Thank you AAPS members for taking the individual American's rights to Federal District Court.
My purpose is to increase awareness of the severe degradation of both our Declaration of Independence (Location of American Principles) and Constitution (Location of Rules) which are designed to protect each individual from a too large Federal government the Founders knew -full well- would occur as the watch-dog of overlap between three Branches of gov. are removed because the actual effect of the 'Patient Protection and Affordable Act (PPAA) is to allow OneBranch of Gov. - the Executive- MONEY, as 6% of GNP with excessive taxing-fines; and POWER - ability through unelected bureucrats HHS, cabinet members Treasury/IRS, Homeland Security TO DETERMINE BOTH THE COST AND THE REIMBURSEMENT FOR 100% of the entire Field of Medicine with resources of any company having any relationship to medicine. Now, in your letter, Executive B. will take, in taxes back to the Exec.B., then reimburse to the private insurance companies as long as they obey the regulation regarding pre-existing conditions, health coverage for employees, taxes (don't forget the subsidies hosp. drug, ins. have given to Obama way back in 5-6/09!). The Exec.B. has a major role in 'conflict of interest' were they a private company doing business! Also, there is one comment-supporter of
Obamahealth who probably counts among millions of Americans, who do not know that the Exec. B. "high risk patients" = "pre-existing cond." that instead of ins. co. protecting each member of the pvt. ins. co., protected against the high-cost patient care needs - the Execu.B. will use taxpayer, robbing Peter to Pay Paul, borrowing from biggest loaners China and Japan, and down-right manipulation of who gets what care, when and how much of what treatment---The old "He who owns the money, owns the power of decision" regarding dollars use...or not, to fund this Horrendous Act. Remember, this "gp. of irresponsible utilizers of other people's money-Administration" does believe that earning money with hard work and all the risk - ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THE REWARDS OF >$250,000 OF THE WORK REWARDS and 5% IS REDISTRIBUTED TO THOSE WHO DON'T EARN OR DON'T HAVE ADEQUATE MONEY DEFINED BY THIS SOCIALIST ADMINISTRATION! Never the intent of any Founder involved in the purpose of either of the 2 Unique in Human History Documents.
There are two other invasions of Executive Branch (le
gislative) are 1) Failure to recognize that Corporations, Businesses (including Physician groups & insurance companies) are Individuals in Law. Therefore, the same rights of indivdual patients are Business-Corp. rights. No insurance company has been 'charged with any crime'; but their rights to safety of person, propterty, home, effects is the same and the Vth Amendment also takes hold.
2) No-where in either of the Two Docs. are the size, power, regulation rights of non-elected individuals allowed - including the original Medicare Legislation which was designed for Only The Group of Individuals Who Would Not Otherwise be eligible for assistance. George III was not, per se, a Socialist, but he was an excellent example of the 29 reasons to separate from Eng. Obama can claim at least of of the prohibitions: including property removed as 'fines' without appeal and unreasonable since the only reason for the fine is to redistribute money from healthy individuals to the more chronically ill!
This PPAA is the most insulting and worstr denegration of both the Declaration and Constitution in the history of the United States. The Money and Power is not allowed in any Branch of Federal level of government - much less the Executive B who knows exactly what he has perpatrated against the Republic of the United States and makes no apology let alone responsibility. He believes his election allows changing the Constitution! He is wrong! How the Federal District Court behaves in your suite on individuals and your own behalf will be watched by We the People of the United States --- never the party! Republicans are singled out because they do know the violations!
Doctors Sue to Overturn the Health Care Bill
March 29th, 2010 The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) became the first medical society to sue to overturn the newly enacted health care bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). AAPS sued Friday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (AAPS v. Sebelius et al.).
“If the PPACA goes unchallenged, then it spells the end of freedom in medicine as we know it,” observed Jane Orient, M.D., the Executive Director of AAPS. “Courts should not allow this massive intrusion into the practice of medicine and the rights of patients.”
“There will be a dire shortage of physicians if the PPACA becomes effective and is not overturned by the courts.”
The PPACA requires most Americans to buy government-approved insurance starting in 2014, or face stiff penalties. Insurance company executives will be enriched by this requirement, but it violates the Fifth Amendment protection against the government forcing one person to pay cash to another. AAPS is the first to assert this important constitutional claim.
The PPACA also violates the Tenth Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the provisions authorizing taxation. The Taxing and Spending power cannot be invoked, as the premiums go to private insurance companies. The traditional sovereignty of the States over the practice of medicine is destroyed by the PPACA.
AAPS notes that in scoring the proposal the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) was bound by assumptions imposed by Congress, including the ability to “save” $500 billion in Medicare, and to redirect $50 billion from Social Security. HHS Secretary Sebelius stated that PPACA would reduce the federal deficit, knowing the opposite to be true if these assumptions are unrealistic.
AAPS asks the Court to enjoin the government from promulgating or enforcing insurance mandates and require HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue to provide the Court with an accounting of Medicare and Social Security solvency.
Congress recognized that PPACA cannot be funded without the insurance mandates, and will become unenforceable without them.
Court action is necessary “to preserve individual liberty” and “to prevent PPACA from bankrupting the United States generally and Medicare and Social Security specifically,” AAPS stated.
AAPS is a voice for patient and physician independence since 1943. The complaint and more information about the suit are posted at http://www.aapsonline.org/hhslawsuit
This entry was posted on Monday, March 29th, 2010 at 11:54 am and is filed under AAPS v Sebelius. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own issue to overturn the newly enacted health care bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). AAPS sued Friday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (AAPS v. Sebelius et al.).
“If the PPACA goes unchallenged, then it spells the end of freedom in medicine as we know it,” observed Jane Orient, M.D., the Executive Director of AAPS. “Courts should not allow this massive intrusion into the practice of medicine and the rights of patients.”
“There will be a dire shortage of physicians if the PPACA becomes effective and is not overturned by the courts.”
The PPACA requires most Americans to buy government-approved insurance starting in 2014, or face stiff penalties. Insurance company executives will be enriched by this requirement, but it violates the Fifth Amendment protection against the government forcing one person to pay cash to another. AAPS is the first to assert this important constitutional claim.
The PPACA also violates the Tenth Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the provisions authorizing taxation. The Taxing and Spending power cannot be invoked, as the premiums go to private insurance companies. The traditional sovereignty of the States over the practice of medicine is destroyed by the PPACA.
AAPS notes that in scoring the proposal the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) was bound by assumptions imposed by Congress, including the ability to “save” $500 billion in Medicare, and to redirect $50 billion from Social Security. HHS Secretary Sebelius stated that PPACA would reduce the federal deficit, knowing the opposite to be true if these assumptions are unrealistic.
AAPS asks the Court to enjoin the government from promulgating or enforcing insurance mandates and require HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue to provide the Court with an accounting of Medicare and Social Security solvency.
Congress recognized that PPACA cannot be funded without the insurance mandates, and will become unenforceable without them.
Court action is necessary “to preserve individual liberty” and “to prevent PPACA from bankrupting the United States generally and Medicare and Social Security specifically,” AAPS stated.
AAPS is a voice for patient and physician independence since 1943. The complaint and more information about the suit are posted at http://www.aapsonline.org/hhslawsuit
This entry was posted on Monday, March 29th, 2010 at 11:54 am and is filed under AAPS v Sebelius. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own
No comments:
Post a Comment