ObamaCare Retrospective/Prospective (which culminated in the Press Release) – Part B

This next effort provides a “study guide” set of hyperlinks to prior digests related solely to ObamaCare; again, although uploads provided since June are replete with relevant hyperlinks—scattered about—this summary starts a fortnight ago, for most of the key-points detailed earlier [available on Scribd] have been recapitulated/reformulated in more recent “blasts.” [Nothing contradictory has been omitted, for—if nothing else—it seems that others (in D.C. and locally) finally have “heard” the two pleas herein.] The prolific nature of these efforts may mislead—and there are plenty of summaries on the Internet— but an overarching goal has been to eschew redundancy [often, by varying the format and graphics].
CXVI [ObamaCare - Action Plan] discussed the networking effort [local and national] being pursued, and it again noted the following-‘graph…which demonstrates what would constitute a winning-strategy:

HR 2009 [“Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act of 2013”] was passed by the House and could be appended to the CR covering the Treasury Department; HR 2300 [“Empowering Patients First”] could be appended to the CR covering the Health and Human Services Department; the remaining eight departments could then be amalgamated into one CR and passed [thereby envisioned to be passed by the Senate and signed by the POTUS]. In this fashion, the GOP would not be portrayed as the “Party of ‘NO!’ ” because it would have adopted [and funded] its alternative-plan, and the GOP would not be portrayed as having “shut down government” because it would have upheld its duties [per the Constitution, Article I, Section 7] to originate government-funding bills.
CXVIII [ObamaCare] warned Mike of what specifically was imminent [“The status of the ObamaCare

defunding effort is both unsettled and energized; as per last night’s summary, all TEA Party Movement groups in Bucks County will meet on Tuesday to decide whether to confront Congressman Fitzpatrick with the “if you fund it, you own it” ultimatum.”], because there was no plan to “keep secrets.” Also,
political import was explored [albeit not in-depth], with the goal being to provide myriad hyperlinks. CXXI [ObamaCare] distilled key-information regarding the “politics” of ObamaCare Defunding [reviewing

the difference between Graves/Meadows]; national import of this effort was documented, along with enhanced dismay that the GOP-leadership hadn’t honored the thrust of what Conservatives wanted.
CXXII [ObamaCare] consolidated pages of bullet-points detailing overwhelming evidence of how VERY problematic this legislation has been; this and the prior note were delivered by Dave Summers to Mike, and notable was this climactic-’graph from one of the participants in that night’s meeting [which constituted a “minyan”…10 people involved…8 present and two by speaker-‘phone]:

My last point is this: What we're doing on Tuesday and with the follow-up Press Release is probably going to cause a lot of consternation throughout the 8th CD and perhaps all of Pennsylvania. Everyone that knows {us} knows how much we like Fitzpatrick, so having our names attached to this Press Release is going to make a lot of jaws drop and a lot of eyes go wide! :) We're ready for whatever may come and if it makes Mike Fitzpatrick rethink his positions and get with the program, we've done our job! {Concur.}
CXXIII [ObamaCare Resolution] was generated after the meeting and contained the rough-version of what would become the first Press Release; it was “translated” into “English” by another individual.

CXXIV [ObamaCare] contained hyperlinks that were generally chosen to refute any lingering concerns [aired during the prior night’s two-hour discussion]; political forces were not ignored in the process. CXXV [ObamaCare] contained the formal text of the Resolution that was adopted after it was clear that no meeting would transpire with Mike; that issuance of the Press Release triggered a sudden-reversal reflected, in our view, its impact, for Mike could no longer depend upon any type of automaticity from those who were true-conservatives [reflecting, candidly, growing concerns regarding other issues, too]. CXXVI [ObamaCare - Press Release] contained the Press Release [to which Jaime was added after she had been contacted]; a graphic labeled any funding of ObamaCare as “BoehnerCare”…and some may suggest that—if Mike doesn’t match words/deed—the local appellation could become “FitzCare.” CXXVII [GOP & Base & TEA Party Movement] probed the philosophical forces-at-play, particularly as to the need for libertarian policies to attract youth; these observations were then linked to ObamaCare. CXXVIII [ObamaCare - Distillation of Updated-Status & Action-Items] recapitulated and linked the local efforts with the national legislation; this was intended to be circulated as a succinct summary of the salient features of what had been accomplished…as a formal reaction from Mike was eagerly awaited. CXXXI [ObamaCare] summarized what transpired during the Wilmington Rally (and how Rafael Cruz spoke both @ the beginning/end, certainly “stealing the show”), and a full-length article by Brent Bozell was provided, inasmuch as it touched-upon each of the major arguments made via Heritage Action; recognized was that he had been traveling with Mary Beth Martin [representing Tea Party Patriots]. CXXXV [Syria & ObamaCare] updated the rhetoric [and the interactions regarding] these two issues. CXLI [Defund ObamaCare - Press Release] distilled the second Press Release, to receive dissemination [local and national] which is to be followed-up on Monday by ‘phone-calls to each/every recipient thereof [unless Mike announces he will co-sponsor the Joint Resolution submitted by Rep. Graves].

* Following dissemination of these data, a core-group of individuals [and others who were “blinded”]…
To: 'mikefitzpatrickpa08'; aaron.clark@mail.house.gov; 'Athan Koutsiouroumbas'; 'Athan Koutsiouroumbas' Cc: 'Diana'; 'Jaime Faucette'; 'Rob Boysen'; 'Dave Sommers'; 'don reimer'; 'Linda Rosen'; 'Lil Boysen'; 'anastasia prz'; 'diana reimer'; bobguzzardi@bobguzzardi.com; 'Mike Henry'; leo@empowerpa.org; chuffman@freedomworks.org; bobguzzardi@bobguzzardi.com; jdeefaucette@gmail.com; cecilia@americanmajority.org; uspatriot741776@yahoo.com; rafaelbcruz@aol.com; colin@lfrusa.com; 'PhilaTeaPartyPatriots EastMontco'; jld209@hotmail.com; joe.murray@mail.house.gov; john.maniscalco@mail.house.gov; katie.bloodgood@mail.house.gov

…received a series of e-mails that provided “informed consent” regarding what had been motivating this physician to push this issue [rather than to allow a more leisurely communications-approach to occur]; excerpted was a memo composed a month ago [a copy of which can be provided upon-request]. It is necessary to explain what I have done during the past 24-hours…and why; although the prior Press Release was—in many respects—intended primarily for internal consumption [and it worked, to a degree, noting that appointment-time on Thursday-

p.m. suddenly sprung-up], this one has been disseminated to all the major local/national outlets I could conjure. Specifically, it was sent to 3/6/10, Fox local/national, NYT/WSJ, Rush/Hannity, Intelligencer/Courier-Post [plus to each columnist], Inqy; follow-up ‘phone calls will be placed Monday-a.m. until/unless we are informed of any alteration of policy. THIS IS AN EMERGENCY, for Mike’s quotes [wants to defund, doesn’t want government shut-down] are explicitly satisfied by the Graves-JR; this assertion can be vetted by review of its complete text, which has been appended. If the risk of government-shutdown is compared/contrasted with the tectonic-shift to transpire after ObamaCare is implemented, one wonders why ANYONE would hesitate to “choose wisely.” Indeed, the metaphor that appears applicable is an announcement @ takeoff that repairs to known-faults in the entire flight-plan [and aircraft] are to be made in mid-air…and that no one in the cockpit knows how to land the plane [think “911”]. There is no tomorrow [not immigration, not debt-ceiling, not ‘14]. Mike has to dig-deep, and he must toss-aside all remaining rationalizations [such as Toomey’s “well, it only funds ~15% of the total program next year”…which ignores the fact that this constitutes the “command/control” of the entire intrusion upon personal rights/responsibilities]. * I maxed-out for his initial campaign, despite the fact that I’m not monied and live in MontCo, and I have tracked every public-event he has held since then [whenever informed, including all debates, which I then summarized in memo-form and submitted thereafter]. I was “seething” a fortnight ago, and my feelings have been magnified since then. Here’s why. You have appended the complete memo of precisely a month ago, in which I issued a simple-request; if you submit a bill, you must be able to acquire a fiscal-note regarding its budgetary-impact [placing ONE ‘phone call to the Legislative Reference Bureau, a technique I learned two decades ago when working with Jon David Fox, Exq.]. I asked “nicely” for this to be accomplished but, guess what…[Crickets]. Here is the relevant excerpt from that memo:

Sixth, I was told Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick dropped a bill “HB
2165” that was intended to function in-reverse (vide infra) but, in this

instance, could provide a vehicle to help the Republicans resolve this conflict (absent the necessity for anyone to “eat their words”); specifically, “http://thomas.loc.gov/cgibin/query/F?c113:1:./temp/~c1136BfHp2:e1692:” hyperlinks to the bill, and here is the associated press-release from Mike’s website: http://fitzpatrick.house.gov/press-release/fitzpatrick-heckintroduce-replacement-health-care-legislation

FITZPATRICK, HECK INTRODUCE REPLACEMENT HEALTH CARE LEGISLATION Bill keeps consumer protections in event of health care law repeal {May 25, 2013 Issues: Health} LANGHORNE, PA - In an effort to provide businesses and families with greater certainty regarding the implementation of the President’s healthcare law, Congressmen Joe Heck (NV-3) and Mike Fitzpatrick (PA8) introduced legislation today that would maintain several popular consumer protections in the law in the event of a full repeal of the healthcare bill. "The health care law is the law of the land, but there are still many issues surrounding the law's cost, implementation, and enforcement that give me reason to believe the law could still be targeted for a repeal," Rep. Heck said. "In the event of repeal, we must ensure that the important consumer protections and options for individuals without insurance in the law are maintained and this legislation does that. As the health care debate continues both Heck and Fitzpatrick agree that while there are some good portions of the law that should remain in place, the law itself should be replaced with more common sense, patient-centered reforms that will actually decrease costs and increase access to care. “This bill gives us a practical way to keep the popular parts of the Affordable Care Act while Congress finds a solution to fix the unpopular parts that have many Americans deeply concerned," said Fitzpatrick. The Heck/Fitzpatrick bill would keep in-place the following provisions in the event of a full repeal of the health care law:

Provide individuals with pre-existing conditions the opportunity to purchase affordable health insurance coverage,  Give Americans who currently have health insurance the guaranteed ability to renew policies that work best for them,  Place prohibitions on rescissions to ensure that patients who have paid their premiums can count on their policy coming through when they get sick,  Establish a limited grant program to give states the ability to work with insurers to develop targeted solutions to address the needs of high-risk populations, and  Give families flexibility by extending dependent coverage to age 26, with reasonable limitations to prevent abuse. ### Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick is serving his third term in the U.S. House of Representatives. He represents Pennsylvania’s 8th district which

includes all of Bucks County as well as a portion of Montgomery County. He serves as the Vice Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. Congressman Joe Heck represents Nevada’s 3rd district.

THEREFORE… It is desirable to affix a “Fiscal Note” to this already-extant proposal and, specifically, to let it be reviewed by “No Labels” [if, indeed, it is to serve as a bridge -builder, @ crunch-time]; OBVIOUSLY, I am “thinking aloud” absent all input y’all have to strategize-maximally.
I hadn’t pushed this facet of the problem until now, but time-is-tight. I don’t care if Mike feels pressured, for I’m told at least one person “close” to him personally [for decdes] views this Resolution as being “subdued.” Therefore, noting that NO ONE called me back ALL DAY yesterday [despite numerous e-mails/calls], I would hope that SOMEONE will provide a “reply-all” reaction to this e-mail…which I’ll then disseminate. THERE ARE NO MORE EXCUSES. IF MIKE IS A MAN OF HIS WORD, HE MUST SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION…AND ANNOUNCE THAT FACT A.S.A.P. This has nothing to do with signing a pledge; it has everything to do with matching rhetoric/deeds. * In many respects, I feel gratified that a fervent effort that started six weeks ago to convince anyone/everyone to split the CR suddenly emerged three days ago, even if via a devious gambit. Yet, if the ambit of what Boehner/Cantor attempted to do was issued in good-faith, then ALL THEY HAVE TO DO is to abide by what I succinctly summarized: HR 2009 [“Keep the IRS Off Your Health Care Act of 2013”] was passed by the House and could be appended to the CR covering the Treasury Department; HR 2300 [“Empowering Patients First”] could be appended to the CR covering the Health and Human Services Department; the remaining eight departments could then be amalgamated into one CR and passed [thereby envisioned to be passed by the Senate and signed by the POTUS]. In this fashion, the GOP would not be portrayed as the “Party of ‘NO!’ ” because it would have adopted [and funded] its alternative-plan, and the GOP would not be portrayed as having “shut down government” because it would have upheld its duties [per the Constitution, Article I, Section 7] to originate government-funding bills. Here, specifically, they need only remove the redundancy of funding ObamaCare in the “mother”-CR…for it’s already in the separate entity…and then PASS THIS CLEAN BILL unscathed [for the Senate would have to pass it, and the POTUS would have to sign it]; we can then deal with the rest [now, a focused-intervention], having denuded their arguments [the D’s and the compliant-media]. We can then stand-pat until they stop this monstrosity [which, oh by the way, should be an effort joined by the unions, for they now discover us as “strange bedfellows”].

This provoked—within minutes—an exchange which is recounted precisely as it transpired, for it again reflects the intrusion of reticence rather than recognition that forthrightness is absolutely necessary: I just received the following reply [printed in-tact], which merits a focused reaction: Listen guys, obamacare (as of march2010) is an entitlement just like welfare or medicaid or SSDisability or Social Security. Tragically it was passed into law. It is not yet an IMPLEMENTED “entitlement” and, thus, is NOT “just like welfare or medicaid or SSDisability or Social Security.” And just like you can't eliminate unnecessary welfare or Medicaid or social security by saying we're not going to fund it .... you cant stop Obamacare by saying we're not going to fund it. Yes you can; items are not uncommonly passed but not appropriated. Obamacare was made law because a law was passed. It can only be stopped by passing another law ... not some vague appropriations that says we're only giving you 85% of money needed to fund that law. It can be stopped EITHER by repeal/replace OR by not “feeding the beast”; the latter would not be “some vague appropriations that says we're only giving you 85% of money needed to fund that law” because, if you read the text, you will note it is specific/air-tight. Ask yourself why. I have, many times, perhaps guilty only of over-thinking strategy [but gratified that Boehner/Cantor have “caught-up”…even if inadvertently…with where I was preaching this effort should go, starting in the beginning of August. How would the govt differentiale between people that legitimately need medicaid and the ones that would be getting Obamacare medicaid?? It can't be done thru funding. Your concern is addressed on the state-level [not federal], as Corbett will [unfortunately] evince on Monday-a.m. [with appropriate legislation differentiating, for example Medicaid/CHIP]. Do you want to totally eliminate Medicaid?

Nope, and this is not at-issue [as per the SCOTUS decision of 14 months ago]. This game of appropriation chicken will only damage good and decent conservatives when legitimate SS recipients get raging mad when they get tossed out onto the streets along with obamacare recipients. It will damage people who are not true-conservatives, and they must withstand whatever transpires [particularly if the only departments that are shut-down are Treasury/HHS, for SS/Medicare would be funded separately]; as Cruz says, we must “win the argument” and we must remember, “don’t blink.” The minute the govt stops - and it will - the story switches from "Hey Obamacare Really Stinks" to "Hey Conservative Republicans Stink cause they demanded we pass legislation that shut down government". No, if my approach is adopted, everything else is funded and the D’s/media can’t envision such a catastrophe; meanwhile, EVERYONE is discovering how much a DISASTER this portends [particularly with regard to personal/privacy concerns, which I’ll “blast” in a future e-mail…time permitting]. Govt shutdown will make you feel good for about two minutes ... and then there will be civil war among both conservatives and Republicans as constituents begin to freak out No, a shut-down won’t “make you feel good” for ANY period of time, but there are many hurdles that must be hopped before that prospect truly looms…and, if it triggers “civil war among both conservatives and Republicans,” then some would argue this has been long-overdue [noting how the conservatives have consistently been dissed during the past three years]; meanwhile, if “constituents begin to freak out,” they will need to be educated regarding the true dybbuk [namely, the guy whose approval-rating is sinking below 30%]. Like I said, you can't stop an entitlement with a vague "lets defund it" bill. “Yes we can” and we WILL; BTW, a patient to whom I just gave chemo-Rx reminded me to call O’Reilly [and I’ll call the WaPo, as well]; indeed, if this were such an impossible task, why would it have engendered such an explosion from the establishmentGOP {including, today, David Brooks}.

Stopping Obamacare will take a bill that sets out the parameters of who specifically can get what if uninsured (re: medicaid).. and when ... and how much. Nope; we would simply maintain the status quo until/if further legislation is passed/appropriated; indeed, this is actually partially correct, for these “parameters” are actually best implemented [as they have been] on the STATE level [as per “federalism”]. That's how it was passed and we need specifics to unpass it. This legislation is plenty-specific, and GOOD reasons must be promulgated to justify rejecting it. BTW, the patient I just treated [who has read the prior memos] reports she saw a picture of St. Raphael in a store last week, and learned that he one of the three Guardian Angels, whose focus is on healing [both of healers and of the sick]. This is of-interest, noting that Ted’s father shares this name, and this is a thought for those who will be attending Church tomorrow. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael_(archangel) Afterthoughts were provided, as well: I also sent it to Sy Snyder [PoliticsPA] and Tony Phyrillis [Pottstown Mercury]; anyone who interviews me will receive a commentary themed solely on “tough-love.” I will then pivot ASAP to requesting that each of the signatories be contacted, for there are no hangers-on, here; each individual is “hot” and knowledgeable. I recognize the issue of “trust” that will be entailed by this activity [absent “threats”], but I have anted-up and have filled the pot to the “House-limit.” There is absolutely no excuse for inaction…or for consultation with D.C.-colleagues…or for awaiting acquisition of further data as to what ObamaCare portends. MIKE, do the RIGHT THING…and do it IMMEDIATELY…and don’t worry about whether Boehner gets upset…and LEAD your constituents… and CHAMPION the GOP!!! * Moreover…regarding the 15% vs. 85% issue…remember that Obama has been collecting taxes for years, monies that, if not wasted [remember, those who wish subsidies don’t have to prove it…and there is no mechanism to fact-check] can be directed towards paying-down the deficit!

* AND ANOTHER THING: It is a source of considerable dismay that the David Walker presentation of “No Labels” served to squish-out an extended discussion via a Town Hall mechanism. This did not forestall this “grass doesn’t grow underfoot” effort that emerged regardless, as obfuscatory claims [reprinted anonymously] have been battedaway. As will be detailed in the upcoming “blast” e-mail, it is clear that the “micro” events in Bucks County mirror the “macro” events nationally…including what the GOPEstablishment warns is a potential civil-war between those who appear to benefit from the TEA [“Taxed Enough Already”] Party Movement and those who serve as the “base” [without which Boehner wouldn’t be Speaker]. Here is the intro to what is being compiled [which remains otherwise in its infancy, even @ 12:45 a.m.]: {omitted here, because it appears atop the prior “blast”} For obvious reasons, it is necessary to “inspire” y’all to ponder these acute-concerns ASAP…as an attempt is made to organize an explosion of hyperlinks to unnerving data. At this point, having been compelled to “go public” with a “taste” of prior efforts to rectify matters, this physician is manifesting two phenomena, private and public. Regarding the former, it wasn’t fun being ignored, as documented throughout, from when warning-shots were increasingly being emitted [to Athan] to when no-one called back prior to the issuance of the Press Release yesterday [despite ‘phone calls to D.C./Langhorne and time-sensitive e-mails]; regarding the latter, despite having listened carefully, scoured the Internet, and reviewing individualized reactions, it has not been possible to detect any cogent argument that would justify NOT defunding while ensuring the rest of government were funded. There is no apology necessary, therefore, for having discharged this barrage, notwithstanding the rest of his good-work [e.g., fitzpatrick-pushes-recognition-of autism-care-givers]; although he may emotionally feel abandoned, he must grow to realize that his true-friends are watching over him, and attempting to guide him towards saving America from the infidels.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful