Cap & Trade affects selling your home
This really should get more publicity. The short story is, a year after “cap & trade” passes, you won’t be able to sell your home without an “energy audit” – which will most likely require you to make major improvements.
Home Sellers Beware. Having a hard time selling your home? Here’s one more hurdle to jump: all homes sales are conditioned upon an energy audit and a new energy rating assessment and energy labeling program for your home that’s outlined in the Democrats’ bill.
And if you thought you could improve your property with a fresh coat of paint and some granite counters? Think again! Now your home will be subjected to a new energy rating assessment and energy labeling program that will penalize you for older windows, original fixtures, and dated appliances. So the Democrats’ bill would bring down the value of your home!
And forget about having any of those nasty old incandescent lightbulbs.
Here’s a California Real Estate site:
This new provision would take place at “point of sale”, meaning before your home transaction could close you would be required to have an energy audit performed. Similar in nature to a general home inspection, an energy audit would look at the energy inefficiencies of your property. Minimum guidelines would probably be developed to determine pass or fail, and then the appropriate repairs or updates would have to be performed to bring your home up to standards.
Just like a “smog check” for your car. Check the photo captioned “An Energy Rater conducts an air leakage test by blowing air through the house.”
A newspaper from South Dakota, Dakota Voice:
Today CNS News reports (and it seems the page total is up to 1,400 from the 1,200 I knew about) says these environmental extremists may force you to spend thousands of dollars to “retrofit” your home to greenie standards before you can sell it:
One site implies that this part of the program isn’t madatory:
Housing Wire: Financial News for the Mortgage Market
A section in HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which narrowly passed a US House of Representatives vote Friday, falls short of mandating an energy audit on homes, according to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
. . . .
…the performance labeling program is a consumer right-to-know provision in the cap-and-trade bill, but it is not required, according to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
When thinking about what the government is likely to do, the prudent man will always assume the worst.
The Road Ahead
Guest Editorial Dec 23 2009 Thurs
by Zoge
Last minute reminder on Dec. 23, 2009.
Those who are placing the US under an unwanted socialist style medical system while ignoring those they represent are legally elected and legally holding offices and using the powers legally assigned to those offices to do so.
People in offices with powers many times take even more power until someone stops them.
Who is willing to offer their time and the necessary work to campaign to elect someone else in the next three national elections?
In 2010 to unseat those who voted to leave themselves out of a health care system that they want for everyone else. This could balance representation between two parties again. Representatives would be pitted against the Administration for two years.
In 2012 to vote in an Administration which reflects the freedoms most people want and to vote in more Representatives who value representing those who value their freedoms.
In 2014 to be sure to have enough of those who like to represent the people rather than to rule the people of the US elected to office.
In 2016 to maintain a two party system and representatives and an administration that values representing the people rather than attempting to rule them.
Devotion of time and amount of work doing what is necessary to get people voted in a lot easier than what our forefathers and foremothers faced in 1776.
This would still take one’s time with a devotion to achieving the long range goal.
Who and how many would pay the price of time and work ?
The Immortal Reid Bill
Not only do they vote on this thing in the middle of the night, they’ve included a provision that makes a part of the bill absolutely irrevocable by any future Congress.
This is reported in The Weekly Standard. The article quotes Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.):
… there’s one provision that i found particularly troubling and it’s under section c, titled “limitations on changes to this subsection.”
and i quote — “it shall not be in order in the senate or the house of representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.
Here’s a link to the bill, and here’s the wording:
‘‘(3) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, or amendment, pursuant to this subsection or conference report thereon, that fails to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).
‘‘(B) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS IN OTHER LEGISLATION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report (other than pursuant to this section) that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the Board if that change would fail to satisfy the requirements of subparagraphs (A)(i) and (C) of subsection (c)(2).
‘‘(C) LIMITATION ON CHANGES TO THIS SUBSECTION.—It shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.
‘‘(D) WAIVER.—This paragraph may be waived or suspended in the Senate only by the affirmative vote of three-fifths of the Members, duly chosen and sworn.”
When it talks about “… that would repeal or otherwise change the recommendations of the Board …”, they’re taking about the Independent Medical Advisory Board. Back to the Bill:
‘‘INDEPENDENT MEDICARE ADVISORY BOARD
‘SEC. 1899A. (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established an independent board to be known as the ‘Independent Medicare Advisory Board’.
‘‘(b) PURPOSE.—It is the purpose of this section to, in accordance with the following provisions of this section, reduce the per capita rate of growth in Medicare spending—
Here are the next paragraphs, summarized:
“… Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services … to determine … the projected per capita growth rate under Medicare … [and] … if the projection … exceeds the target growth rate … by requiring the Board to develop … a proposal containing recommendations to reduce the Medicare per capita growth rate …”
In other words, we’ve got to cut costs, you’ll just have to wait until 2025 for your heart bypass operation.
“… the proposal shall include recommendations so that the proposal as a whole … will result in a net reduction in total Medicare program spending … “
This is followed by
The proposal shall not include any recommendation to ration health care, raise revenues or Medicare beneficiary premiums …, increase Medicare beneficiary costsharing (including deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments), or otherwise restrict benefits or modify eligibility criteria.
Maybe there are financial magicians (in the old Merlin sense – perhaps the “Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services” is such a man) who can cut costs and expenses while at the same time not increasing any fees or reducing or restricting services.
But I have serious doubts that any of them are anywhere near the centers of power in Washington.
Senate votes in the middle of the night
When things you’re doing don’t stand up to the light of day, do them in the dark of night. Underground. With nobody watching.
At 1 a.m., the Senate held a vote for the Reid amendment to the health-care bill.
By the way, when the 1 a.m. vote took place, the Reid Amendment had been public for about 36 hours, and the public had not had a single business day to examine it. “Make no mistake,” said Minority Leader Mitch McConnell a few minutes before the vote. “If the people who wrote this bill were proud of it, they wouldn’t be forcing this vote in the dead of night.”
Getting holdout Senators to vote for it has been expensive:
Health bill money for hospital
A $100 million item for construction of a university hospital was inserted in the Senate health care bill at the request of Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., who faces a difficult re-election campaign, his office said Sunday night.
As part of the deal to win Nelson’s support, the federal government will pay for Nebraska’s new Medicaid recipients. It’s a provision worth about $45 million over the first decade.
Louisiana’s Senator Mary Landrieu got a $300 million increase for Medicaid concessions.
On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.”
The section spends two pages defining which “states” would qualify, saying, among other things, that it would be states that “during the preceding 7 fiscal years” have been declared a “major disaster area.”
I am told the section applies to exactly one state: Louisiana, the home of moderate Democrat Mary Landrieu, who has been playing hard to get on the health care bill.
That article says “$100 million”, but somehow, over time (a week or so), it has grown to about $300 million
Vermont’s Bernie Sanders got about $10 billion for community health centers – after he changed his mind from opposition to support.
Hawaii for the Hawaiians?
There’s a bill in the Senate that would segregate ethnic Hawaiian people and public lands from the state of Hawaii. It’s known as “Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009″.
Senator Akaka (D-HI) has been trying to get this through since 2000.
According to the Wall Street Journal, in an editorial titled Aloha, Segregation:
… the bill would transfer a percentage of public-owned lands to a native Hawaiian government within the state of Hawaii. The legislation would collect some 400,000 ethnic Hawaiians scattered across the country into a newly affiliated tribe, eventually endowed with the powers of a sovereign state, including freedom from state taxes and regulations and separate police power.
…
Under the Akaka bill, someone will have to divine exactly who qualifies as a Native Hawaiian. In the bill’s current version, the determination would be handled by a nine member commission staffed by experts in native Hawaiian genealogy.
That, says the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, amounts to racial discrimination and would “subdivide the American People into discrete subgroups accorded varying degrees of privilege.”
There’s a lot of resistance to the bill, even from the Hawaiians:
There have been many shady dealings with Senators Akaka and Inouye lately. So far the Akaka Bill is unavailable to the public until sometime next week after mark ups.
That seems very shady.
. . .
Obama and Akaka are revving to set us upDespite Hawaiians voicing their opposition to the Akaka Bill they continue to try to set up a trust relationship between Hawaiians and the federal government without the consent of Hawaiians.
There’s more to this issue – we’ll post more, later.
The Democrats’ true colors: Red
The health-care bill died in the Senate on Wednesday – but that doesn’t mean they’re giving up. As the old saying goes, tomorrow is another day.
There’s an interesting quote from Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (he’s listed as “Independent”, but that doesn’t exactly describe his political philosophy):
… Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont vowed it will return when the realization dawns that private insurance companies “are no longer needed.”
OK, that’s just Sanders, and he’s certainly entitled to his opinion – no matter how absurd it is. Not quite:
His remarks drew handshakes and even a hug or two from Democrats who had filed into the Senate to hear him.
If you can’t get the votes, hide the bill
The so-called Health Care Bill – titled “America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009″ – also known as “Affordable Health Care for America Act” – is apparently neither affordable – either by the people or by the country – nor gives much choice.
Those links go the the Library of Congress website, and give the text and status of the bills. Unfortunately, the content seems to change from day to day, and only Harry Reid and a few of his close confidants know exactly what’s in it.
Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY) raises an interesting point. This health-care bill runs over 2000 pages, would affect almost every American, and amount to control of about 16% of the country’s economy. But we need to have it voted on now.
And here’s the most outrageous part: at the end of this rush, they want us to vote on a bill that no one outside the Majority Leader’s conference room has even seen. That’s right. The final bill we’ll vote on isn’t even the one we’ve had on the floor. It’s the deal Democrat leaders have been trying to work out in private.
McConnell notes that for the Energy Bill of 2002, the Senate spent 8 weeks, 36 roll call votes, and 151 amendments before it passed.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002: 7 weeks, 20 roll call votes, 30 amendments.
This health-care bill:
This bill has been the pending business of the Senate since the last week of November — less than four weeks ago.
We started the amendment process two weeks ago.
We’ve had 21 amendments and motions — less than two a day.
. . . .
… they intend to bring to the floor and force a vote on before Christmas.
This for a bill that won’t become law until 2014.
Could it possibly be that the Democrats know they won’t be in office then, and have to get it passed before they’re voted out?
Should just 60 people be able to effect one of the most sweeping changes in the American economy?
Cost of Healthcare
Forget the $848 billion cost of the bill – or maybe it’s $1.6 trillion ($1600 billion). Numbers like that are just too big to fully comprehend.
Let’s see what it would cost you and me. Here’s the report from the Congressional Budget Office, dated 30 November 2009.
Average premiums per policy in the nongroup market in 2016 would be roughly $5,800 for single policies and $15,200 for family policies under the proposal, compared with roughly $5,500 for single policies and $13,100 for family policies under current law.
Under current law, we’re not required to buy the insurance. Under the new law, we would be.
The bill brovides for Federal subsidies. The amount of the subsidy would depend on your income. For a middle-class family of four making $50,000 a year, there would be no subsidy. (See Table 2 at the very end of the report.) The cost for the “Low-Cost Plan” would be $14,100. (The figures in the quote above are for the “nongroup” market – people who buy insurance directly from companies, rather than those covered by employer plans.)
Harvard Medical School faults health care plan
In an article in the Wall Street Journal, the dean of Harvard Medical School finds the health care plan lacking.
… there are no provisions to substantively control the growth of costs or raise the quality of care. So the overall effort will fail to qualify as reform.
…
…the final legislation that will emerge from Congress will markedly accelerate national health-care spending rather than restrain it.
Is he the only person who remembers Massachusetts?
Here, insurance mandates similar to those proposed in the federal legislation succeeded in expanding coverage but—despite initial predictions—increased total spending.
…
… newly created organizations of physicians and other health-care providers will be given limited dollars per patient for all of their care, allowing for shared savings if spending is below the targets.
I don’t think Dr. Flier was one of the white coats in the Rose Garden.
Money for votes
It’s always worked in the past. This time, though, they have a little more of our money to throw around.
Here’s a list of what the White House spread around to “encourage” Senators to vote their way:
The $100 Million Health Care Vote?
On page 432 of the Reid bill, there is a section increasing federal Medicaid subsidies for “certain states recovering from a major disaster.”
Exactly one “certain state” qualifies: Louisiana (Hurricane Katrina).
Update: Landrieu says it’s really $300 million:
“I am not going to be defensive,” she declared. “And it’s not a $100 million fix. It’s a $300 million fix.”
House healthcare bill includes financial boost for California
Contained in the nearly 2,000-page House healthcare bill is a little-noticed provision — worth $300 million to California — that would increase federal Medicare payments to doctors in a wide swath of the state in response to complaints that low reimbursement rates have kept them from taking new patients.
Goodies for labor tucked away in health bill:
… big labor bosses hope you do not notice some lower-profile provisions tucked into the pages of this massive proposal. If they become law, these provisions would give union leaders considerable influence over health care decisions affecting us all.
. . .
After spending almost $80 million during the last election cycle, unions are on the brink of reaping a significant return on their investment. Despite representing only about 7.6% of private sector employees, unions are poised to gain significant privileges, authority and financial windfalls from health care reform. Coming at the expense of tax-paying patients and businesses, these specific benefits would do little or nothing to improve our health care system.
. . .
According to research firms, unions are woefully short of funds to pay their retirees’ anticipated insurance claims. Thus, under the House resolution, union leaders who have mismanaged these plans for their members could receive up to $10 billion in taxpayer-funded bailout money, innocuously referred to as a “reinsurance program.”
Maybe some of the $787 billion will actually go to improving health care for the average American.
