Log In | Register
..
This past week, a number of American companies announced--as required by SEC rules--a big charge against earnings because of the extra COSTS the new Obama/Democrat health care bill will impose on American businesses. These companies included Boeing, Verizon, AT&T, Caterpillar, Deere, and probably others I did not see.
Now my younger daughter works--as an attorney--for a large New York law firm. She is in the litigation section, which primarily defends public companies from securities litigation. What is the main source of securities litigation? It is alleged fraudulent misrepresentation/concealment of material facts . This can lead to either SEC action or to the kind of private lawsuits that my daughter helps defend. Thus, if a company's accountants determine that the new health care bill will impose future cots on the company--affecting the company earnings and therefore the stock price--the company is REQUIRED to notify investors of this information so that investors are not purchasing the stock under false pretenses. That is what these public corporations have done.
What has been the reaction of the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress? It has been the reaction of people who care nothing for either law or truth, but care only for INTIMIDATION and COERCION--mixed, of course, with bribery. That is how this health care bill was passed. Thus, it should be no surprise that these tactics are continuing.
Yes, spokesmen for the Obama Administration have sent out the message that they look unfavorably on companies who are tying to comply with "the law" as best they can. They have suggested these "charges" against earnings are premature, and have implied that these companies are trying to sabotage the health care bill. You will remember that the CEO of Caterpillar was USED by Obama basically announcing--falsely--that the CEO had told Obama that Congress needed to pass the "stimulus" bill in order to allow Caterpillar to rehire workers. The CEO said later that Caterpillar would have to lay off workers before it began hiring again. The point is that Obama has made DEALS with these big corporations, and that they have generally supported him. But let them do anything that the Obama Administration does not like--even if required by law--and the Obama Administration sends out a signal that it looks unfavorably on these companies (implying retaliation, even if that is never explicitly stated--but see below).
But that is not all. It is not just intimidation from the Obama Administration. Henry Waxman--Democrat in the House of Representatives and chairman of an important committee--has sent a letter to many of these companies requiring them to appear before Congress to explain their actions (in a "witch hunt" hearing before his committee).
Now you might be thinking: "Well, if the health care bill is going to cost so much, and COST JOBS, maybe Congress should look into that with the view toward changing or repealing the health care bill." Oh, you poor, naive simpleton (or dishonest person, like Waxman). Democrats in Congress have already made clear that they are accusing these companies of attempting to sabotage the health care bill for their own purposes, and that the purpose of this "hearing' is to intimidate these companies.
Now I think this is disingenuous outrage on the part of Democrats simply trying to INTIMIDATE and EXTORT these companies--as well as any other companies that may be contemplating a similar charge because of anticipated extra costs of the health care bill. However, there is a reason Democrats in Congress might consider it plausible that corporations would distort/misrepresent the numbers for their own purposes. That is because it is what DEMOCRATS in Congress would do, in the same position.
How do we know that? We know that because it is what Democrats did do, to get the health care bill passed in the first place. They manipulated the bill, and lied about the bill, in order to get it though Congress. This included "gaming" the CBO (Congressional Budget Office) by gimmick after gimmick in the bill. Did Democrats also intimidate the CBO, in addition to the outrageous gimmicks in the bill itself (such as imposing taxes the first year, but deferring the costly "benefits" until the fourth year or later; or such as imposing a tax on "Cadillac" insurance plans that will not even go into effect until 2018, which means it probably never will go into effect)? It is reasonable to assume that Congress, and the Obama Administration, put great pressure on the CBO to go along with the assumptions they were GIVEN by the politicians, and some footnotes by the CBO indicate that the CBO was perfectly aware of being "gamed". It is absurd to suggest that the CBO could give accurate numbers on a 3000 page bill that kept CHANGING (partially for the express purpose of "gaming" the CBO "score").
After all, we know that members of Congress were both intimidated and bribed into passing the health care bill. There is not even any doubt about taht. From the Louisiana Purchase" to the Cornhusker Kickback" to the "Gator Aid" to the union bribes to the....and so on, it was a scandal. Even at the very end, enormous pressure was put on pro-life Democrats, and any other wavering Democrat in the House. Nancy Pelosi supposedly used every threat in the book, and some that she may have written into the book herself. There was NOTHING this health care bill was not going to do: from balancing the budget (lol), to reducing health care costs (lol), to "improving" medical care (lol), to reducing health insurance premiums (lol). Al of these assertions were questionable, at best, but it did not stop Democrats from asserting them as if they were facts.
Yes, Democrats--not to mention the mainstream media, although some of those people have gagged at some of the dishonesty in the health care bill assertions--have proven themselves DISHONEST and CORRUPT throughout the saga of this health care bill. Why should they not assume that these corporations are not the same? Isn't it what Democrats would do if they were running these corporations and did not like something government was doing? Of course it is. Democrats have proven that they will do, and say, ANYTHING to support this health care bill. Obama has proven the same thing.
Doubt me.? Remember when Obama said that doctors--those evil doctors he kept giving white coats to stand behind him to support him--would not treat diabetes correctly (with diet, exercise, and preventive care), because they only got paid a "pittance", while if they let the condition progress $30,000, $40,000 or 3v3n $50,000 would bne paid TO THE SURGEON for an amputation. What can you say about a President who will say something as DISHONEST as that (it is on tape)? Of course, surgeons are not paid 3ven $30,000 for an amputation. They are lucky to be paid $3000.00. I heard one doctor say that he got $500 for an amputation of a foot (somewhat low, I thought, but not nearly as low as Obama's ridiculous statement was high). This is all in addition to the fact that ordinarily the "surgeon" does NOT even make the decision as to what kind of preventive care to give, and the people giving the preventive care do not ordinarily participate in the surgeon's fee. (Then there is the ridiculous "3000%" that Obama said small corporations would "save" on subsidized insurance premiums, "enabling them to pay higher salaries"--see my article with the partial title: "The 3000 Percent Solution".) (Will Verizon and the rest LOWER salaries/hire fewer workers because of this health care bill? It is a good bet.)
Nope. Obama and the Democrats have proven what dishonesty and intimidation THEY will engage in for their own purposes. No wonder they are willing to assert that American corporations are just as bad.
