ObamaCare uncovered: even worse than you thought

In two short minutes, you can find out even more things than you’ve heard before about what’s wrong with ObamaCare. (And this doesn’t even cover it all, folks.) We knew it was bad – we knew it was really bad – but did we know it was this bad? I mean, seriously, $100-a-day fines for each employee? If this isn’t an extreme violation of personal, constitutional, and conscience rights, I don’t know what is.

Of course, we shouldn’t be surprised at all the things that can hide in a nearly 1,000 page law, with even more pages of regulations implementing that law. In 2011, John Vinci of NetRight Daily wrote (footnotes omitted):

If you thought that Obamacare was long, it is only a fraction of the length of the regulations.

Obamacare contains over 700 directives for HHS and other agencies to implement Obamacare.

We went through and counted all of the Obamacare regulation documents published so far. We found that the number of pages in regulations are already 114 percent as long as the number of pages in the Obamacare statutes! The statutes contain 961 pages compared to 1,093 pages of regulations … What is more telling is the word count comparison. The Obamacare statutes together contain 425,116 words. Compare that to 1,147,271 words published so far in Obamacare regulation documents. The regulations are 270 percent as long as the statute itself.

Alliance Defense Fund, the organization who created the video at the beginning of this article, has also designed an easily sharable collection of facts about ObamaCare. You can share the fact sheet with your friends on Facebook, Twitter, and more. ADF has done a well-researched job of explaining just what ObamaCare means to everyday Americans. And they reveal multiple hidden facts that must be brought to light.

For example:

Employees who don’t purchase ObamaCare will be fined up to 2.5% of their salary.

Some ObamaCare plans can take $ straight out of your paycheck and put it in an abortion-on-demand fund.

The U.S. Department of Labor reports that there are approximately 154,000,000 people in the U.S. labor force.  If only half of plans include the Abortion Premium, at only $1 per month, the yearly income into this fund would be $924,000,000.

On average, an abortion costs $450.  At the above rate, this fund could completely subsidize 2 million abortions per year.  Currently, there are 1.2 million abortions per year in the U.S.

The employee will discover that their plan contains an abortion premium either by seeking it out in the fine print once they have enrolled, or noticing the separate surcharge taken from their paycheck.

ADF provides sources for the claims made in its fact sheet. The facts are chilling, but they must be studied, understood, and broadcasted by every American. Clearly, President Obama has used ObamaCare as an avenue to give a committed Planned Parenthood associate and abortion advocate – HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius – free rein to impose conscience violations and abortion funding on millions of Americans who are pro-life or who simply do not desire to fund someone else’s abortion.

As ADF correctly states, “[f]orced purchase is usually called ‘coercion’ rather than ‘commerce.’”

Know the facts, and speak out, America.

  • bubbalouwee

    Our Lady of Fatima in 1917 requested prayers for the conversion of Russia, or Russia would spread their errors throughout the world.  It looks like Dictator Obama is following the cummunist manifesto and shoving it down our throats.  We need help from Jesus Christ to resist this massive corruption and be prepared to become martyrs if the opportunity arises to give our life.  St. Thomas Moore set an excellent example for us to follow.

  • Guest

    You all do realize that the whole idea of mandating individuals to purchase healthcare was started by Republicans, right? Most of those of us who identify as liberal aren’t actually all that happy with it since it doesn’t even include a public option…

    • Yes, but Republicans and conservatives never reached a consensus that it was the right thing to do. Also, their version of an individual mandate was very different: minimum catastrophic insurance to offset state-guaranteed emergency care, NOT the much more comprehensive and expensive general-use insurance where government decides what services providers must cover, which is what Obamacare does.

      • Charles

         Also, was it not a single conservative think tank’s proposal in response to a Democrat policy initiative? “If you’re set on doing it, we’d be happier, and it would make more sense if you take step X.” Hardly a party principle or advocated position.

    • Charles

      You do realize that the whole idea of mandates or single-payer (meaning single-decision maker) is to have sufficient power to influence change in society according to centrally-planned directives? Yes, of course, liberals would have preferred to impose their will through a single-payer system, but they are just as content to do so through mandating participation in their defining and regulating of health care.

    • Cool, then Obama and the Dems should have no problem killing this horrible “Republican” law then.  Let’s agree to scrap it now.  :)

    • Cool, then Obama and the Dems should have no problem killing this horrible “Republican” law then.  Let’s agree to scrap it now.  :)

    • Melissa

      Just because a republican might state that it’s good to eat meat, they don’t want you to shove bacon down a Jew.  Furthermore, most people on here might vote republican because of the huge loss of life that democrats advocate for (just see how sex selection abortions weren’t banned).  So just to say that one party or another did something, doesn’t mean anything to me.  There is a right, there is a wrong, and sometimes they are both wrong! 

  • Shaw198213
  • Oedipa

    After complaining about how long and tedious the law is, the only proof the ADF provides for their outrageous claims is — a link the law. And not a specific provision. You have to start out at page 1 and find it yourself.

    So I had to go find the reasoning myself. And guess what I found. It’s bunk.

    Politifact.com: “The claim that the Obama administration has issued rules for “$1
    abortions in ObamaCare” is ridiculous; the administration has simply set
    a floor for how much money per month of the premiums paid by those who
    have chosen plans that include abortion must be placed in a segregated
    account in order to make sure that there’s enough money available to pay
    for abortion services incurred by people enrolled in that plan.

    The bigger charge — that the Obama health care law “requires all
    persons enrolled in insurance plans that include elective abortion
    coverage to pay a separate premium from their own pockets to fund
    abortion” — is also incorrect.

    The provision in question only affects people who purchase insurance
    plans that cover abortion and who do so on the exchanges — a much
    narrower group than the claim suggests. And people who make such
    purchases will be paying their private dollars into abortion coverage
    accounts voluntarily. Despite some puzzling wording, ultimately the law
    allows for full disclosure of its abortion rules at the most obvious
    time, when someone is signing up for coverage. On balance, we rate this
    claim False”

    • Kristiburtonbrown

      You’re going to have to come up with more than a journalism source to claim that ADF’s arguments are false.  Politifact isn’t being completely honest in the way they word their argument, as can be expected from most media sources.  This $1 (or more) charge for abortion is not just charged to people who want abortion in their insurance plan.  It will be charged to anyone who chooses an insurance company who provides abortion for anyone in the plan.  
      For example, if United Healthcare would choose to include abortions in their coverage, and my employer gives UH as my only healthcare option, but I don’t want to cover abortion in MY insurance, I have to pay the charge anyway because I’m using an insurance company who covers abortions for those who do want it.  Politifact is pretty crazy to claim that the separate charge is voluntary.  It’s not.  

      And the “full disclosure” is buried in about 20 pages of wording when you sign up for insurance.  Tell me who reads through all that.  Finally, ADF most certainly did give specific provisions for their various claims.  How bout you read through their fact sheet again?  http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/Content/pdf/ObamaCare_and_its_Mandates_Fact_Sheet.pdf

      • Oedipa

        I did read through it. It was an outrageous laundry list of complaints which required some justification beyond taking you to page 1 of the 906 pages of “Obamacare”. I could develop a white paper, too, that says Obamacare requires me to eat 100 unicorns a year, then provide a link to page 1 and say “prove me wrong!” … because as everyone is eager to point out — the law is long and complicated.

        So, that said, I’d rather get the explanation from a “journalism source” (I don’t know how you manage to type that with such contempt. I can only assume you don’t care for what Karl Rove derisively called the “reality-based community”. Given LA’s journalistic cred I guess I shouldn’t be surprised) than an activist group who are prone to view it through their own politically expedient lens.

        But you’re apparently not reading the ADF fact sheet yourself, because they’re clear that their complaint about the $1 surcharge is exclusive to people buying insurance on exchanges (ie: the invidual market) where consumer choice will indeed be available. Your United Health Care anecdote, therefore, doesn’t apply.

        Lastly, the complicated nature of this provision is due directly to the complications the Hyde amendment creates. I assume you and ADF like the Hyde amendment. Rather, it’s just that you don’t like insurance covering covering abortions and I think that position is pretty well documented already.

        • Kristiburtonbrown

          Of course I don’t like insurance covering abortions because I don’t like abortions.  The absolute main issue, however, is that no one should be forced to pay for others’ abortions through their insurance.  And whether you want to claim it’s through the individual market or an employer (both of which are true), there will still be a lack of choice.  (I understand that the exchange market will be available to small businesses and their employees.)

          Consumers should not be forced to buy what they may consider a lower-quality health care plan because by choosing a different one, they will have to pay for someone else’s abortion.  This is the kind of thing that is very likely to happen.  Sure – a choice, maybe – but a very bad and unfair one.  In addition, there may be states where every insurance plan on the exchange covers abortion.  What kind of choice will that offer people like me who don’t want to pay for it?  If that’s your definition of choice, I’m not liking it… =)

          Oh yes…I’d like to point out that you inserted the word “exclusive” in ADF’s fact sheet.  They don’t state that. And you’re still being a bit silly about your claim that you are only directed to “page 1” of the law.  Again, ADF specifically lists the exact section you can check out to evaluate their claims.  And you can find an index to locate those sections of the law just after “page 1.”

      • Guest

        You’re going to have to come up with more than a journalism source to claim that ADF’s arguments are false.

        I suppose it’s unsurprising that a LiveAction blogger thinks a cartoon is more reliable than a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalistic site.  Let me guess–a bubble gum wrapper told you that the Pulitzer Board is in the pocket of Big Abortion?

        • Kristiburtonbrown

          I wouldn’t call that a cartoon.  It’s an informational video (that just so happens to be interesting), made by a very large legal organization that wins than three fourths of all cases litigated to a conclusion.  So yeah, on a matter of law, I think I’d trust them over a journalism site.

  • Guest

    This video is total propaganda, for being such upright Christians you guys do skew the truth quite a bit for your own ends.

    • Kristiburtonbrown

      And your basis for claiming that is???

  • Mitchbehna

    Plus, the CBO estimates that Obama’s healthcare stimulus will actually cost about $1.8T, not $787 billion and health premiums are also skyrocketing

  • Anonymous