For First Time, NorCo Council Acts Favorably to Proposed Employee Health Center

Last night, Northampton County Council received a presentation from the committee that reviewed three bids for a voluntary and exclusive health center for county employees (and possibly retirees). Although Council member John Brown still had reservations, it appears that the rest of County Council and perhaps Brown himself may be warming to the idea.  Council member Tom Giovanni was part of the committee reviewing the bids, and he recommended that they discuss the matter with Council. The committee has chosen Integrity Health, but a contract is still being finalized. The purpose of the presentation was to keep County Council in the loop. 

The County did issue a news release concerning the health center:

Integrity Health has been selected by the Request for Proposal Committee, which includes Northampton County Commissioner Tom Giovanni, Director of Human Services Susan Wandalowski, Director of Human Resources Mary Lou Kaboly, Director of Fiscal Affairs Stephen Barron, and Procurement Manager Kathryn Anderson, to provide an on-site health and wellness center only for Northampton County employees and employee dependents covered under the county’s health plan.

“The Administration of Northampton County is dedicated to providing its employees with the best health and wellness care available while controlling costs for county employees and taxpayers,” says [Exec] Lamont G. McClure.

A cost assessment calculates savings to the taxpayer of $1.5 million - $2 million per year. The services provided by the Employee Health Center would be confidential and strictly voluntary, and County employees will not be required to visit the center, nor will they be required to leave their primary care doctor. All services at the center will be provided on a no-copay basis. The center would be open seven days a week, 10 hours a day on weekdays and five hours a day on weekends, and allow patients to make same and next-day appointments. Virtual appointments provide additional convenience for patients.

Integrity Health operates several health centers in New Jersey and expanded to Lycoming County, Pennsylvania.

Texas Teacher Dies From Flu, Delayed Getting $116 in Meds

A second grade Texas teacher has died from the flu because she was unable or unwilling to pick up her prescription, which was $116 with copay. Her delay may be because she was frugal, was unable to afford the medication or simply hates taking pills. I fall in all three of those categories myself. Unfortunately, this will continue no matter whether Obamacare, single payer or some other form of health insurance is in place.

Ultimately, staying healthy is a losing battle.

The Pa. Department of Health reports that, as of February 3, flu is widespread throughout the state, with the highest activity in the southeast. Statewide, there have been 91 deaths so far, including one in Northampton County.

Exec Sez Healthcare Award Could Cost $1 Million

Though Northampton County is dragging its feet about producing a copy of the ruling, Director of Administration Luis Campos and Executive John Brown have both admitted that, earlier this month, they lost a major union grievance. It was filed by AFSCME Local 1435 over the Exec's unilateral decision to reduce health care benefits, starting this year. The arbitration award impacts about 650 Gracedale workers. At yesterday's budget hearing, Brown predicted this could cost the County about $1 million. Though that's a lot of money, it's a lot less than the $2.5 million figure I was initially provided.

NorCo Worker Deals With Illness, Insurance Denials

I'll call this guy Jim. He's a long-time employee of Northampton County, and does not mind paying a bit more for his health insurance. "You can take 10% of my salary and I don't have a problem," he told me last night. "But when my wife can't get coverage, then I have a problem." Unfortunately, that's the problem he's facing right now, thanks to changes in the health care plan provided to workers by Executive John Brown,.

Married for 24 years, Jim and his wife are currently putting their child through college. as anyone with kids can tell you, that's an expensive proposition. "We're back to living paycheck to paycheck," he admits.

No time is the right time for someone to become sick, but it has happened to his wife. Recently, she began experiencing bloody bowel movements and was not feeling well. She eventually ended up in the office of a gastroenterologist, who is concerned. He has ordered a colonoscopy and a CAT scan. He also prescribed barium for the procedure as well as Nexium for the acid reflux that has accompanied his wife's other symptoms.

And Northampton County's medical insurance carrier, in its infinite wisdom, denied coverage.

Now the insurance provider quickly reversed itself on the colonoscopy and CAT scan, but still refuses to pay for the barium medication needed for the colonoscopy. It also is refusing to cover Nexium, telling this guy's wife she can get it OTC.

Fortunately, the doctors are involved and are going to discuss this denial with the insurance provider. But in the meantime, this guy is a wreck. He told me that if he pays for the medication himself, he will be $400 out of pocket.  

According to Jim, this is not the first time. Last year, he was denied coverage for the removal of a lump in his chest. The claim administrator had denied coverage, arguing it was cosmetic It took a lawyer and doctor tag team before the insurance changed course.

For Jim, the excised lump was benign..But changes to these health plans are a cancer on the morale  and health of the county workforce.

NorCo Council May Condemn Brown's Healthcare Program Tonight

This longtime County worker visits the food bank to feed her children

Walking into the courthouse today, I was stopped by a Northampton County employee who is upset about the healthcare program changes that Executive John Brown is imposing on most workers soon. He's by no means the excitable kind, but these changes are going to hurt him. Worse, they are going to hurt his special needs son.

"I don't know what I'm going to do," he told me, fighting back the tears.

Without going into detail, this child has been fighting his entire life against a serious disease he'll always have. He requires regular nursing care and intense medical treatment, though he still manages somehow to get As and Bs.

All that will stop when Brown's "still robust" healthcare program goes into effect.

I didn't know what to say.

Making my way a little farther down the hall, I was stopped by another County employee who is practically apoplectic over the cuts.

"I handle three million dollars a week, and am going backwards," she told me.

I didn't know what to say.

"Could [the healthcare plan change] adversely affect some of these families?" he asked on a Wednesday's right-wing radio show. "Yes, it absolutely could."

The operative word her is "will", not "could". These healthcare plan changes will adversely impact a middle school student who, through no fault of his own, is in near constant need of medical care. He could tell Glenn Geissinger and radio host Bobby Gunther Walsh, "Welcome to the real world!"

Geissinger, a lay clergyman who at one time was leading Council in prayer and once told us all to bow our heads, apparently doesn't give a shit.

In fact, Geissinger was actually rallying the tea party crowd yesterday, sounding the clarion call of cuckoo radio to attract people to come in and blast the County worker, creating division and hard feelings unnecessarily
.
Though Northampton County Council is powerless to stop Brown from decreasing or even eliminating healthcare coverage, something Brown discussed two weeks ago, it does have the power to tell him they don't like what's going on. Such a resolution is on this evening's agenda.

Would You Have Upheld Obamacare?

Despite all the predictions. the Supreme Court has just upheld Obamacare in its entirety, including the individual mandate. Thus, it is up to Congress to gut this act, if it can. So if you were Chief Justice Anonymous, how would you rule?

Dent, Andrews Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Benefit Amputees

FROM CONGRESSMAN CHARLIE DENT. – U.S. Reps. Charlie Dent (PA-15) and Robert E. Andrews (NJ-1) today introduced bipartisan legislation to ensure amputees are able to acquire coverage that meets their unique needs. The Insurance Fairness for Amputees Act, H.R. 4175, does not mandate coverage, but requires that if an insurer chooses to include coverage of custom orthotics and prosthetics in their policy, it must be on the same basis as the plan’s general medical coverage.

“Too many amputees are discovering the coverage they believed was best for their specific needs is inadequate,” said Rep. Dent. “This bipartisan legislation will promote fairness and improve their ability to receive the specialized care and treatment they require.”

“This bill provides thousands of amputees with much needed peace of mind that the coverage they require will meet the same standards as other surgical and medical benefits provided under a private health plan. This means amputees will no longer be denied coverage for a much-needed artificial limb because of arbitrary exclusions or lifetime caps in their policies,” said Rep. Andrews. “Since this bipartisan bill does not mandate coverage, it will improve care for countless Americans without adding to our debt and deficit.”

Today, diabetes is the single largest cause of amputation in the United States, followed by peripheral vascular disease and trauma. Approximately 1 in 200 U.S. citizens is an amputee, and an even larger proportion of the population suffers chronic limb impairment because of debilitating conditions such as multiple sclerosis and cerebral palsy. Additionally, numerous veterans – many of whom will eventually transition to private sector coverage – are returning from service in Afghanistan and Iraq with limb impairments. For these Americans, customized orthopedic bracing is essential to maximizing their mobility and independence.

The Insurance Fairness for Amputees Act does not mandate coverage, and costs no federal money. In essence, the legislation is a truth-in advertising provision. Amputees and those with limb-impairments sometimes find their insurance policies offer watered-down or evasively minimalistic coverage for the orthotics and prosthetics care they require. H.R. 4175 ensures these patients have the ability to acquire coverage that provides for their distinctive needs.

The Amputee Coalition, the largest patient advocacy organization on behalf of amputees in the country, has advocated the enactment of similar legislation in nineteen states. The organization fully supports H.R. 4175 as the natural next step to assure clarity about insurance coverage.

Dent Proposes Medical Liability Reform

LV Congressman Charlie Dent, to the chagrin of many trial lawyers, has always been been an advocate for medical liability reform. Yesterday, he and Congressman Erik Paulsen, a Minnesota Republican, introduced legislation aimed at decreasing health care costs through comprehensive medical liability reform.

“The 2010 health care law missed a critical opportunity to enact meaningful medical liability reforms,” said Rep. Dent in a news release. “Our medical justice system is a major cost driver for health care spending and it impacts the ability of patients to receive high quality care. We expect doctors to make decisions based solely on what is best for their patients, not on what is best to defend against frivolous lawsuits. Across the United States, the lack of comprehensive reform has affected where qualified doctors practice, what fields of medicine they pursue, and the services they provide. As Congress continues to discuss ways to reform and strengthen our health care system, advancing the common-sense policies included in H.R. 2205 will help reduce health care spending and ensure access to quality care.”

“The reality is medical liability does contribute to increased healthcare costs. Healthcare professionals practice defensive medicine for fear of frivolous lawsuits and end up ordering billions of dollars in extra tests and treatments,” added Rep. Paulsen. “The current environment not only increases the cost of care for patients, but also discourages highly skilled and dedicated physicians from providing important services. Three out of four emergency rooms have reported shortages of specialists, and many orthopedic surgeons have chosen to retire early or scale back their surgical duties, because of liability concerns. These reforms are needed to protect patients, reduce healthcare costs, and ensure that this nation continues to produce the world’s greatest healthcare professionals.”

The practice of defensive medicine – when doctors order tests and treatments in order to protect themselves against frivolous lawsuits – is estimated to cost as much as $200 billion annually. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) analyses indicate comprehensive medical liability reform would save the government $54 billion over the next decade and cut national health care spending by 0.5 percent per year.

Dent's leislation will encourage states to adopt effective alternative medical liability laws that reduce the number of health care lawsuits initiated, reduce the average amount of time taken to resolve lawsuits and reduce the cost of malpractice insurance. The legislation will also enact nationwide reforms to stabilize compensation for injured patients, hold parties responsible for their degree of fault, ensure that meritorious claims are swiftly resolved, encourage compliance with accepted clinical practice guidelines, and guarantee that medical care is available to those who need it the most by providing protections to safety-net providers.

Onerous 1099 Health Care "Reform" Repealed By BiPartisan House

Whether you support or oppose health care reform, most will agree that its 1099 mandate, scheduled to start in 2012, would wreak havoc on most small businesses. Yesterday, a bipartisan House voted to repeal this requirement, 314 to 112, in what is called the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act.

LV Congressman Charlie Dent, who had complained about this provision before the overhaul was enacted over a year ago, explained his vote supporting the repeal. “By forcing businesses to comply with needlessly burdensome tax filing requirements, the 1099 provision would ultimately divert limited resources and energy away from employers’ efforts to grow and innovate.”

In a news release, Dent's Congressional office reports that the The National Taxpayer Advocate, an independent entity operating within the auspices of the IRS, estimates 26 million non-farm sole proprietorships, four million S corporations, two million C corporations, three million partnerships, two million farming businesses, one million charities and other tax-exempt organizations, and likely more than 100,000 federal, state, and local government entities will be impacted by these new filing requirements.

“Unfortunately, the 1099 provision exemplifies many of the misguided elements included in the new law,” Dent explained. “It stands in the way of economic growth and job creation, while doing nothing to decrease the cost of health care in the United States.”

Dent was encouraged that 76 Democrats joined a unanimous GOP. “I hope the strong support for this bill among House Democrats signifies they are willing to admit provisions included in the hastily-drafted health care law will be detrimental to the American economy. I am prepared to work in a bipartisan manner to eliminate or modify additional impediments and enact effective health care reform.”

My only question is why would 112 House members want to keep this draconian provision?

Dent Explains Vote to Repeal Health Care Overhaul

Although the promised repeal of Obamacare passed the House yesterday, 245 to 189, nobody expects that to happen. The Senate has promised to never let it see the light f Day, and President Obama would certainly veto the measure. According to the Christian Science Monitor, the real work starts now, as four separate committees study changes in the law. There is hope, however faint, for some bipartisan change.

LV Congressman Charlie Dent explains his vote:

“The most pressing issue facing our health care system is the crisis of cost. When visiting communities in our area, I hear frustration from local residents about rising premiums, the cost of medical services and prescription drugs, and their inability to choose between different insurance plans because the individual market is too expensive. When I meet with employers, particularly small businesses, I find they are struggling to keep up with the escalating cost of employee health care. When I speak with state legislators, they share serious concerns about the growing percentage of state resources dedicated to health care spending. When I analyze our federal budget, I see the dramatic impact of health care entitlement spending.

“Today, I voted to repeal the misguided health care law of 2010, which is seriously flawed in its structure and practical implementation. Tomorrow, I will support a House resolution that directs several committees to produce practical and effective reforms that will lower health care costs, expand access to affordable insurance coverage and foster job growth. I support health care reform and believe all Americans should have access to affordable health insurance. Unfortunately, the legislation enacted last year raises health care costs for most Americans, increases spending by state and federal governments, jeopardizes the coverage of those who are happy with their current plan, and stifles needed economic growth. The law enacted in 2010 is simply unwise and unsustainable.

“Most problematic, the new law will increase health care costs for American families and seniors, whose budgets have been stretched precariously thin by the economic downtown. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the premiums for millions of families will increase by as much as $2,100 by 2016. Under the law, seniors will pay as much as 20 percent more for their Medicare Part D prescription drug premium.

“Many of the law’s strongest supporters in Washington vow it will help reduce our nation’s growing deficit. However, these claims are based on misleading budget gimmicks and deceptive accounting practices. For example, the law imposes 10 years worth of taxes to fund only 6 years of programming. The Office of the Actuary for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) found that health costs will rise by an added $310.8 billion over the next 10 years as a result of the law. Moreover, the CBO’s long-term budget outlook acknowledges that most of the major savings provisions in the law are either “widely expected” to be scaled back or would “be difficult to sustain for a long period.” Rather than reductions, this will naturally lead to significant increases in the federal deficit.

“Under the law, access to care will be jeopardized and many Americans who are currently satisfied with their plans will not be able to keep them. The law includes more than $200 billion in cuts to payments for hospitals, skilled nursing facilities and home health agencies. The CMS Actuary estimates those cuts could cause roughly 15 percent of Medicare Part A providers to become unprofitable and drop out of Medicare, 'possibly jeopardizing access to care for beneficiaries.' Over time, the Actuary estimates 40 percent of providers may withdraw from offering services to Medicare enrollees. While nearly 20 million Americans would gain coverage under the Medicaid program, the Actuary cautioned 'it is reasonable to expect that a significant portion of the increased demand for Medicaid would be difficult to meet, particularly over the first few years.' Furthermore, half of all Americans who have insurance through their employer and two-thirds of workers in small businesses will be at risk of losing their current coverage by 2013.

“Finally, the law impedes economic growth. There are more than half a trillion dollars in new taxes included in the statute, many of which will impact small business owners and middle-income households. Specifically, $210 billion in new payroll taxes will reduce investment and hamper growth. Additionally, the law includes a mandate that imposes a penalty on employers that cannot afford to purchase health insurance for their employees, which CBO found will 'cause some employers to respond by hiring fewer low-wage workers.'

“I believe we must replace the misguided policies of the current law with reforms that will address rising health care costs. Specifically, I support medical liability reforms to reduce the practice of defensive medicine. I believe Congress must provide Americans with more options for affordable health coverage, such as low-cost catastrophic plans for younger individuals, patient-driven Health Savings Accounts (HSA), cross state purchasing, and effective high risk pools or reinsurance models as a backstop. We must enact real payment reforms that focus on quality rather than quantity, and provide greater flexibility for employers to reward employees who adopt healthier lifestyles. I also support advancing medical innovation and enhancing health information technology to make care more effective and efficient. Finally, we must aggressively fight waste, fraud and abuse.

“I look forward to working with my colleagues during the 112th Congress to enact these sensible policies that will reduce costs, expand access and support economic growth.”

Is Elliot Sussman Being Groomed as New Medicare Czar?

I had a perfect opportunity and blew it. There he was, sitting right in front of me during a ZHB meeting in Bethlehem, and I just let him go. Dr. Elliot Sussman had just stepped down as top dog at Lehigh Valley Hospital, and I did not even know it. He certainly did not act like a big shot. For one thing, he quietly waited his turn. And when it was, he sounded like most fathers, hoping that converting the space atop his garage into a "guest home" would attract his adult children.

I let him get away.

OK, so we all know that Dr. Sussman stepped down at LVH? Suddenly. No mention is made of future plans. That's what happens when people are fired, but Dr Sussman was not acting like a man who had just been fired when I saw him last week. In fact, two physicians from different states tagged along with him.

I think he's going to Washington, and is keeping quiet about it until background checks are done and Senators are on board with him as a replacement to a beleagured Dr. Donald Berwick, who heads up the $700 billion per year Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

Dr. Berwick's favorable comments about government-run health care in Britain, combined with claims about rationing health care services and disparaging remarks about the importance of the doctor-patient relationship, have him in hot water with Republicans. In fact, President Obama used his "recess appointment" tool to delay a contentious confirmation hearing. And now, Dr. Berwick runs from reporters.

Since he'll never be confirmed, why not replace him with someone Republicans actually like? That's where Dr. Elliot Sussman comes in.

The ex-LVH chief was at the White House, back in March, for a panel discussion with President Obama about health care reform. He was there when the Bill was signed into law. He's told the Greater LV Chamber of Commerce that he believes in a more gradual approach to health care reform. Although Dr. Sussman contributes primarily to Republicans, he contributed to both John Callahan and Charlie Dent in the most recent election cycle.

I have no evidence beyond what what is posted here. It makes sense to me, but for all I know, Dr. Sussman may be starting at St. Luke's next week.

Northampton County's Health Care Costs Rise 25% in One Year

Budget Administrator Doran Hammon has just told Northampton County Council's Finance Committee that there's been a 25% increase in health care costs for County employees this year, That's $3.3 million.

"That's exactly why we need less employees," remarked Council President Ron Angle.

Dent, Callahan Share Views on Health Care Overhaul

If you were in Congress next year, what would you do to change or improve the current health policy legislation?

Charlie Dent: Emanuel. The President came to the meeting. I recommended various medical liability reforms. "We had a massive debate on this issue, as you know. It was very frustrating for me, personally. I was invited to the White House in May 2009 to discuss health care with RahmRahm Emanuel said, 'We're going to do that, Charlie.' I said, 'Great, Rahm, what are you gonna' do?' He told me. I said, 'Rahm, That's great, I'll support you. It's not going to save you money, but I have some more ideas for you.' So we had a nice conversation with the President chimng is, 'Yes, we're going to do medical liability reform.'

"When the Bill was written and presented to the American people, not one word on medical liability reform. Why did that happen? The President of the United Staes said it was going to happen, and it didn't happen. He told me and twelve other members, in the White House, there was going to be liability reform. Why? Because the trial lawyers didn't want it. Howard Dean said it very well.

"So what we need to do is control the costs. That's the first order of business. The law deals with expanding coverage, but it does not deal with cost containment. That's why this law is going to fail. It will fail. And it will lead to rationing.

"So what we should do is medical liability reform; we should allow small businesses to reach across state lines where they can receive greater discounts when they purchase insurance; get out from under the state insurance mandates; we should also make sure that individuals can buy insurance across state lines. That is something that we can do, and that will make a very meaningful difference. Because right now, we don't have that in America.

"One other thing that I think we also really need to focus on - making sure that a federal bureaucrat can't step between you and your doctor. We need to protect that. We need that type of patient's Bill of Rights, a Medical Rights Act. That's extremely important.

"So health care is going to be an issue that we're going to have to deal with. We're going to have to defund much of this health care law. The employer mandate's not gonna' work. The individual mandate is problematic. Many of these tax hikes have to go. The 1099 provision in the health care law. If you pay more than $600 to a vendor, you have to issue a 1099 for, a paperwork nightmare.

"So there's so many issues that we're going to have to address, we're going to be spending years."

John Callahan: "[Congressman Dent would] repeal the Bill, and that would be a mistake. That would essentially be taking all the - I mean - who here wants to see the ability of the insurance companies to deny new coverage due to pre-existing condition? Who doesn't want to have the opportunity to cover other kids up to the age of 26 on their health insurance if they don;t have a job that gives them health insurance?

"That's Charlie Dent's plan, to go back to the old policies of before. We all know what has happened in the course of the last 6 years with health care premiums. In the time that Charlie Dent's been in Congress, health care premiums have gone up by 34%.

"We all recognize that this is a central issue to this country, and our ability, not just to provide health care fr our citizens, but to be competitive in the global market place. Charlie Dent wants to go backwards, and not forwards. He wants to repeal the Bill. He doesn't want to improve on it, he wants to repeal it.

"There is medical liability reform in the Bill. There are demonstration projects set u, and I think we should move forward with further medical liability reform going forward.

"But the reality is that there's not a day goes by that I don't talk to a senior citizen that's caught in a doughnut hole, trying to make a decision between paying their rent or paying for their prescription drug bill. And the list goes on and on, and Charlie Dent doesn't see that as a problem. He said when he got elected six years ago that this was issue One. It's not about rhetoric. It's about results. And he has done nothing to move this country forward when it comes to healthcare, and meanwhile, he's accepted $350,000 from those same medical insurance companies."

Blogger's Note: The medical liability demonstration projects mentioned by Callahan have nothing to do with the health care overhaul. They are instead part of an initiative announced by President Obama on 9/9/09. Callahan never really offered any changes or improvements, but chose instead to criticize Dent.

ObamaCare = Unfunded Mandate for Norco Gov't

From last Thursday's Council meeting, an exchange revealing an unfunded mandate to Northampton County as a result of the health care overhaul. Your property taxes will pay for it:

John Stoffa: "I want to alert you to a concern I have, which is 1/1/11, the caps come off, the major medical for our retirees with a new plan., its a $12,500 cap. That comes off. We have roughly 700 [retired] employees. We don't know what that's going to mean but it's going to mean more money. ..."

Ron Angle: "This was part of the Obama health care plan, am I correct?"

Stoffa: "Yes."

Angle: "Is the federal government furnishing money for their plan?"

Ann McHale: "Yeah, yeah, they are."

Stoffa: "Interestingly enough, they do have a piece, and we have people applying for that for a certain age range, but it's not going to cover the full cost in no way, shape or form."

Angle: "Another unfunded mandate."

Remember Callahan's Courageous Health Care Stand, a Day Late and a Dollar Short?

Back in June, I told you that the federal health care overhaul, which congressional candidate John Callahan endorsed a day after it passed, is going to put County finances in intensive care. You see, Northampton County is self-insured. Its medical plan is administered by Capital Blue Cross, but all employee claims are paid from the County till. That means your tax dollars pay the bills, and those bills are going up for two reasons.

First, thanks to the overhaul, the County must now pay the medical, dental and even some eyecare claims of all family members under age 26. There is no requirement that they continue to live with their parents or even be dependents. They can even be married and raising families of their own. The County must still pay all of these expenses at no additional cost to County workers.

Second, there currently is a $12,500 annual limit on what the County will pay for retirees before insisting on other types of insurance. Thanks to the plan blessed by Callahan, that cap has now been lifted and the County must pay it all.

"Washington isn't sending us any money to pay the bills. They're just playing Santa Claus," remarked one County official.

In addition to the indirect costs that will be passed on to you by County governments, it will also hit American families and small businesses directly, with an increase in premiums. The Wall Street Journal reports this week that consumers and businesses in some states might face rate hikes up to 20 percent, largely due to mandates in the health care law. Additionally, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Office of the Actuary released a new analysis that shows national health expenditures will increase more rapidly over the next decade as a result of the new health care law.

In addition to the direct and indirect costs, there will be more paperwork and taxes for small businesses and individuals, and more job losses. The law contains more than $500 billion in tax increases, including a tax on medical devices that will raise costs and kill jobs here in Pennsylvania. Among its mandates is the “1099 provision,” which will greatly increase the amount of IRS paperwork for small businesses, costing time, money and jobs when small businesses and working families can least afford it.

Congressman Dent opposed the law and expressed concern that the new law would not reduce health care costs. He offered constructive amendments that would have enacted medical liability reforms to reduce the costly practice of defensive medicine, and remove the medical device tax. Of course, those amendments were ignored. Since the legislation was signed into law, Dent has co-sponsored legislation to repeal the detrimental “1099 provision.”

John Callahan was willing to join Moveon and scream "Health Reform Now" outside of Congressman Dent's Bethlehem office. But he refused to say exactly what he meant. He dodged the most critical issue of this generation, knowing that taking a position would cost him votes.

He did finally decide to support the health care reform bill, a day after it had passed. He led from the rear, not the most admirable quality in a leader. And the position he finally took was the one demanded by party bosses and the Washington establishment.

“John Callahan waited until the 13th hour to state his support for the health care law, but he still owes an explanation of how he thinks it’s going to save American families and small businesses money,” said Congressman Dent in a news release. “John Callahan is among the last people in America who think the government health care plan is going to help more people than it will hurt. Going forward, we must replace misguided policies of the current law with reforms that will address the rising health care costs that impact families, small businesses and our economy. John Callahan stands with the very policies that are raising health-care costs and killing jobs.”

Dent: Government Health Care Takeover Will Kill Jobs

When Congressional wannabe John Callahan finally took a position on Pelosi-care, a day after it passed, he somberly stated, "The legislation passed last night brings down health care costs for families and small businesses." Guess what? A hidden provision of the government health care takeover touted by Callahan’s blessing will swamp small businesses with paperwork, costing them time, money and resources that could be used to create new jobs.

That's according to a CNN report. "[J]ust a few lines buried in the 2,409-page document ... mandates that beginning in 2012 all companies will have to issue 1099 tax forms not just to contract workers but to any individual or corporation from which they buy more than $600 in goods or services in a tax year. The stealth change radically alters the nature of 1099s and means businesses will have to issue millions of new tax documents each year.”

According to the National Taxpayer Advocate, an independent office within the IRS, this new provision will affect about 40 million taxpayers, including 26 million sole proprietors and one million charities. The National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB) adds that new Form 1099 expansion is “another crippling paperwork mandate that unfairly targets small businesses," and estimates average costs associated with tax paperwork is about $74 per hour.

“John Callahan should take heed – this is what happens when you blindly support a bill you didn’t bother to read,” said Congressman Charlie Dent in a news release. “This is only one of dozens of mandates in the health care bill that will cost more American jobs.”

Dent is a cosponsor of HR 5141, the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act, which would repeal this unnecessary and costly piece of red tape for American job creators.

The 1099 provision has been derided by Democrats and Republicans alike. Four Democratic Senators - Mark Begich (Alaska), Ben Nelson (Nebraska), Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire) and Evan Bayh (Indiana) – have publicly expressed concern about the regulation and asked the IRS to correct it administratively.

Fed'l Health Care Overhaul Will Hurt Norco Government

When he voted against the federal health care overhaul, passed along partisan lines just a few short months ago, LV Congressman Charlie Dent warned it was going to cost all of us. According to an unnamed Northampton County bean-counter, it may soon be affecting your county tax bill. Here's how.

Northampton County is self-insured. Its medical plan is administered by Capital Blue Cross, but all employee claims are paid from the county till. That means your tax dollars pay the bills, and those bills are going up for two reasons.

First, thanks to the overhaul, the County must now pay the medical, dental and even some eyecare claims of all family members under age 26. There is no requirement that they continue to live with their parents or be dependents. The County must pay all of these expenses at no additional cost to County workers.

Second, there currently is a $12,500 annual limit on what the County will pay for retirees before insisting on other types of insurance. Thanks to Pelosicare, that cap has been lifted and the County must pay it all.

"Washington isn't sending us any money to pay the bills. They're just playing Santa Claus," remarked this County official, who estimates this will cost us several hundred thousand dollars. And as he concludes, "Every single dollar must be paid by the taxpayer, one way or the other."

Toomey, Dent Blast Health Care Overhaul

Of course, the recently enacted federal health care overhaul was a hot topic at Friday's candidates' night, hosted by the local tea party.

Republican Senatorial candidate Pat Toomey: (See his video here.)

"It's over $2 trillion in spending of money that we clearly don't have and can't afford. It's going to increase our deficits and debt, and destroy jobs. And it's over a half a trillion dollars in new taxes, taxes on pharmaceuticals, on medical devices, taxes on employers, taxes on workers. Taxes on jobs! Imagine! With the unemployment rate nearly ten per cent, we pass a bill that taxes job creation. This makes absolutely no sense at all.

"One of the things that's as disturbing as all of that to me is the fact that it's really designed to expand dependency, make people more dependent on government, and less able and less willing to have an independent access and control to health care.

"So what we should have done is and we still can do when we repeal this thing is - and the day will come when we can repeal this thing - is we can have the kind of reforms that will make health care more affordable, more accessible. I have long argued that we ought to give individuals the same tax deductions that workers' employers get. Employers get to deduct the cost of health insurance when they buy it for their workers, that's fine. Individuals ought to get the same opportunity. That would immediately make it more affordable for individuals who have to go out and buy health insurance on their own.

"Speaking of insurance, I can buy car insurance from a little green lizard but I can't get health insurance from a guy in New Jersey. This makes no sense to me at all. We ought to force the insurance companies to compete for our business. That is a big source of the problem. Some of the Democrats say they think the only answer is the government. How about some competition? That would make such a big difference.

"I think we need medical malpractice reform as well.

"The goal should be repealing this bill and replacing it with the kind of reforms I've advocated. But let's be clear. President Obama's not gonna' sign a repeal bill, and he's going to be President for at least a couple more years.

Congressman Charlie Dent: (See his video here).

"One of the big fears I had is that, once the Congress enacts a law like this, it's very hard to take it back. It's very hard. So what do we do?

"We're going to have to find ways to defund this. That's one of the most effective things we can try to do in the short term.

"In the intermediate term, we're going to have to try and repeal the major provisions. We have to get rid of the mandates, the employer mandates, the individual mandates, the tax law increases, the Medicare cuts. They didn't cut Medicare to save Medicare. They didn't try to fix it. They cut Medicare to create a new entitlement program. You can't do that, you can't do it.

"So what else are we gonna' do? Defund it, repeal where we can, s best we can, but let's be honest. In the short term, between now and November, the people who just voted for that law aren't going to vote to repeal it. And should we get it through to the President, he won't sign a bill to repeal it. So what we have to do right now in order to stop this damage that they've just done, is we need to elect a new Congress. We're going to need a new President. That's what we're gonna' do. That's probably the best thing we could do.

"Now during this health care debate, I went before the House Rules Committee. That's where they were going to try the 'deem and pass,' you know, Congressman Slaughter, the Slaughterhouse rule and all that sort of thing. I go up into the Rules Committee and offer amendments to the Bill on medical liability reform and to strike the medical device tax. Alcee Hastings, presiding, from Florida, impeached judge, now a member of Congress, he basically didn't like my amendments and basically, two hours before I got the colloquy with him, said, 'We make up the rules here as we go along.'

"We need to replace the people on that Committee. We need to replace them. It is an outrage.

"And that's what we're fighting against right now in Washington. That kind of arrogance, and a Speaker of the House who can stand up and say 'we need to pass this Bill so you can find out what's in it.' Please.

"And now we are finding out what's in it. We're finding out how retirees are at risk of losing their prescription drug benefits because of one change they made, and that's Medicare Part D. Now Henry Waxman is waxing indignant, waxing indignant because people are reporting a loss that's going to occur, and he's going to scold them next week."

NorCo Council Supports AG Corbett's Health Care Challenge

In an otherwise uneventful meeting, Northampton County Council last night adopted a nonbinding resolution, 5 to 3, condemning the recent Federal health care overhaul as unconstitutional, and calling on AG Tom Corbett "to protect the citizens of Northampton County from any and all effects of the Federal Health Care Reform Act." It's based on a similar proposal under consideration in Lehigh Township, where a final vote will take place on Tuesday night.

Lehigh Township Supervisors' Chair Darryl Snover, who drafted the proposal under consideration, debated it with several Council members last night.

John Cusick: "I understand your concerns, but I'm just not seeing where it's a township or even a county issue."

Snover: "If not us, then who?"

Cusick: "The 435 people elected to Congress are the ones who should be dealing with this. I don't agree with what they did, but I don't think it's an issue that we should be addressing here or at the township level."

Snover: "I respectfully disagree. It is our job to represent the people in our districts, and this is the only way their voices can officially be moved up through the ranks of our government."

Lamont McClure: "Some of the provisions in the Bill include allowing children to stay on their parents' health insurance until they're 26 years of age. Do you agree with that provision of the law?"

Snover: "Honestly, whether or not I agree with any particular aspect of the law, I simply believe that it is beyond the scope of the powers that are designated to belong to Congress and the United States federal government. Clearly, the Constitution sets forth that it is a responsibility or a right of the people or to the state, and I believe that at this point, short of a Constitutional amendment authorizing the Congress to act on something like this, it simply isn't lawful."

McClure: "If I ask you about different provisions of the bill, you'll tell me the same thing?"

Snover: "Essentially, yes, sir."

McClure: "OK, so you won't answer my questions about specific provisions of the bill. You just have a general opposition to it on the Constitutional grounds."

Snover: "I would have no objection if the State of Pennsylvania chose to enact some sort of health care reform because that clearly is a power that has been designated to them. I simply believe at this tie, that short of a Constitutional amendment, and I can argue this on a variety of fronts that the federal government has enacted, that they simply do not have the authority, and 'We the people' have allowed them to usurp the Constitution."

McClure: "So your entire basis for that is the Tenth Amendment."

Snover: "Essentially, yes, and the founding fathers' intent. There is no such thing as charity in the Constitution. It simply is not there."

The last time John Cusick voted "present," it took three weeks for Home Rule Charter scholars to determine what the hell it meant. (A resolution that everyone thought had passed, actually failed). Cusick swore, "This is the only time you'll ever hear me say present." But last night, he did it again.

Because she's in the insurance business, Council member Ann McHale concluded she's somehow conflicted, and abstained. Council member Peg Ferraro, who is recuperating from surgery, missed the meeting.

McClure was the sole "No" vote.

That meant that the remaining five Council members ALL had to support the resolution, and they did, and it passed.

Snover told me he expects his proposal to pass unanimously at next Tuesday's 7 PM supervisors' meeting, which will be held at their municipal building, located at 1069 Municipal Road, Walnutport, PA 18088-9719. He's invited AG Corbett to the meeting, but told me "he's a busy man."

Ninteeen states have challenged the constitutionality of the federal health care overhaul. Northampton County appears to be the first municipal government to support AG Corbett's lawsuit.

Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa (10:45 AM): Chairman Snover has posted a comment here, noting two factual errors in my post. First, although he inspired Angle's resolution, he did not write it. Second, my quotation is actually from the Lehigh Township ordinance. I failed to get a copy of the Northampton County resolution, which I ASSumed was identical.
Update (11:00 AM): Michael Duck's blog includes comments made by Council members Bruce Gilbert and Ron Angle. Duck also speculates that Cusick's "present" vote may have been intended as an "extremely subtle" jab at President Obama, who cast 129 "present" votes in the Illinois legislature.

Lehigh Tp Will Seek AG's Protection From Federal Health Care Reform Act

Nestled along the Blue Mountain Ridge in northwestern tier of Northampton County is thirty square miles known as Lehigh Township, home to 9,700 people. Unless a gigantic hog farm is proposed, it's pretty quiet up there.

They don't like lots of hogs, even with lipstick. They don't like them up there, or in the nation's capitol, either. Last night, supervisors unanimously approved advertising an ordinance condemning the Federal Health Care Reform Act as unconstitutional, and calling on AG Tom Corbett "to protect the citizens of Lehigh Township from any and all effects of the Federal Health Care Reform Act."

According to Township Secretary Treasurer Alice Rehrig, Corbett has been invited to attend the April 13 supervisors' meeting.

The text of this proposed ordinance is below:

WHEREAS, Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution establishes the specific powers of the Congress of the United States; and

WHEREAS, The 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States establishes the powers and authority not granted to the Federal Government are belonging to the States and the People respectively; and

WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Lehigh Township recognizes that the Federal Health Reform Act violates the limitations duly imposed on the Federal Government; and

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ENACTED AND ORDAINED, and it is enacted and ordained by the Board of Supervisors as follows:

1. The Board of Supervisors of Lehigh Township, on behalf of the citizens of Lehigh Township, do fully support and encourage Pennsylvania Attorney General, Tom Corbett, in joining with numerous Attorneys General in several States, in challenging the constitutionality of the Federal Health Reform Act.

2. A letter of support shall be crafted and sent, to Attorney General Tom Corbett, on behalf of Lehigh Township Board of Supervisors, and the citizens of Lehigh Township, requesting that the full power of the Office of the Attorney General be utilized to protect the citizens of Lehigh Township from any and all effects of the Federal Health Reform Act.

3. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately.