This month the unemployment rate was reduced to 7.8% from 8.1%, and a month earlier it was at 8.2%. This is a large drop but not many jobs were added. Instead, the size of the labor pool was reduced. If the labor pool was the same size as on January 1, 2012, the unemployment rate would be 8.4%. If the labor pool was the same as on January 20, 2009 (the day Obama took office), the unemployment rate would be 11.4%.
The U-6 rate (the real rate) is 14.6%. There are fewer people working today than on January 20, 2009. In order for unemployment to drop .4 points (from 8.2 to 7.8) the economy would need to create roughly 500,000 new jobs. The Bureau of Labor Statistics own numbers claim only 114,000 new jobs were created.
To create 500,000 more jobs the nation would need at least a 5% GDP growth. The Obama Commerce Department says our anemic growth rate is only 1.4%. In order to maintain current employment numbers (to account for population growth), you need a 3% growth rate. We had a 1.5% growth rate and unemployment dropped from 8.2 to 7.8. What happened is that they didn’t count 1.1 million people who have stopped looking for work.
These people are discouraged and given up hope. They are probably on SSI disability, and are treated as if they don’t exist.
A link to Dr. Moody’s original articles appears below. It is very detailed and provides indepth arguments. We urge everyone to read it, and this is just a brief synopsis. Although the Massachusetts Healthcare Law is nicknamed “RomneyCare,” to be fair to Mitt Romney, the law was not shaped entirely according to his recommendations. For example, Governor Romney vetoed eight portions of RomneyCare to include an Employer Mandate, which were eventually all overridden by the a Democrat-dominant State Legislature. Also, from the day it was established in 2006, what has become of mandatory healthcare in Massachusetts is a function of what the present Governor and Legislature have made of it.
Nine Differences Between ObamaCare and RomneyCare
- 1) The bill called “ObamaCare” is 2070 pages long, and RomneyCare was only 70 pages in 2006. So there are 2,000 more pages of differences between ObamaCare and RomneyCare.
- 2) RomneyCare was uniquely designed for Massachusetts, but ObamaCare is a one-size-fits-all mandate imposed upon all states, regardless of each state’s needs and economic conditions.
- 3) ObamaCare expands the size and power of federal government beyond the “few and defined” powers delegated by the Constitution, thus diminishing State powers; in comparison, RomneyCare invokes “numerous and indefinite” powers to mandate that citizens be insured, thus preventing some from “gaming the system” — where free-riders were formerly getting government to pay for medical bills when they could afford to buy insurance in the first place.
- 4) One Trillion dollars is needed to fund ObamaCare — 500 Billion in higher taxes and 500 Billion borrowed from Medicare. In contrast, taxes were not increased to fund RomneyCare, nor were funds borrowed from Medicare.
- 5) RomneyCare was enacted only after Mitt Romney balanced the state budget; whereas, ObamaCare was enacted during a time when Barack Obama and a Democrat-dominant Congress didn’t even try to balance a budget and didn’t even propose a budget, but engaged in massive federal spending, unprecedented in the history of the United States.
- 6) RomneyCare is constitutional by virtue of the “numerous and indefinite” powers reserved to the States via the 10th Amendment to the Constitution; ObamaCare is unconstitutional because it overreaches the limited federal powers enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.
- 7) In a June 2011 GOP Presidential Debate sponsored by CNN, Mitt Romney said that “if people don’t like it in our state, they can change it.” In contrast, Barack Obama has consistently resisted the repeal of his healthcare bill, even when the majority of Americans want to repeal ObamaCare.
- 8) Mitt Romney passed Massachusetts Healthcare with bipartisan input and support; in comparison, Barack Obama imposed ObamaCare upon Fifty States using a partisan approach that largely excluded input from Republican Senators and Congressmen — andcontinues to exclude input from “We the People.”
- 9) While the majority of Americans don’t want Obama-Care, the majority of citizens in Massachusetts support RomneyCare. According to a 2011 survey by Harvard School of Public Health and The Boston Globe, 63% of Massachusetts residents support the 2006 health law, while 21% say they oppose it.
The orignal article is at: http://www.calldrmatt.com/Differences_Between_RomneyCare_and_ObamaCare.htm It should also be remembered that:
- Obamacare was unilateral. Romneycare was bipartisan.
- Obamacare = government insurance. Romneycare = private insurance.
- Obamacare = Costs $2 trillion over 10 years. Romneycare = Funded within the existing MA budget.
- Obamacare requires all businesses to issue an IRS Form 1099 whenever goods or services in excess of $600 are purchased. Romneycare had no such provision.
- Obamacare cut Medicare Advantage by $150 billion, forcing dozens of Medicare Advantage coverage providers to cut back vision, dental and prescription benefits. Romneycare did not.
- Obamacare required a 30% payment cut for Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Romneycare did not.
- Obamacare cut Medicare spending by $400 billion. Romneycare did not.
- Obamacare tax penalty for employers = $2000 per employee. Romneycare tax penalty for employers = $249 per employee. (a penalty which Gov. Romney opposed and vetoed, but his veto was overridden.)
Over 70 million people have been infected with HIV-AIDS, but only one has been cured. Thanks in large part to the generosity of the United States, over 8 million people world wide are now on life saving antiretroviral therapy.
1.7 million people died of an AIDS related illness last year. The International AIDS Society Conference is in Washington this week for the first time in 22 years, and Laura Bush will be speaking to the gathering.
AIDS prevention is a major focus for rockstar Elton John. He says the president who did the most for AIDS victims was George W. Bush: “He was an amazingly informed about AIDS. I had so much respect for him, especially when the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) was announced when he gave $15 billion to AIDS.
“He knew what he was talking about. One of the old adages in life is never judge someone until you meet them. I didn’t like his policies but I have to say when I met him, I found him well informed and determined to do something about the AIDS situation so I changed my opinion of him. I learned a lesson.”
The Bush initiative was largest amount of funding by any nation to fight a single disease. The major issue facing prevention efforts today is not a lack of technology or funding, but the social stigma associated with HIV, which deters individuals from accessing both education and treatment programs.
Bush was well known for his Freedom Agenda and says “One aspect of freedom is for people to be free from disease.” He has made three trips to Africa since leaving office.
In the rankings posted today, the liberal website Daily Kos predicts Pedro Rios (R) will win an open seat for the California State Assembly. Democrats are especially unpopular in the Central Valley because of stringent regulations which have restricted the water supply. The Daily Kos says it will be very difficult for a Democrat to overcome Rios’ 60 to 40 advantage.
This is a 69% Hispanic district and there are currently no Latino Republicans in the state legislature.
In 2010, the main accusation of Valley Democrats was that Republicans were anti-immigrant. They will have a hard time making that case against this year’s GOP nominee. Rios was born in Mexico and immigrated when he was nine years old. He has lived in Delano for the last 25 years.
Rios understands agriculture because along with his family, he’s picked grapes, pruned almonds, and cultivated tomatoes, squash, bell peppers and green peas. He graduated from California State University at Bakersfield, joined the Army National Guard, and was awarded the Army Achievement Medal.
From personal experience he knew his business idea would be a success, and he was correct. He established Rios Portable Toilets to provide restroom facilities for agricultural workers.
In 2000, he was elected to the Delano City Council (population 53,000), and went on to serve as Vice Mayor and Mayor. Delano is best known as the birthplace of the United Farm Workers, and it is still closely identified with the late labor leader Cesar Chavez. Chavez was a liberal on all fiscal issues but his union strongly advocated restricting immigration.
Rios has gone from farm worker to farm owner. He says “The American dream is still alive, but it is being hampered by the heavy hand of government, taxes and regulation. The once great state of California has been driven to the brink of failure.
“Businesses are leaving in droves and taxes are being raised. Higher taxes are not the answer. We must focus on decreasing the size and scope of government. Spending cuts should be made across the board. I do not support any new taxes, and I do not support Governor Brown’s tax proposal.”
He also has a strong anti-Obama message. The administration has had a major role in restricting water to the Central Valley and Rios says “We need water, not a $100 billion train. Water is the life-blood of our families’ future. It will be my number one job.”
Our quote of the day is from Tony Fratto. He previously served as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury and was later Deputy Assistant to President Bush and Principal Deputy Press Secretary.
This morning he said: “It’s shocking to me the number of people — especially college kids — who have learned all they know about economics from Ron Paul. They say ‘fiat currency’ like it’s a bad thing. Ron Paul is not some intellectual economic counterbalance to Paul Krugman.
“There are actual, serious economists who are. Basic macro and micro economics should be part of the core high school curriculum. It is more important and useful than a foreign language, biology and chemistry. Maybe we should get a group of economists on the left and the right to agree on a basic economics course for high school juniors, and then get schools to adopt it.
“I bet even Krugman, Taylor, Mankiw, Stiglitz and others could agree on a basic macro/micro principles and concepts curriculum.”
This photo is of the entire Bush Press office on September 14, 2007. It was taken on the late Tony Snow’s last day as Press Secretary. Fratto is standing next to Snow and behind the new Press Secretary, Dana Perino.
Snow resigned because of colon cancer and died on July 12, 2008 at age 53.
Our quote of the day is from former Speaker Newt Gingrich: “President Clinton and the Republican Congress created a bipartisan work oriented reform of welfare in 1996. Obama is single handedly destroying our work.”
The GOP Congress passed welfare reform but Clinton deserves credit for signing the measure in August of 1996, despite significant liberal opposition. Clinton’s approval rating at the beginning of the year was similar to Obama’s (46%), and the Gallup Poll had him losing to Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS) by 10% in late 1995.
Clinton’s approval rating jumped six points after his January 23, 1996 State of the Union address, and he received one of the largest ratings boosts in history. He did it by abandoning liberal policies of 1993/1994, such as Hillarycare.
Clinton received numerous standing ovations from the GOP during his address that year when he spoke of welfare reform and said “The era of big government is over.” He then went on to talk of a government that “lives within its means,” and asserting that “deficit spending must come to an end.”
Later in the speech he boasted that the “federal government today is the smallest it has been in 30 years.” Obama has never received a similar response from the GOP.
Doug Schoen who was Clinton’s 1996 pollster says “He had his own health-care and spending baggage, but he shed it by adopting an agenda that included a balanced budget, frank acknowledgment of the limits of government and welfare reform. Clinton would almost certainly have lost the 1996 election had he not taken that approach. Democrats would have suffered major losses in the 1998 midterm election had they not followed him.”
California has experienced large budget shortfalls for the last decade and today faces a $16 billion budget gap. Liberal Democrats are in complete control of the state.
As usual, their solution is increased taxes, regulations and more spending. As a result, businesses are continuing to flee the state. This week began their new fiscal year, and what did the California legislature do to address the financial crisis?
The lawmakers are still refusing to make meaningful budget cuts, but new spending is always fine with them. On Thursday, the State Senate passed a bill that would block local law enforcement from referring a detainee to immigration officials for deportation, unless that person has been convicted of a violent or serious felony. California will not be cooperating with federal immigration enforcement in this area. The so-called Trust Act will force local police to release individuals without conducting a thorough background check.
It lets dangerous people slip through the cracks. The Center for Immigration Studies says the Trust Act “benefits illegal aliens who are committing crimes. It makes it much harder for federal and local law enforcement agencies.
“The local law enforcement agency will not know what convictions are on a person’s record unless they hold them long enough for a DHS check.”
The same day, the State Assembly passed $8 billion in funding for high-speed rail and other projects, sending the bill back to the state Senate for final approval. Republicans are united in their opposition to the rail project.
The legislature has also approved “financial aid” for undocumented students, and they voted to reduce impoundment fees of vehicles driven by unlicensed drivers. This means the cost of driving with no insurance in California is greatly reduced.
In January they thought the deficit would be $9.2 billion, but it jumped to $16 billion as tax revenues declined. One reason is that business owners are fleeing the state. The tax base is shrinking, so lawmakers keep raising taxes on everyone else.
The top destinations for the California business departures are Texas, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and a tie for Utah and Florida. They are all right-to-work states, except Colorado. California has the second highest state unemployment rate in the country, and raising taxes on employers will not reduce the problem.