to be implemented:

1. Senate Finance Committee (headed by Sen. Max Baucus) passes a conceptual framework of Obamacare out of committee. This is a less-radical version of Obamacare is likely pass out of committee this week since the CBO released a favorable score yesterday.
   Status: incomplete.

2. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid must merge the Senate Finance Committee bill with another (more liberal) bill from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions (HELP) Committee.
   Status: in progress.
   
   1. The actual final text will be determined by Reid himself.
   2. Reid can draft and insert text into the bill not approved by either committee.
   3. This process will take place with no senate hearing or public conference committee.
   4. No one will be allowed to read the bill before the Senate debate except senators chosen by Reid and the Obama Administration.
3. Sen. Reid will move to proceed to HR1586 (the house bill passed in March which taxes bonuses received by certain TARP recipients) in order to get around the Constitutional requirement that tax bills originate in the house. Reid’s final version of the healthcare bill will be inserted into HR1586 and passed.
   Status: confirmed.

4. The house will then take up Obamacare and could pass it without amendment (sending the bill directly to the President without a House-Senate conference committee and another round of votes in the House and Senate–and a longer period of public scrutiny of what the proposed law actually says).
   Status: implementation in progress.

Successful execution of this strategy is possible but not without difficulties:

1. It will be difficult for Sen. Reid to keep all 60 democratic Senators happy as he merges the two committee bills. These bills diverge on some of the most sticky issues, including the public option.
2. Sen. Reid has never attempted to merge committee bills before and the process is intensely complex, which leads me to believe that it could take longer than they expect.
3. The House may not pass the bill without amendment, which would force a House-Senate conference committee to resolve the differences and thus open up a period for public scrutiny of the bill.
4. Any delays will reduce the chance of final passage.

If a conservative is a vegetarian, they don’t eat meat.
If a liberal is, they want to ban all meat products for everyone.

If a conservative sees a foreign threat, he thinks about how to defeat his enemy.
A liberal wonders how to surrender gracefully and still look good.

If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is will take care of him.

If a conservative doesn’t like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don’t like be shut down.

If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn’t go to church.
A liberal wants any mention of God or religion silenced.

If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that his neighbors pay for his.

…

Nullification has a long and interesting history in American politics, and originates in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. These resolutions, secretly authored by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, asserted that states, as sovereign entities, could judge for themselves whether the federal government had overstepped its constitutional bounds, to the point of ignoring federal laws.

Virginia and Kentucky passed the resolutions in response to the federal Alien and Sedition Acts, which provided, in part, for the prosecution of anyone who criticized Congress or the President of the United States.

Historian Thomas E. Woods looks at nullification as a constitutional “check,” and a way to prevent one government from having the power to rule on the limits of its own authority:

“The main point that nullification aims to address is that a government allowed to determine the scope of its own powers cannot remain limited for long. This is a lesson we should have learned by now. Moreover, since piecemeal solutions to reducing federal power have accomplished nothing, we can hardly afford to dismiss out of hand the idea of nullification, a remedy that is at once creative and intelligent, and recommended by some of the greatest political thinkers in American history.”

Resistance Left, Right and Center

Groups across the political spectrum have focused their efforts on this same principle – calling on state governments to not just say no to the federal government, but to actively resist federal laws and actions.

• Firearms Freedom Acts have passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and under the force of law, call on those governments to refuse federal regulation of firearms made and kept in those respective states.

• Real ID legislation has passed in approximately 2 dozen states requiring state governments to refuse implementation of the 2005 law.

• Health Care Freedom Acts are being actively pursued in six states (including Arizona), and would resist proposed national health care legislation on a number of levels.