Obama Promises To Veto Legislation That Would Restore The 40 Hour Workweek

Photo credit: The Speaker (Flickr)

Republicans have made it a high priority to re-define “full-time” work under Obamacare for the new Congress, making it 40 hours per week instead of the 30 hours it is currently.

President Obama has now promised to veto legislation that would restore the 40 hour workweek. He did so through press secretary Josh Earnest earlier this week.

The economy has seen a significant transition from full-time work to part-time work as a result of the definition of full-time work as just 30 hours.

It’s not just Republicans who are complaining about the re-definition of the full-time workweek under Obamacare. Obama’s labor union allies are raising an outcry about it as well.

Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa, UFCW President Joseph Hansen, and UNITE-HERE President D. Taylor sent a letter to Obama in 2013 demanding that the problems under Obamacare such as the 30 hour work week be solved:

Since the ACA was enacted, we have been bringing our deep concerns to the Administration, seeking reasonable regulatory interpretations to the statute that would help prevent the destruction of non-profit health plans. As you both know first-hand, our persuasive arguments have been disregarded and met with a stone wall by the White House and the pertinent agencies. This is especially stinging because other stakeholders have repeatedly received successful interpretations for their respective grievances. Most disconcerting of course is last week’s huge accommodation for the employer community—extending the statutorily mandated “December 31, 2013” deadline for the employer mandate and penalties.

Time is running out: Congress wrote this law; we voted for you. We have a problem; you need to fix it. The unintended consequences of the ACA are severe. Perverse incentives are already creating nightmare scenarios.

What do you think? If Obama won’t listen to Congress, will he at least listen to his labor union allies on the definition of the full-time workweek? So far, his answer has been no.

h/t: Townhall

Photo credit: The Speaker (Flickr)

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Top Liberal Meltdowns Of 2014

bestofrants

Whether made by politicians, cable news commentators, or civil rights activists, there was no shortage of controversial remarks and full-blown rants captured on video this year. Western Journalism compiled some of the more memorable moments of leftist punditry from 2014.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Watch: Emotional Congresswoman’s Passionate Tirade About What Obamacare Did To Her Husband

lummis

Jonathan Gruber, the so-called architect of Obamacare, was in the hot seat this week before a congressional oversight committee where he referred to his own comments as “glib, thoughtless, and sometimes downright insulting.” During the four-hour hearing, Wyoming Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R) told her own personal Obamacare story. She and her husband, Alvin Wiederspahn, had enrolled in Obamacare, but when they filed claims, they were informed that their Obamacare enrollment had not been successfully completed. The couple enrolled again, but when Wiederspahn filed his claims the second time, he was told they were still not enrolled.

During this enrollment period, Wiederspahn was experiencing chest pains, but because he did not yet have health insurance coverage, he did not undergo all the medical tests his physician recommended. Mrs. Lummis told Gruber and HHS official Marilyn Tavenner that her husband died of a heart attack soon after:

“On October 24th, the week before election, my husband went to sleep and never woke up. He had a massive heart attack in his sleep at age 65. A perfectly, by all appearances, healthy man.”

Lummis did not directly blame Obamacare for the loss of her husband, but did say that, since he did not have insurance coverage, Wiederspahn chose not to take the last test, which could have saved his life.

“I’m not telling you that my husband died because of Obamacare. He died because he had a massive heart attack in his sleep. But I am telling you that during the course of time that he was having tests by a physician and was told we were not covered by Obamacare, that he then decided not to have the last test the doctor asked him to have.”

She told Gruber that the glitches and problems with the passage and implementation of the healthcare law have “real-life consequences on people’s lives.”

Rep. Lummis was barely able to contain her emotions while getting one parting shot at Gruber:

“And the so-called ‘glibness’ that has been referenced today have direct consequences for real American people. So get over your damn glibness.”

 

h/t IJReview

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Mary, Mary Quite Contrary

Photo credit: Senate Democrats (Flickr)

On the eve of her election defeat, U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) appeared as a guest on my radio program, Ringside Politics, on WGSO 990 AM in New Orleans.

Over the past 16 years as host of Ringside Politics, I have interviewed Senator Landrieu over a dozen times. In the past, she would call in to promote a particular issue or cause, usually engaging in pleasant conversation or good-natured debate.

Our relationship certainly changed in our last radio interview, which occurred over a year ago on the contentious topic of Internet taxes. It was a testy exchange as the Senator and I clashed on whether the government should extend its reach into Internet commerce and tax consumers who purchase goods online.

After our on-air tax debate, the Senator refrained from appearing on my program, even though she had an open invitation. She finally relented on election eve and called in for an interview, which was a sign of her last minute desperation facing a major political loss. At the time of the interview, no respectable political analyst gave her any chance of winning re-election.

With her losing badly and battling a cold, it was clear from the beginning of the interview that Senator Landrieu was unhappy.

Initially, we discussed her infamous decision to support Obamacare–and later her 97% support for President Obama and finally the shocking allegations made by State Senator Elbert Guillory (R-Opelousas) that there was rampant election fraud in her last election. In fact, Guillory alleged that 10% of Landrieu’s votes were fraudulent in the last election.

The Senator abruptly left the conversation before I could ask the dozens of questions submitted by listeners, who wanted to know why she supported the President on issues such as gun control, amnesty for illegal aliens, higher spending, more taxes, etc.

In our 11 minute exchange, she had to defend her vote on Obamacare and was unable to engage in her favorite topic of recent days: Bill Cassidy’s LSU payments and potential billing discrepancies.

Here is a link to the heated interview, which showed how much pressure Senator Landrieu felt with her 35 year political career ending. However, she had no one to blame but herself for her political downfall.

While she was surely abandoned by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and her fellow Democratic Senators on the Keystone Pipeline issue, she would not have been so vulnerable if she would have listened to the people of Louisiana.

In the end, she was too invested in liberalism to connect with the voters of her state. She supported President Obama 97% of the time, while Louisiana voters only give President Obama a 37% approval rating; so it was clear she did a very poor job of representing her constituents.

She has a lifetime American Conservative Union voting record of only 20%. While that might work in Vermont, it is miserably out of step in the red state of Louisiana.

The majority of Louisiana voters were very motivated to vote against Mary Landrieu and Barack Obama for a variety of reasons, but the most important one is Obamacare. During the deliberations on the legislation, voters throughout the state bombarded Landrieu’s office with postcards, emails, and calls demanding that she vote no on the bill.

Instead of listening to our concerns, she voted with President Obama. The result has been much worse than a billion dollar waste of a website; it has been massive job losses, work hours being cut, many Americans losing their doctor, and millions of people facing higher insurance premiums. Today, doctors are fleeing an industry in turmoil thanks to Mary Landrieu and President Obama.

Sadly, Senator Landrieu was irritable on the air last Friday. It was not the way she should have ended her political career. Maybe she had regrets about her poor decisions in office, or maybe she was just upset that her privileged lifestyle will be coming to an end. Either way, it was a good lesson for Bill Cassidy.

Hopefully, our new Senator will never forget that he works for the people of Louisiana, not a political party–and certainly not a politician or a President.

Photo credit: Senate Democrats (Flickr)

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Issa Refutes Gruber’s Testimony That Insurance Costs Have Decreased

gruberissa

Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, had his chance to question the architect of Obamacare, Jonathan Gruber, who embarrassed the Obama administration with his inflammatory comments about “the stupidity of the American voter.”

ISSA: The night before last I was at the Kennedy Center Honors where they honored Tom Hanks, famously Forrest Gump, the ultimate in successful stupid man. Are you stupid?

GRUBER: I don’t think so, no.

ISSA: Does M.I.T. employ stupid people?

GRUBER: Not to my knowledge.

ISSA: OK, so you’re a smart man who said some, as the ranking member said, some really stupid things. And you said the same, is that correct?

GRUBER: I…the comments I made were really inexcusable.

Rep. Issa asked the former healthcare law advisor about the cost-shifting aspects of the Affordable Care Act in which one person would get a reduction in their insurance rate while someone else would have to pay more to off-set that person’s decrease.

Gruber explained that the ACA set up insurance exchanges that pooled risks for the healthy and less-healthy which, on average, resulted in lower health insurance costs. Issa immediately corrected the M.I.T. economics professor, saying that total costs did not decrease, but actually increased.

ISSA: I’m a taxpayer, Mr. Gruber. Trust me, people are not paying less; people like me are paying more for those, because taxes are, in fact, a cost that’s paid. Total costs did not go down. Cost shifting occurred in your model, isn’t that true?

GRUBER: The amount that individuals have to pay for health insurance, on average, fell in my model.

ISSA: Well, but it didn’t fall in reality.

Issa questioned why the American public should believe the accuracy of his model if deception, by Gruber’s own statements, was part of the process. He suggested that the Committee and the next Congress conduct an independent audit of Gruber’s insurance model.

 

h/t PJ Media

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom