Healthcare Law Clears House Hurdle On Repeal

Honoring a campaign pledge the Republican controlled Congress wasted no time in repealing the outrageous healthcare bill railroaded through Congress by the Democrats last year.

I listened to Congressmen/women speak yesterday for and against the bill. One central theme emerged from the opposition. The Democrats stated the bill would create jobs. They failed to mention it would be 16,000 IRS agent jobs. More government jobs means more taxation, plain and simple.

Congressman Barletta On Healthcare Repeal

Barletta Vs. Kanjorski Part 2

In the next part of the debate between incumbent Paul Kanjorski and challenger Lou Barletta healthcare became the topic of discussion. Moderator Bill Kelly went to Andree Phillips for the question. She stated she went to a meeting yesterday comprised of senior citizens. She "voir dired" Kanjorski about their concerns over insurance, Social Security and their coverage over provisions found in Obamacare. "I can tell you there were 30 people in that room and they were all afraid, they were afraid because they see their Medicare premiums going up and their coverage going down." "What are you going to do to improve that situation for our senior citizens?"

Kanjorski's response "First of all I want to tell 'em and I am sorry you couldn't tell 'em that the present law passed has no effect PRESENTLY on their premiums going up or their services going down. The law hasn't been put into effect and won't go into effect for 4 years. So any impact on healthcare costs in the United States have nothing to do with the healthcare bill passed by the law recently." His platitudes went on to bring in pre-existing conditions. He also made the claim "In this country 1 in 5 employees are imprisoned to their job and are in economic serivitude as a result of the failure of healthcare and coverage in the United States. That is horrendous.  I've been in Congress long enough to see the Clinton's try to get healthcare 15 years ago and a failure. Now President Obama brought it through, we carried it through but always with the understanding just as we did with Social Security and Medicare, that adjustments and changes will have to be made in Amendments to make sure this very complicated Act actually works. In affects 17% of our Gross Domestic Product." He rambled on about touting some benefits of the act including "making it more efficient for companies to operate in this country" and "closing the hole on drugs in this country".

Then he said "And quite frankly the Health Act has no ramifications or application to Medicare that senior citizens are under....I just want to leave with one thing. Anyone watching this debate tonight. Be sure of one thing. If you are a senior citizen, if you are under the protection of Medicare you will not be impacted in any way negatively by what the Congress has done". Moderator Kelly called the time on his response at this point.

Barletta countered "Who believes that thirty million more people will be included in the healtcare plan and we are actually going to save money because the federal government is going to run it. Nobody believes that, nobody believes that will happen at all. As a matter of fact Congressman we already saw the effects of your vote on the healthcare bill when Mercy Hospital announced, uh, is talking about selling their three Catholic hospitals, uh, as part of the decision is based on the effect that Obamacare will have on the hospitals. This healthcare bill will chase doctors out of business."

From the Heritage Foundation Side Effects: Massachusetts Seniors Will Lose Medicare Advantage Plans in 2011.

From The Weekly Standard Obamacare Forces 22,000 Seniors to Lose Medicare Advantage

From the Palm Beach Post Seniors set to lose Medicare Advantage perk

From the PRN Newswire Local Seniors Could Lose Their Medicare Advantage Coverage Under House Bill; Approximately 3 Million Seniors in 22 States, Including New Hampshire, Could Lose Their Medicare Advantage Coverage

Read this article that appears on the National Review Online.

Seniors who retain Medicare Advantage plans in 2011 should not be fooled into thinking that they have dodged Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare. Unless Obamacare is repealed, their time will come.

What did Paul Kanjorski tell seniors?

"And quite frankly the Health Act has no ramifications or application to Medicare that senior citizens are under....I just want to leave with one thing. Anyone watching this debate tonight. Be sure of one thing. If you are a senior citizen, if you are under the protection of Medicare you will not be impacted in any way negatively by what the Congress has done".

Was that Kanjorski's second damnable lie? He is listening to his mentor, Nancy Pelosi. Of course she was the one who said "But we have to pass this bill so you can find out what is in it".

Protecting Medicare??? Actually not, just hurting seniors.

Clinton Stumping For Kanjorski

It's old news that Bill Clinton came into Nanticoke yesterday to stump for Paul Kanjorski.

A little observation about Clinton by John Baer today. The article is discussing voting trends in Pennsylvania over the years.

In 1994, Clinton was seen as more liberal as president than as a candidate and got hammered over deficits and health-care reform (sound familiar?). Democrats lost 54 House seats, eight Senate seats and control of Congress.

Will history repeat itself?

Kanjorski Hires Kevin Lynn- Payback?

Bill OBoyle reports for the Times Leader that Congressman Paul Kanjorski has hired former WILK Talk Show host Kevin Lynn as a "communications assistant".
As you can see Abigail McDonough wanted to play coy with the media about this hire.

Abbie McDonough, communications director at Kanjorski’s Washington, D.C., office, confirmed Lynn was hired and said his title is “communications assistant'"

McDonough would not reveal Lynn’s salary, stating in an e-mail, “He works out of the Wilkes-Barre office and all congressional salaries are available to the public on a quarterly basis.”

The first lesson one learns in communication is to talk to each other. It helps keep the story straight.

When contacted Monday, Lynn said he began working for the congressman Oct. 4 at a weekly salary of $1,000. Abbie wanted to hide information but Lynn didn't know it.

McDonough also said “Kevin’s views as stated on the radio are not emblematic of the Congressman’s opinions.”

Lynn, 61, said his job consists of writing for the congressman about job-related matters. Lynn stressed that he is not working on the veteran lawmaker’s reelection campaign.

Let's see folks. It is three weeks before an election where Kanjorski has not led in one poll. Kanjorski has Ed Mitchell speak for him. Abbie McDonough's title is "communications director". According to Legistorm.com Ms. McDonough was paid $54,677.12 last year up from $46,937.50 the previous year, a 16.5% increase. Yet Kanjorski sees a need to hire one more "communications assistant" at another $52,000 per year. The taxpayers went from paying $46,937.50 per year for someone to speak on Kanjorski's behalf to $108,677.12.

Senior citizens received no raise last year in their Social Security and are facing the same fate this year. In this Pocono Record article Kanjorski tells seniors they "don't have to worry about losing any benefits because of this bill.


"This was one of the most difficult votes I have ever cast, primarily because there is a great deal of confusion about what this bill will do. Senior citizens do not have to worry about losing any benefits because of this bill. In fact, their coverage for prescription drug costs and preventative care will improve. No federal funding will be used to fund abortion. The bill does not empower the federal government to take over health care. If people are happy with the insurance they have, nothing needs to change."

— U.S. Rep. Paul Kanjorski, D-11


Obamacare Forces 22,000 Seniors to Lose Medicare Advantage

Side Effects: Massachusetts Seniors Will Lose Medicare Advantage Plans in 2011

New York Times Reluctantly Notes Seniors Losing Medicare Benefits, Denies It’s a Problem

CMS Data Shows 30 Percent of Seniors Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Plans to Lose Coverage

Kanjorski should explain his statement to the public about not losing any benefits because of his yes vote.

Ms. McDonough has been facing some tough questions about the Congressman.

Kanjorski: Project could lure 1000 jobs to NEPA

Rep. Kanjorski Seems To Insult Minorities

Mark-to-Market Lobby Buoys Bank Profits 20% as FASB May Say Yes

March 30 (Bloomberg) -- Four days after U.S. lawmakers berated Financial Accounting Standards Board Chairman Robert Herz and threatened to take rulemaking out of his hands, FASB proposed an overhaul of fair-value accounting that may improve profits at banks such as Citigroup Inc. by more than 20 percent.

The changes proposed on March 16 to fair-value, also known as mark-to-market accounting, would allow companies to use “significant judgment” in valuing assets and reduce the amount of writedowns they must take on so-called impaired investments, including mortgage-backed securities. A final vote on the resolutions, which would apply to first-quarter financial statements, is scheduled for April 2.

The political action committees of banks including Citigroup, Bank of America, Bank of New York Mellon, Wells Fargo and banking trade groups contributed money to Kanjorski’s re- election campaign last year, according to the Federal Election Commission. Citigroup gave $6,500, Bank of America $7,000, Bank of New York $8,000 and Wells Fargo $13,000.

Kanjorski spokeswoman Abigail McDonough didn’t return calls seeking comment.

Northeastern Pa. congressmen weigh tough vote

Two undecided northeastern Pennsylvania Democrats may decide the fate of health care overhaul legislation slated for a House vote this weekend.

That hardly makes Congressmen Paul Kanjorski and Chris Carney happy. Their political futures hang in the balance.

How prophetic is that reporter's analysis turning out to be as we approach election day? Both Kanjorski and Carney are in trouble.

Kanjorski Demolished 11th District Chances With Voting Record

In today's Wall Street Journal the following Opinion on "Obamacare and the Election" is writtend by its editorial staff. Republicans should heed the advice.

Republicans have made intellectual progress on health care since the 1990s, but it remains outside their political comfort zone and certain (or shall we say uncertain) Members still believe the issue is a loser. Yet ObamaCare has scrambled everything.

For one, the plan's march to the sea is only beginning and the trail of destruction will grow. The last six months have seen 2011 premium increases as high as 9% due to ObamaCare; multibillion-dollar corporate writedowns by Verizon, AT&T, Caterpillar and others; disruption in the insurance markets leading to the erasure of child-only policies and other types of specialty coverage as shown in the McDonald's imbroglio; the Administration beginning to impose price controls on premiums; insurers withdrawing private options from Medicare Advantage; and Democratic protection of a 1099 tax reporting mandate that will slam small businesses.

Republicans should be repeating all of these tangible harms in a litany, while predicting the damage to come. Every wonk in Washington knows this bill creates a new entitlement that will transfer the costs of covering the uninsured to the government but do nothing to control underlying health costs. Democrats will embrace more restrictions on care of the kind we are already seeing in Massachusetts since Mitt Romney's ObamaCare dress rehearsal.

Yesterday the Standard Speaker published this Opinion about the stimulus package, Stimulus money being spent just as advertised. Okay if they think so. Look at this article, Spending stimulus money is key challenge in Pa., that appeared in the Delaware County Daily Times.

According to state officials, recipients of the roughly $29 billion doled out for Pennsylvania stimulus projects were given one simple, five-letter word of instruction: S-P-E-N-D.

"There has been a tremendous focus on spending this money quickly in order to spur the economy quickly," said Mary Rucci, director of citizens' awareness at the Pennsylvania Stimulus Accountability Office in Harrisburg.

"There is a big focus on spending rapidly and I think in many areas it's taken place and it's been a change for state government," she said. "There was a tremendous effort across the board to identify shovel-ready projects and to accelerate processes however possible to get the funds spent."

With more than $10.5 billion spent so far, Rucci said the state looked on track to spend its share of the $787 billion stimulus package by 2014.

They just don't get it. People need jobs and they need them NOW, not in 2014.

So what does the Pennsylvania legislature do about it. Pa. House adjourns for elections, leaving policy items unsettled

HARRISBURG - With the bang of a gavel Wednesday, the state House recessed so members could return to their districts to run for reelection.

But the fate of a number of big-ticket policy items remains up in the air, among them a tax on extraction of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale. Other bills appear destined for legislative burial, including one that would crack down on distracted driving.

Mr. Eachus and Company is worried about re-election and their jobs, not ours. There isn't one word mentioned about job creation. Unbelievable.

JOBS AND HEALTHCARE. If I was running as a Republican I would utter those words over and over and over til the end of the campaign.

Kanjorski And Obamacare Force Sale of NEPA Hospital

This report from WNEP-TV16 details the sale of an almost century old Catholic hospital system due in part to the provisions found in the Obamacare healthcare reform legislation supported by Paul Kanjorski.

The Sisters of Mercy first opened Mercy Hospital in Scranton in 1917. Now the facility and all other Mercy locations in the area are up for sale.

"There is always sadness and mourning when you think of letting go of anything but the Sisters of Mercy are strongly supportive of this decision because we do understand the realities of health care and we do think it's best for the community," said Sister Marie Parker of Mercy Health Partners.

She and Mercy Health Partners CEO Kevin Cook said they are already in talks with potential buyers.

They said Mercy isn't struggling but, they added, now is the time to make a sale.

"We are in position of strength and it's always better to make a move for the future from that position," Sister Marie Parke added.

"Actually we're doing well. We're ahead of budget for the year. It's more that when we look out over the landscape of health care over the next five years and the needs of these facilities, the needs of this community, we understand a different level of investment will be needed than what we can do on our own," Cook said.

They said much of that required investment is the result of the health care reform bill passed in Washington.

The CEO said it means the need for more spending and less federal reimbursements.

"Health care reform is absolutely playing a role. Was it the precipitating factor in this decision? No, but was it a factor in our planning over the next five years? Absolutely," Cook added.

On Healthcare Hold The Applause

On health care, hold the applause
By NINA OWCHARENKO AND ROBERT E. MOFFIT - The Heritage Foundation



Last March, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the Obama administration's health-care bill had to become law "so you can find out what is in it." Six months later, we're finding out, all right. And its popularity is flat-lining.

Public opinion - fueled by daily revelations of higher costs, heftier premiums and disruptions in current and future health insurance coverage - is quickly hardening in favor of full-scale repeal. A closer look at how specific groups will be affected shows why:

Businesses: The White House heralds the small-business health-care tax credits, and the taxpayer bailout for retiree coverage, as business boosters. This might impress anyone who doesn't run a business. But business leaders know that disruptive employer mandates; a raft of new taxes on insurance, drugs, medical devices and investment; plus mounds of regulation and IRS paperwork, will hike costs considerably.


Meanwhile, the New York-based Mercer consulting firm reports that 47 percent of employers expect to lose the "grandfathered status" of their health plan next year under new federal rules. So much for that repeated presidential promise of "keeping" the plan you like.

Seniors: The White House team thinks that Andy Griffith can sell their Medicare changes to gullible seniors through television ads. But Medicare's Office of the Actuary projects that the record-breaking payment reductions due to hit hospitals, home health agencies, and nursing homes will make 15 percent of these providers unprofitable and possibly "jeopardize" seniors' access to care.

Payment cuts to Medicare Advantage plans will hit especially hard. These plans' projected 10-year senior enrollment is expected to drop from 14.8 to 7.4 million. By 2017, the average annual per capita cuts for Medicare Advantage enrollees will be about $3,700 - a 27 percent reduction from today's levels. Perhaps Griffith could cut another ad explaining to seniors why this is good news.

Doctors: They lose big time. The law doesn't fix the Medicare physician payment formula, meaning that doctors again face draconian payment cut of 23 percent this December. And with an estimated 18 million more persons enrolled in Medicaid, which pays doctors on average 56 percent of what they'd make in private practice, physicians will see their pay being set even more through government formulas.

Doctors will have to comply with new federal quality and reporting standards or face mandatory reductions in Medicare payments. They can expect more bureaucracy, more rules and regulations, more compliance and reporting requirements. Top it off with more emergency room overcrowding and a shortage of colleagues, and still no relief through medical liability reform. Doctors should sue their lobbyists for malpractice.

States: Washington's micro-management of health care is very unpopular in state capitols. Twenty states have filed suit against the imposition of an unconstitutional individual mandate to buy federally approved insurance, and 13 are suing over the mandatory Medicaid expansion. Already 44 states report that they have exceeded projected Medicaid enrollment and spending targets for this year, but Washington is ordering even higher state spending.

Under Section 1311, the cash-strapped states "shall" set up federally designed health insurance exchanges, and, in so doing, comply with numerous federal rules on their establishment and management. While the Congressional Budget office says the 10-year federal costs for "start up" and related expenses to establish these exchanges is $7 billion, additional costs to the states is unknown. Expect more court challenges.

Taxpayers: President Obama promised he wouldn't raise taxes on middle-class Americans. Supposedly, no family making less than $250,000 annually would be touched. Not so. Most of the new taxes, estimated to generate more than $500 billion in the coming decade, will fall on middle-class Americans.

The president now admits that the new law doesn't lower health-care costs. With more than $1 trillion in additional federal spending, plus the creation of two new entitlements - a program of taxpayer subsidies for insurance and a federal long-term care program - government spending will skyrocket in 2014, driving up costs for taxpayers.

With such strong economic incentives to drop workers' coverage, former Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Holtz-Eakin predicts 35 million people or more could be dumped out of their employer's plan. That would mean bigger taxpayer subsidies for the displaced workers to get their coverage through the state exchanges, much higher federal spending that would raise the deficit by an additional $554 billion in the first 10 years, and as much as $1.4 trillion over the next 10 years.

Some "reform" bill. No wonder so many Americans want to pull the plug.

Commentary In The Times Leader- Stephen M. Alinikoff

Election will offer clear philosophical choices for U.S. COMMENTARY Stephen M. Alinikoff

I CONSIDER myself an average citizen, lucky enough to be born in a country that has bestowed bountiful gifts to my family and to me. I have lived my entire life in the Wyoming Valley and was born in the waning days of World War II. The country has changed dramatically since then and I must say in most respects not for the better. I honestly feel that we will not be leaving our children a country in which their generation will be better off and better equipped to surpass the achievements of previous generations.

If I were not so angry with what is happening with my beloved country I would have merely passed over an article in The Times Leader, which reported a meeting that Congressman Paul Kanjorski hosted at the East Mountain Inn on Sept. 8.

What Kanjorski was reported to have said is emblematic of one of, if not the major problems facing this nation: a dysfunctional Congress totally out of touch with the desires, needs and history of this country.

Kanjorski related his defense of the bailout packages over the last two years: “Those days will be remembered as the most instrumental moments of the 21st century.” Kanjorski, Nancy Pelosi, Charley Rangel and Maxine Walters were the ones standing between us and the total financial collapse of the United States. Yes, he honestly believes that and expects us to believe it.

The congressman went on to say: “If you recall gun sales were way up, America was weaponed up, that’s what the times were like two years ago.” He then said something that has yet to be followed up by our local or national media. He told the group “8,000 troops stood at the ready” in North Carolina to come to Washington to guard the White House and the Capitol.

I certainly was not aware we were so close to an armed insurrection. My question is: from whom?

It really is hard to believe, if nothing else Congressman Kanjorski is at the top of his game when it comes to political hyperbole on the campaign trail. History and its facts do not lie. The facts are that over the last 77 years, we have seen an undeniable march of one-party rule and that party’s philosophy being legislated into statutory policy.

It is the undeniable philosophy of central government growth at the expense of federalism and individual rights.

It is an undeniable fact that we are on the verge of a national bankruptcy, which, if continued, will have consequences for our national security and ability to remain the world’s preeminent power.

It is an undeniable fact that all legislation concerning matters of revenue, taxes, spending and finance must constitutionally originate in the House of Representatives.

From 1933, (the 73rd Congress) to the present (the 111th Congress) there have been 38 sessions of Congress. Thirty-one of the sessions – 81 percent – have been controlled by the Democratic Party. In the most recent 26 sessions the percentage in Democratic control has been 85 percent – even higher.

Kanjorski, one of the most senior Democrats, has served since 1985. He has worked to bring us public projects such as: an inflatable dam; some sort of shooting range/training facility to be placed somewhere. He also was successful in steering over 5 million in taxpayer funds to a failed business owned by family members. As one of the most senior members, he was one of the leaders in bringing us “Obamacare,” which will create the single largest bureaucracy by any Congress in our history.

In his meeting at the East Mountain Inn, he also heralded his role in passing Wall Street reform although he didn’t mention that the two main culprits – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – were left noticeably untouched in this new legislation. Those agencies have been used by Congress for years as a repository for political jobs and bad loans.

After reading the article, I do not for one moment doubt that Congressman Kanjorski believes in what he said and has done and is proud of where he has taken us. He is not only one of the leaders of the present majority in Congress, but also one of its most outspoken defenders.

So, our choice seems clear. If you are satisfied with the politics of Kanjorski, Pelosi, Walters and Rangel, and where they are taking us, your choice is easy.

However if you feel anger about the half truths, the lack of integrity, the self serving attitude and arrogance as well as the downright incompetence of our elected representatives, the choice is also yours.


Stephen Alinikoff lives in Kingston. He is a managing principal in a local insurance and investment firm.

Kanjorski Vote On Healthcare To Raise Price For All

FoxNews.com is reporting that new government figures show Obamacare under Barack Obama's costly healthcare overhaul that Paul Kanjorski voted for will increase the tab for everyone.

The nation's health care tab will go up -- not down -- as a result of President Barack Obama's sweeping overhaul. That's the conclusion of a government forecast released Thursday, which also finds the increase will be modest.

Here's what Paul Kanjorski had to say on March 21, 2010 about his vote for the healthcare overhaul.

"Today I will vote for legislation designed to improve the affordability and accessibility of health care. Americans already spend more on health care than the people of any other nation. If we take no action, health care costs are expected to double over the next ten years, just as they have over the last ten years.

The 60 Plus Association, as reported in the Times-Tribune, started television commercials attacking Paul Kanjorski for his misguided vote on the healthcare overhaul.

A conservative-leaning, nonprofit issues group will launch close to a $500,000 television advertising campaign locally today portraying U.S. Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski as a Washington liberal who voted for a costly health care reform bill that cuts Medicare by $500 billion.



Ed Mitchell, Kanjorski media consultant said. "Who in their right minds believes that he(Kanjorski) would (have) voted to cut Medicare by $500 billion?" The answer Mr. Mitchell is the Congressional Budget Office back in 2009.

Congress’ chief budget officer on Tuesday contradicted President Barack Obama’s oft-stated claim that seniors wouldn’t see their Medicare benefits cut under a health care overhaul.

The head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, told senators that seniors in Medicare’s managed care plans could see reduced benefits under a bill in the Finance Committee.

The bill would cut payments to the Medicare Advantage plans by more than $100 billion over 10 years.

Elmendorf said the changes “would reduce the extra benefits that would be made available to beneficiaries through Medicare Advantage plans.”

SHAWN BISHOP, SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE PROFESSIONAL STAFF MEMBER: “The $113 billion dollars is a reduction in the extra benefits, the added, additional benefits that Medicare Advantage enrollees have available to them. And those benefits come in the form of vision, dental, reduced hospital deductible. It’s unstatutory, it’s unlawful for any Medicare Advantage plan to reduce the AB covered benefit that they provide. That’s by statute. They have to provide that. They are going to have a reduction in the added benefits that they have in Medicare Advantage. So there’s a reduction in benefits but its additional extra benefits that they have above what they’re entitled to by law on the fee for service side.” (Finance Committee, U.S. Senate, Hearing, 9/22/09).

Ed Morrissey states in his article "Only an idiot would conclude that $500 billion in cuts to Medicare over 10 years would mean no reduction in benefits". Elmendorf is speaking not just from hard data but also common sense. Any attempt to get that level of “savings” from Medicare will necessarily cut the benefits going to its recipients. Trying to cast that as a myth is either an indication of mathematical incompetence, political dishonesty, or both.

I guess that answers Mitchell's question.

Kanjorski And Sallie Mae- When A Handshake Means Nothing

A press release in April, 2009 by Paul Kanjorski talked about jobs coming to Sallie Mae in Northeastern Pennsylvania.

U.S. Rep. Paul Kanjorski called it the best kind of economic stimulus: new jobs.

Kanjorski and U.S. Sen. Bob Casey joined Sallie Mae Chief Executive Officer Albert L. Lord to brighten an otherwise dreary Monday by announcing the work force at Sallie Mae will nearly double over the next 12 to 18 months.

The three said Sallie Mae is returning to the United States about 2,000 jobs from its overseas operations, with 600 of them coming to the facility in the Hanover Industrial Park. The hiring process is expected to begin immediately.

Kanjorski said he had a meeting with Sallie Mae managers and employees on the day before the 2008 general election. He said it was a difficult meeting and he had to bite his tongue because he couldn't reveal discussions were already under way about bringing jobs back to the United States.

"That's why I couldn't wait to get back here today to make this announcement," he said, noting that Sallie Mae will become one of the top 10 employers in the region.

(A little pun here, the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away).

In this press clip from the Labor and Industry Press Office there is a Times Leader article from 11/07/2009 talking about petitions Sallie Mae supporters were circulating in trying to save 1000 Sallie Mae jobs.

The petitions were circulated to protect the 1,000 local jobs that could be lost under a proposal to have the federal government originate all federal student loans.

Grass-roots organizers such as Lisa Dougherty of Hazleton, an 11-year Sallie Mae employee, coordinated the petition drive that took her and others to Philadelphia two weeks ago. They boarded a busa and went througout stadium parking lots to get signatures. That was an extraordinary effort.

The effort pleased Al Lord, chief executive officer of Sallie Mae, who traveled from the publicly traded company's headquarters in Reston, Va., to say thank you.

(here's an ironic twist to the story) Lord thanked (at least it wasn't The Lord thanked) U.S. Rep. Paul E. Kanjorski, for sticking up for Sallie Mae. The company's political action committee has contributed thousands of dollars to Kanjorski's campaigns, including $11,000 in 2007 and 2008.

"That took courage. There's a lot of pressure to vote in a given direction because this is a favored bill of the administration." Little did Lord know how soon that courage would turn to cowardness.

A Big Fat Slob wrote about Paul Kanjorski, healtcare reform, and Sallie Mae back in March, 2010. Kanjorski claimed he was undecided at the time over voting for healthcare reform and refused to commit that he was going to support Obama on the bill.

A source with information received directly from the White House has told us that Kanjorski has told the President that he is firmly in the Republican column on the health insurance reform initiative. [See UPDATE below] Contrary to recent reports in the Washington Post , Firedoglake, and Ben Pershing's Blog, among others, Kanjorski reportedly told the President there was little no room for movement on his vote.

Kanjorski's movement to the "No" column was NOT the result of the faux abortion issue. Instead, Kanjo's decision to oppose health insurance reform was dictated by the interests of the large private student loan lender, Sallie Mae, which has a facility in his district. Kanjorski has long-ties with the folk at Sallie Mae, something he's boasted about in the past. A 2008 piece on Kanjorski's deep-ties to Sallie Mae laid it out pretty well:

Sallie Mae has rewarded Kanjorski for his support in other ways as well. According to federal campaign finance records, the loan giant has contributed, through its PAC and from individual company officials, nearly $70,000 to the Congressman's campaign coffers over the last decade. In addition, the Sallie Mae Fund, the company's charitable arm, has made generous contributions to one of the Congressman's pet causes: donating $1 million in 2003 to the Wilkes-Barre Catholic Youth Center, which provides daycare and overnight care to children from primarily lower-income and minority families. Kanjorski has long championed the center and fought to get federal funding for it. In Sallie Mae's news release, the center's executive director "expressed deep gratitude" to the Congressman for helping to secure the loan company's donation.

Stephen Burd, The Higher Ed Watch Blog. The House added "The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act" to the reconciliation bill on health insurance reform. The reform measure allows students to borrow directly from the federal government instead of from Sallie Mae or other lenders. Currently, the federal government loans money to Sallie Mae, which in turn makes a tidy profit by re-lending our tax dollars to college kids.

Kanjorski, by supporting one of his large corporate financial backers, is threatening to turning his back on the rank and file, the middle class, the laborers, and all of the individuals suffering for lack of access to health care.

As well all know Kanjo went on to ultimately vote for the healthcare reform bill but with a handshake that Sallie Mae jobs in his district would be spared from the provisions in the bill that turned students loans over to the federal government, not that the ObamaStatesofAmerica isn't big enough already.

In this interview on WILK posted Sunday March 21, 2010 Paul Kanjorski talks about his YES vote on healthcare reform. The caption underneath the broadcast states 11th District Congressman Paul Kanjorski tells WILK in an exclusive interview that he will be voting YES on the healthcare reform bill after getting some assurance on the security of some 1100 jobs locally through Sallie Mae.

The Times Tribunes published this article by David Falcheck on March 31, 2010- Changes in federal student loan program could put local Sallie Mae center in jeopardy

The law would put an end to billions of dollars in federal subsidies to lenders originating student loans and make loan originations directly. But the government will need companies such as Sallie Mae to service the loans.

That's what U.S. Rep. Paul Kanjorski said he expects to happen. To convince him to vote for the combination health care and student loan reform legislation, he said he insisted on assurances from the U.S. Department of Education that Sallie Mae jobs would be preserved.


It's May 20, 2010 and here is today's headline in the Times Leader-

Sallie Mae letting 100 go in July

One hundred customer service workers at the Sallie Mae center in Hanover Township have been informed that they’ll lose their jobs July 16.

The news wasn’t unexpected. Just last month the Reston, Va.-based student lending and loan processing company announced that 2,500 total workers will be let go by the end of 2011, including all 1,200 workers at the company’s centers in Killeen, Texas, and Panama City, Fla.

Conwey Casillas, Sallie Mae’s vice president of public affairs, said, “The company’s focused on our future and our future in Pennsylvania is highly dependent on the amount of direct loans we service.”

He declined to discuss the layoffs or comment changes in student lending approved by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in March and its direct impact on the announcement made Thursday

The change is expected to save at least $60 billion. But it will also mean a drastic reshaping of Sallie Mae, the nation’s largest student lender.

In the course of one year and one month Northeastern Pennsylvania went from securing 2,000 jobs to losing 100 jobs all due to Paul Kanjorski's vote for the government takeover of the student loans.  The handshake he recieved as assurance for their jobs wasn't worth the paper it was written on.

When Arlen Specter toured the Innovation Center with Paul Kanjorski he had this to say "It is very helpful to have people with seniority and experience and clout," .

In Kanjorski's interview with Roderick Random aka Borys he had this to say
"It's taken 25 years to get to the seniority position I have and the power position I have," he said. "Nobody who replaces me will get there in one, two or three terms."

If seniority matters so much, why did Mr. Kanjorski bring home fewer dollars in the 2010 federal budget than Rep. Chris Carney, D-10? Mr. O'Brien asked.

Right now there are 2,500 people at Sallie Mae asking the same question.

The Geniuses On Healthcare Reform

Companies Are Already Thinking About Dumping Worker Health Benefits

When the United States government passed healthcare reform, well that is the name they put to it anyway, many rallied around believing the law was goiing to lower premiums and cover more people. The liberals quickly pounded their chests that finally everyone would get to live off the government. Well, to those who think there is a free ride, read this article about post-healthcare reform.

Many big companies, Verizon (V), AT&T (A), John Deere (DE), and Caterpillar (CAT)for example, are thinking of dropping their own paid health insurance. Instead of the traditional employer-paid plans they will give employees a stipend to buy their own insurance on the federally mandated state insurance exchanges.

The problem is the Democrats never planned on this scenario when they forced this healthcare bill upon the people. Healthcare reform may have passed but there is no denying that it polarized this country like many of the Democratic policies hailed by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid.

The evidence comes from internal company documents that Fortune magazine obtained from a congressional committee, which requested them while investigating big-corporation complaints that the Affordable Care Act would collectively cost them $1.35 billion. (Short summary: The law closes a tax loophole that let companies double-count tax benefits established by Medicare drug program.) The committee was going to hold hearings on the companies’ write-downs of this money, writes Fortune’s Shawn Tully, until it saw the documents.

What they revealed is that all four companies believed that the savings for dropping employee health coverage would far outweigh the penalties they’d owe under the reform law for doing so — about $2,000 per employee. Even if the companies gave their workers raises with a post-tax value exceeding the cost of insurance premiums, after government subsidies, that amount plus the penalty would cost far less than the corporate health benefits did.

A slide from an internal AT&T presentation tells the story. Titled “Medical Cost vs. No Coverage Penalty,” it shows that in 2009, AT&T spent $2.4 billion on health benefits for its nearly 300,000 active employees. The penalty for not covering those employees, by contrast, would be only $600 million, or 25 percent of its current spend.

Basically the Democrats have positioned this market so that the government will become the biggest supplier of insurance. Since when is the government supposed to be in "business."


What has 75 balls and screws old ladies? Bingo. What has no balls and screws everyone? The government. Geniuses.

Kanjorski Tries To Placate Seniors With Misinformation

Standard Speaker staffer Jim Dino, a great reporter, wrote this article about Paul Kanjorski's appearance at the Greater Hazleton Chamber of Commerce's Red Carpet Breakfast yesterday.

In the Paul Kanjorski tradition of "stretching the facts to win an election" he tries to reassure seniors that the recently passed healthcare legislation would not harm Medicare.

"I talked to a senior citizen recently, and he told me, 'Don't let them ruin Medicare,' " Kanjorski said. "The bill actually helps Medicare by closing part of the doughnut hole with prescription drugs. The bill also extends care under Medicare. Don't let anybody tell you this bill hurts Medicare.

A funny thing happened on the way to page A13 of the same newspaper. The headline reads "Seniors fear new law will hurt Medicare". The link will take you to Yahoo news since the SS choose not to publish the Associated Press article on its website.

There's no doubt that broad cuts in projected Medicare payments to insurance plans, hospitals, nursing homes and other service providers will sting. Those cuts will impact on the provision of care through more staffing cuts and less new services. Is that "extending care"?

This line is particularly telling. Obama is hoping that most will eventually conclude the plusses outweigh the minuses. Mr. President, shouldn't there be more than just hope. Or was this the part of Hope and Change you were talking about. Paul, if the President only has hope how can you state "It will".

The bill may close the donut hole in Medicare Part D but it taxes the pharmaceutical industry to pay for that provision which will ultimately be passed onto the consumer through higher premiums.

The next problem is for retirees and their prescription benefit. This article from Richard Lowry highlights the problem corporate America is facing with this new bill.

Companies began to receive a tax-free, deductible subsidy in 2003 to continue prescription-drug coverage for their retirees, a ploy to keep the firms from dumping retirees into the new government prescription-drug program. Outside experts and big employers counseled against ending the deductibility, pointing out that it would adversely affect the companies' financial statements immediately (accounting rules require that corporations note the long-term effect of the new liability right away).

These warnings got shelved under a category ensuring their brusque dismissal: Information Inconvenient to the Passage of Health-Care Reform.

Retirees will be forced to pay more for their current coverage which could amount to several hundred dollars per month as a result of the removal of the subsidy.

It is evidenced by the required SEC filings made by several large corporations including AT&T, Catepillar, and Deere & Co.

Last week, AT&T announced it will take an immediate $1 billion write-down thanks to a new tax in the health bill that will cause Caterpillar ($100 million) and Deere & Co. ($150 million), among other large employers, to do the same. The benefits consultancy Towers Watson estimates that the change may reduce corporate profits by as much as $14 billion over time.

The companies will reconsider providing prescription-drug coverage for their retirees at all. The Employee Benefit Research Institute calculates that companies could now save $1,000 per beneficiary by handing them off to the government. As many as 2 million more retirees could end up on the government program, according to James Klein of the American Benefits Council. These retirees might wonder about the truthfulness of Obama's constant promise that everyone can keep his current insurance.

The CBO estimated that the new treatment of the subsidy would generate roughly $5 billion in revenue. If companies stop taking the subsidy, that revenue disappears, while the costs of the drug program increase. A Towers Watson study stipulates that "employer plans generally provide much better protection than the standard Medicare benefit." And subsidizing those employer plans is cheaper to the government than providing the coverage itself.

Whenver Paul Kanjorski speaks the facts will always triumph over the rhetoric. Seniors will not only be paying significantly more for their helathcare; they will be forced into a government program.

It isn't enough to own the banks and the auto industry. Obamacare wants the healthcare industry too.

Paul Kanjorski's Pandering Extraordinare

In tomorrow's Times Leader they are going to print a story about Paul Kanjorski pandering to seniors that healthcare reform is good for them.
10:14 PM

Kanjorski touts health reform
Cough..B.S....Cough...B.S...okay enough with that.

In the same publication on the same day here is the headline
Posted: 1:00 AM
Updated: 1:20 AM


Health insurance could go up 17% for young adults
CARLA K. JOHNSON AP Medical Writer

Over at PA Watercooler they wrote about this problem.

Paul Kanjorski...whatahelluvajoburdoing...It's the Republicans who are supporting big insurance...No Paul..it has always been you.

Here is Part 1- Kanjorski Owned By Business PACs

Part 2 Kanjorski Owned By Wall Street

Part 3 Kanjorski Owned By Wall Street (More)

Rank: 4 – Contributions from Insurance industry, career ($995,186) But ohh..yess Paul its the Republicans...why don't you return this money?

Carney Takes On Palin

Carney Wants Sarah Palin To Come To Northeast PA For A Debate It would be a most interesting confrontation to say the least.

Big Win For Big Pharma

In this Associated Press article by Alan Fran he outlines how the big pharmaceutical giants lobbyists made sure that the healthcare reform bill was a WIN for them.

WASHINGTON — Chalk one up for the pharmaceutical lobby. The U.S. drug industry fended off price curbs and other hefty restrictions in President Barack Obama's health care law even as it prepares for plenty of new business when an estimated 32 million uninsured Americans gain health coverage.

To be sure, the law also levies taxes and imposes other costs on pharmaceutical companies, leaving its final impact on the industry's bottom line uncertain. A recent analysis by Goldman Sachs, the Wall Street firm, suggests the overhaul could mean "a manageable hit" of tens of billions of dollars over the coming decade while bolstering the value of drug-company stocks. Others expect profits, not losses, of the same magnitude.

Either way, pharmaceutical lobbyists won new federal policies they coveted and set a trajectory for long-term industry growth. Privately, several of them say their biggest triumph was heading off Democrats led by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who wanted even more money from their industry to finance the health care system's expansion.

"Pharma came out of this better than anyone else," said Ramsey Baghdadi, a Washington health policy analyst who projects a $30 billion, 10-year net gain for the industry. "I don't see how they could have done much better."

Chalk up another one for Kanjorski and Carney's vote for Big Pharma. Washington wasn't worried about taking care of the middle class. It was and will continue to worry about the political dollars dolled out by lobbyists.

As an addendum there is a commercial being aired by "Americans For Stable Quality Care" supporting Paul Kanjorski. Who is a member of that organization? Big Pharma- we represent millions of doctors, nurses, technicians, manufacturers, hospitals, drug companies and health care consumers across the U.S. Never known a loser in a political issue to pay for commercials for a politician.

For Those Who Believe The Health Care Bill Screws The Insurance Industry

Health care bill benefits insurance industryand The Reasons. Take a look at why the next movie is "Insurers Gone Wild" So why do insurers welcome Obamacare? Why are the Democrats labeling Republicans as protecting insurers when the Dems gave them 32 million more customers? Ask any businessperson whether their business will suffer or flourish if they recieve 32 million more customers?

The Obamacare Scam. Hidden taxes in legislation that inflates premiums.

Healthcare Coverage- What Does It Really Mean?

In a previous post we touched on the subject of health insurance coverage in the newly signed Patient Protection and Affordable Healthcare Act, otherwise commonly known as the Healthcare Reform Bill. What people are hearing and what the bill really contains seems to be a severe disconnect.

If anyone believes that the coverage for the uninsured will cover everything, think again. That is known as a Cadiallac plan that will be taxed. Will the policies have a deductible of $5,000.00, $10,000.00, what will it be? Will it cover prescription medications? What exactly is the government promising to the citizenry when it states it has passed healthcare reform? Let's take a look

• Create four benefit categories of plans plus a separate catastrophic plan to be offered through the Exchange, and in the individual and small group markets:
– Bronze plan represents minimum creditable coverage and provides the essential health benefits, cover 60% of the benefit costs of the
plan, with an out-of-pocket limit equal to the Health Savings Account (HSA) current law limit ($5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for
families in 2010); So who has that kind of money laying around to pay for healthcare.If you can't afford the premium how can you afford the out of pocket expense?
– Silver plan provides the essential health benefits, covers 70% of the benefit costs of the plan, with the HSA out-of-pocket limits;
– Gold plan provides the essential health benefits, covers 80% of the benefit costs of the plan, with the HSA out-of-pocket limits;
- Platinum plan provides the essential health benefits, covers 90% of the benefit costs of the plan, with the HSA out-of-pocket limits;
– Catastrophic plan available to those up to age 30 or to those who are exempt from the mandate to purchase coverage and provides catastrophic coverage only with the coverage level set at the HSA current law levels except that prevention benefits and coverage for three primary care visits would be exempt from the deductible. This plan is only available in the individual market.

Hold onto your pocket book if you are a low-income individual or family.

– • Reduce the out-of-pocket limits for those with incomes up to 400% FPL to the following levels:
– 100-200% FPL: one-third of the HSA limits
($1,983/individual and $3,967/family);
– 200-300% FPL: one-half of the HSA limits
($2,975/individual and $5,950/family);
– 300-400% FPL: two-thirds of the HSA limits
($3,987/individual and $7,973/family).
These out-of-pocket reductions are applied within the actuarial limits of the plan and will not increase the actuarial value of the plan.

FPL stands for the Federal Poverty Level. Here is a chart of the federal poverty levels for 2009-2010. $10,830 for an individual and $22,050 for a family of four. If you are at those levels you will be expected to pay $1,983/individual and $3,967/family. Folks, are they kidding us??? If they call that a reduction what a scam.

In an effort to educate the masses here is some other highlights of the bill from the Kaiser Family Foundation that are worth mentioning.

• Impose new annual fees on the pharmaceutical manufacturing sector, according to the following schedule:
– $2.8 billion in 2012-2013;
– $3.0 billion in 2014-2016;
– $4.0 billion in 2017;
– $4.1 billion in 2018; and
– $2.8 billion in 2019 and later.
• Impose an annual fee on the health insurance sector, according to the following schedule:
– $8 billion in 2014;
– $11.3 billion in 2015-2016;
– $13.9 billion in 2017;
– $14.3 billion in 2018
– For subsequent years, the fee shall be the amount from the previous year increased by the rate of premium growth.

If anyone believes that those entities won't in turn pass on those costs to the consumers there are a few bridges for sale. Basically consumers will have to pay premiums then higher premiums because these costs will be passed on.

• Create state-based American Health Benefit Exchanges and Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) Exchanges, administered by a governmental agency or non-profit organization, through which individuals and small businesses with up to 100 employees can purchase qualified coverage. Permit states to allow businesses with more than 100 employees to purchase coverage in the SHOP Exchange beginning in 2017. States may form regional Exchanges or allow more than one Exchange to operate in a state as long as each Exchange serves a distinct geographic area. (Funding available to states to establish Exchanges within one year of enactment and until January 1, 2015) Individuals and small businesses will not receive any ability to purchase qualified coverage until 2017. Exchanges will allow businesses to pool their purchase lowering costs. Evidently that wasn't important enough to happen now.

Some sobering analysis. That is why they want to tell you that the Republicans are obstructionists. It keeps your eye off the real problems in this legislation.

Let's go on to Medicaid.

Expand Medicaid to all individuals under age 65 (children, pregnant women, parents, and adults without dependent children) with incomes up to 133% FPL based on modified adjusted gross income (as under current law and in the House and Senate-passed bills undocumented immigrants are not eligible for Medicaid). All newly eligible adults will be guaranteed a benchmark benefit package that at least provides the essential health benefits. To finance the coverage for the newly eligible (those who were not previously eligible for a full benchmark benefit package or who were eligible for a capped program but were not enrolled), states will receive 100% federal funding for 2014 through 2016, 95% federal financing in 2017, 94% federal financing in 2018, 93% federal financing in 2019, and 90% federal financing for 2020 and subsequent years. States that have already expanded eligibility to adults with incomes up to 100% FPL will receive a phased-in increase in the federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) for non-pregnant childless adults sothat by 2020 they receive the same federal financing (90%) as other states. In addition, increase Medicaid payments in fee-forservice and managed care for primary care services provided by primary care doctors (family medicine, general internal medicine or pediatric medicine) to 100% of the Medicare payment rates for 2013 and 2014. States will receive 100% federal financing for the increased payment rates. (Effective January 1,2014)

So taxpayers of individual states will have to share the burden and costs of this expansion starting in 2017 and beyond- A federal mandate but a state problem. No wonder the 14 Attorney Generals are suing the government.

Obama, Kanjorski, and Carney are taking the ability to use your FSA/HSA to pay for over the counter purchases.

Exclude the costs for over-the-counter drugs not prescribed by a doctor from being reimbursed through an HRA or health FSA and from being reimbursed on a tax-free basisthrough an HSA or Archer Medical Savings Account. (Effective January 1, 2011)

To the abortion foes

• Require plans that choose to offer coverage for abortions beyond those for which federal funds are permitted (to save the life of the woman and in cases of rape or incest) in states that allow such coverage to create allocation accounts for segregating premium payments for coverage of abortion services from premium payments for coverage for all other services to ensure that no federal premium or cost-sharing subsidies are used to pay for the abortion coverage. Plans must also estimate the actuarial value of covering abortions by
taking into account the cost of the abortion benefit (valued at no less than $1 per enrollee per month) and cannot take into account any
savings that might be reaped as a result of the abortions.

Prohibit abortion coverage from being required as part of the essential health benefits package. (Effective January 1, 2014)

Can an Executive Order really supercede the law of the land? Why not prohibit it now? Why wait until 2014?

Paul Kanjorski and Chris Carney had a choice. The information above represents their choice.

Lou Barletta On Healthcare Reform Bill Passage And Kanjorski Vote

Watch this at WILK News Radio

Healthcare Reform What Does That Mean?

Perusing the internet today provided many different perspectives on the health care reform reconciliation bill passed by the House yesterday(giving new meaning to March Madness). Maybe it was the sites chosen but an overwhelming backlash seems to be developing over the nod given by the House. What exactly does the healtcare reform mean? Did we fix what was broken or break what was working?

Paul Kanjorski tried to peddle his usual "we sort of stretched the facts" by claiming the bill was "essential to the country's economic future" in this story by Borys Krawczenick of the Times Tribune.

"If we lose this fight today, it will be 15, 20 years before we get a president and a Congress that would take this on," Kanjorski said.

His faithful Democratic followers must ask him "Paul, if the bill was ESSENTIAL to the future and the fight that important why weren't you behind it sooner?" Or will the saying "the people ate it up" hold true once more.

In a display of hutzpah his colleague, Chris Carney, proffered to the masses that "saying yes to health care was absolutely the right vote" in a story appearing in the Times Leader by Andrew Seder.

“Electoral politics did not come in to play,” Carney, D-Dimock Township, said fro mWashington, D.C. on Monday. “You don’t govern based on upcoming elections. If you do you don’t deserve to be here.”

Tom Baldino, a political science professor at Wilkes University, said he wasn’t surprised by Carney's vote but he questioned the two-term congressman's assertions that the upcoming elections didn’t factor in.

“Every vote in Congress takes into consideration the reelection of the member,” Baldino said.

In an interview on Bloomberg Television this morning former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin called the deficit savings from this bill as games and fantasy. The doctors accepting Medicare have a $300 Billion dollar increase in fees due them, NOT IN THE BILL. The cost to run the operations of this bill is $114 Billion, NOT IN THE BILL. $70 Billion in long term care premiums used to calculate deficit reduction, not recognizing that premiums mean claims and the claims are NOT IN THE BILL.
$53 Billion stolen from Social Security used to calculate deficit reduction forgetting that one day benefits will have to be paid, NOT IN THE BILL. Lastly $460 Billion in Medicare cuts with no mechanism in the bill to accomplish those cuts, IN THE BILL WITH NO TEETH.

Overall Holtz-Eakin puts the price tag on this bill at $2.5 trillion dollars with $600 billion to $1 trillion missing in funding. Our children and their children will be paying twice. Once when they have to buy the insurance and the second time when they have to pay off the debt to fund it.

We could have fixed what was broken without this massive burden of debt. Covering the people who are high risk, covering children to age 26, eliminating denying coverage all together, etc. were simple fixes rolled into a complex equation.

The drugmakers were the whipping post to excite the masses for the need to reform healthcare. Guess what? They got more customers with extension of their products covered and paid for by the government in this bill. They are winners not losers. Did Obama, Kanjorski, and Carney tell the public that? Now that one WAS IN THE BILL.

The bill does nothing to reduce costs so premiums will still increase. And the biggest fact left out is the reality that every day there are more and more people in this nation and on this planet. Reducing total costs is a fantasy goal unachievable. If there are 80 million more people in this nation now than 30 years ago there is absolutely no way to reduce the total cost without reducing coverage and care.

The constitutional challenges already started with Tom Corbett at the forefront. The stark reality is that Washington is forcing the costs of this plan onto the states. And they will have nothing of it.

The Louisiana Purchase has an opportunity to repeat itself. Why Lousiana gets $300 million in Medicaid funding while the other 49 get saddled with its costs is a question Kanjorski and Carney need to square up with their Pennsylania constituents.

As for the real benefits of the bill:

• COMING LATER:

The real transformation of America's health insurance system won't take place until 2014.

Four breathtaking changes will happen simultaneously:

• Insurers will be required to take all applicants. They won't be able to turn down people in poor health, or charge them more.

• States will set up new insurance supermarkets for small businesses and people buying their own coverage, pooling together to get the kind of purchasing clout government workers have now.

• Most Americans will be required to carry health insurance, either through an employer, a government program or by buying their own. Those who refuse will face fines from the IRS.

• Tax credits to help pay for premiums will start flowing to middle-class working families, and Medicaid will be expanded to cover more low income people. Households making up to four times the poverty level — about $88,000 for a family of four_ will be eligible for assistance. But the most generous aid — including help with copayments and deductibles — will be for those on the lower-to-middle rungs of the income scale.

When all is said and done, the majority of working-age Americans and their families will still have employer-sponsored coverage, as they do now. But the number of uninsured will drop by more than half. Illegal immigrants would account for more than one-third of the remaining 23 million people without coverage.

Cost could be the Achilles' heel of the whole effort.

"I hope it is not repealed, because we do need to extend coverage to most of our population," said Gail Wilensky, who ran Medicare for President George H.W. Bush and remains a leading health care adviser to Republicans. "But it could well be substantially modified. It expands coverage, but it does very little to take on two other major issues: improving quality and leveling the rate of growth in spending."

P.S. One more thing...Congress gets to keep its Cadillac plan and does not participate in this legislation like the rest of us.