Credibility Issue – President Barack Obama

April 12, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

A forewarning was issued since April 2008, regarding the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama that was disregarded.

Monday, May 5, 2008 @ http://padminiarhant.blogspot.com/2008/05/electability-factor.html

Electability Factor – By Padmini Arhant

Senator Barack Obama during his speech delivered on March 18th, 2008 in Philadelphia, following the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s rhetoric, ascribed to the relationship with his former pastor as;

Source – “WORLD NET DAILY” (Thank you).

“And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children.

Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother.

For some, nagging questions remain.

Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course.

Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”

Source – NPR.org, April 29, 2008 – (Thankyou).

• The following is a transcript of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama’s remarks about his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. This speech was delivered in Hickory, N.C., on Tuesday, April 29, one day after Wright appeared at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., to address accusations that he had made inflammatory remarks about the United States. The transcript was provided by the Federal News Service.

“Yesterday, we saw a very different vision of America. I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday.

You know, I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992.

I have known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years.

The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago.

His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church.

Now, I’ve already denounced the comments that had appeared in these previous sermons.

As I said, I had not heard them before.”

The contradictory statements from the Illinois Senator Barack Obama during his speeches on two different occasions concerning Rev. Wright unarguably provides legitimate reasons for critics and discerning electorate to question the judgment, loyalty and Patriotism factor from the candidate seeking the office of the “Presidency of United States.”

The inconsistency in the statements by the Senator foments the argument for the electorate that despite knowing his former pastor intimately for twenty years as described by the Senator himself,

He has been unable to change or influence the “mindset” of the controversial Rev. Wright about the nation that has embraced human race across the globe and provided unlimited opportunities for all like a mother towards her children with unconditional love.

The question arises about Senator Barack Obama’s leadership ability to transform “Washington Politics”, the other premise of his campaign, considering the above fact with “Rev. Wright.”

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics | Leave a Comment 

The Powerful Truth

April 12, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Ever since the health care legislation bill was analyzed and presented on this website, democracy has been suppressed by powerful forces represented in the highest office through false propaganda by media and press corps including the nation’s so-called liberal magazine against Truth.

The obituary for Truth published in the newspapers through innuendo against the evidence of its existence is oxymoron, if not unscrupulous.

Again, for the record – Truth is well, alive, and more determined than ever to prove the purity and sanctity of its element.

When one has nothing to hide and is honest, open and completely transparent – the vehemently opposed ethical practice in contemporary politics, the deadly carcinogens polluting the minds beyond salvation consider Truth as a major threat to their diabolical means.

Often those who judge others on the premise of disparaging information provided by those in  Power against truthful dissent ought to turn inward and question their own morality prior to voluntarily reaching the lowest ebb in journalism and/or theatrical performance via skits and movies on the specific overseas vile television network.

Is news being reported to inform public or entertain them by transforming their magazine or program to a cheap tabloid and a desperate source of concocted lies to appease those in power with nuclear arsenal?

If it’s the latter, then it’s doomed to fail on  complicity with authority’s flagrance allegation of debauchery against Truth.

Any honorable individual would confront the facts and take responsibility for their wrong doings rather than indulging in character assassination of Truth.

As for the alleged cover up in the health care scandal – any incident political and otherwise propagated in the selective nation’s so-called liberal magazine and the public funded network in the name of  Free Speech,

The Bible – King James Version: John 1:47

“Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!”

I present the unequivocal facts about my involvement going back to the political campaign of the candidate –

Senator Barack Hussein Obama and his spouse Michelle Obama.

a. 1608, William Shakespeare, King Lear, II, II, 102.
“I know, sir, I am no flatterer: he that beguiled you, in a plain accent.”

Beginning with my personal life, I was nurtured with the value to earn respect and not demand it.

My Principle – Rise to glory through your noble deeds that you can share with all.

Regarding the unsubstantiated allegation of debauchery –  I wish to state that chastity and morality is revealed in the human conduct.

When the guilty accuses the truth finder of debauchery for exposing the factual Presidential scandal it’s a confirmation of the accuser’s personal experience.

My personal life is no longer personal and subject to the triviality of –

‘She is anyone’s guess and a fair game indeed.’

Accordingly, the self promoted moral guardians of the society consider their prerogative to target the woman who is a mother, sister, daughter…in family relations.

More importantly, a human being committed to the sanctity of spiritual call by accepting God’s will. 

I bear none other than the Almighty God witness to this truth.

Never mind about the fact that she too has a family.

The passion, dedication, sacrifices made thus far for humanitarian issues is presumed a sheer exhibition on the world stage, despite enormous benefits to those responsible for the caricature.

Further on chastity and morality issue:

The irony is the purveyors of physical pleasure (the flesh trade) are denigrated by those contributing to the establishment.

What does one call trading human trust for profit and self-interest in today’s politics?

If morality and ethical norm is patented by those holding the power mantel, then it’s incumbent upon them to demonstrate through action.

After all, isn’t action believable than rhetoric?

Reverting to the political involvement that began in January through April 2008 – then September 2008- until March 2010.

I was approached by the candidate Senator Barack Obama via email, subsequent to my first time political donation in life – an amount $25.00.

From then onwards, I had repeat requests from then Senator Barack Obama, his spouse Michelle Obama and other prominent Democratic Party members to volunteer for the campaign and make regular donations.

The endless course literally led me to financial bankruptcy serving the beneficiaries not only in political gains but also material for mockery of my difficult monetary status.

The email requests were periodically published on the website including my responses.

I adopted the policy of transparency and accountability from day one of the Presidential election campaign and advocated vigorously in that regard.

On all issues pertaining to political, economic, social and environment matter, I emphasized on ethical efficacy conspicuously abandoned in the political capital, Washington D.C. where decisions concerning millions of lives across the globe are made.

I routinely submitted the communication with all political entities via World Wide Web for public view and understanding of the issues that are imperative to global community.

All my ideas, suggestions and strategies were presented on the web site and were addressed to the authorities for implementation.

However, they were selectively neglected on both domestic and international issues. The ones that were adopted like the economic stimulus and the job bill assumed the administration’s titles.

I deplored the pork barrel or earmark spending in the stimulus bill through the blogpost upon identifying the items in the news report.

Any communication from the President of the United States and the Democratic Party were strictly related to campaign donations, rallying for the candidates and complaints about the opposition attacks.

The communication was published on the website and available for public review.

I unsubscribed to the email from the President Barack Obama, the administration and the campaign in early October 2009.

The reason being, it had only instructions to energize the public on health care, energy legislation asking constituents to contact their local representatives without providing any details on the bill.

I learned about the components from the news report published in my local newspaper, on-line news publications and television broadcast.

My communication was always relayed through the website, for which there was no response.

I was not privy to the White House and/or the Congress members’ dealings and discussions with any interest groups in Wall Street, Washington and elsewhere.

My information source on legislative matter and the political affairs was solely through local and international news reports available in print and public news media.

As stated earlier, I was never hired by the White House, the Democratic Party, corporations, any groups or agencies intimately or remotely affiliated or associated to political members or authorities in Washington, Wall Street or anywhere in the World.

I was constantly approached for mandatory service without pay as the political aide by the Obama campaign and then the administration in getting the Democrats elected to Congress and never briefed or detailed on the nature of any developments on the legislations or administration’s policies.

I worked since January 2008 and until now without any payments or benefits.

Now, there are false rumors about me claiming unemployment benefit, which is absurd and completely distorted. I’ve never been on any unemployment benefit.

At the same time floating the fictitious narrative on me as super wealthy to drown any other candidate.

A  Super wealthy  collecting unemployment benefit alongside!  Obviously, they were attributing own practice to feel better.

Then the comedy satire insinuating bipolar disease, acute mental illness and the continuous slander thereafter to show their loyalty to political class is nothing more than own mirror reflection.

Perhaps, the notion is that Brown Foreigners are not supposed to eat. They don’t need a home and maintain a modest existence by being able to pay their utility bills, transportation needs, and provide for their family.

My explicit request to President Barack Obama on my precise role in the administration or the Democratic Party following the influx of donation reminders had no response to that until date.

I regularly clarified my position with President Barack Obama in 2009 and 2010 through the website, that I was unwilling to be a cheerleader of policies against public interest and refused to be an attack dog for the administration at any time.

I had no previous knowledge about the distant period setting and the health bill negotiations between the White House and their special interest allies.

It was also published on the website and obtainable if required.

I was treated as the political campaigner for the Democratic Party and not an administration or Congress member. They sought help with the political election in 2010 to boost public support for President Barack Obama.

There is political smear from the critics, more interested in the investigation of my openness instead of channeling their resources towards the Bilderberg secret meeting attended by Presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain in 2008 that I unveiled on my website for public awareness and fearlessly dissented the authorities’ decisions on many issues including the troops increase in Afghanistan.

If I were to allegedly cover up on the health care or any other issue manufactured by the White House,

Why would I become the victim of violent threats by the authority in power?

Why would they insist that I should quit being inquisitive and even nick named me Snoop Dog in their parlance?

I questioned the then candidate Barack Obama on flip-flopping of issues during the political campaign and after the administration assuming power in the White House.

For switching from Single Payer System to private health care for profit.

Defaulting on campaign finance at the crucial moment of the Presidential election.

Casting his vote on FISA in 2008. Patriot act and the discriminatory policy in 2009.

Torture, detention, overseas rendition, troop withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, altering the 9/11 terrorists federal trial to a military jurisdiction, the continuation of the predecessor, the former President George W. Bush’s policy.

Collecting public donations while claiming that there were no special interests’ contributions to his campaign, when the funds were flowing from Goldman Sachs, AIG, health industry and others – the figures that I published on the website much to the administration’s anger.

The administration and the State Department blocked the EU unilateral declaration under Sweden’s Presidency that embraced my policy on Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It was scheduled in November 2009. The people in both states were prepared and unbeknown the news vanished.

Similarly, in the Honduran crisis, the military coup leader agreed to step down and allow the former President Manuel Zelaya to remain in office until the national election in November 2009. The prospect was extinguished with the administration not inclined to intervene.

The materials with visual content were published on the website to this effect.

Haiti – the recommendation on the exiled leader Jean Bertrand Aristide’s return to his country was ignored.

Challenged on the environmental policies that was contradictory to the pledge made on the campaign trail. I called the COP15 summit a failure in the absence of real achievement.

In the 2008 Pennsylvania Primary election – I expressed my objection earlier on about Senator Obama’s approval to spend an estimated 11 million dollars on the television advertisement against his formidable opponent Senator Hillary Clinton while they declined to pay the foot soldiers $10 an hour for going door-to-door campaign. Most of them were African Americans eager to serve in the contentious primary that he lost to his democratic contender.

Lately, I responded to the Washington Post’s article by Richard Cohen on,

“Obama Policy unappreciated by the right and the left,” where I indicated that showering praise on the inadequate or failed policy would qualify as cronyism and exacerbate the corrupt political system.

I was issued a warning and a remark ‘She does not follow rules and creates her own that does not bode well with the authority.’  i.e. the international incognito clique running the gamut via proxies and puppet governments worldwide.

Because of my strong position on ethics and morality, I was abruptly eliminated from the campaign in March 2008 after ensuring the Democratic Party nomination in the primary election victories.

Perhaps, the critics’ selective memory may not serve them well.

I launched a campaign through my earlier website and endorsed the former Vice President Al Gore for President in May 2008. Furthermore, in an unprecedented gesture, I selected the Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold as the Vice Presidential candidate on the ticket.

It was in protest of the dramatic shift in Senator Obama’s policies visible after clinching the Democratic Party nomination. My rejection of the international Presidential candidate Barack Obama infuriated many of his ardent supporters, who have now become my cynics.

I was called a traitor even though the Senator’s policies did not synchronize with the base.

After the arrival of the Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican candidates gained momentum in the general election and so did the communication from the candidate Barack Obama, his spouse Michelle Obama (for whom I was non-existent during the Gala Democratic Party Nomination) and the Obama campaign.

The flurry of emails and snail mail asking me to get back in the campaign was superfluous.

They managed to persuade the Vice President Al Gore to email me and send a letter in that regard, which was also published on the website.

Somehow, the alleged ‘character’ of the woman they have misportrayed now didn’t seem to matter then, when they were aspiring their dreams.

Is it political expediency or cutthroat politics to borrow the term recently used by them?

My communication medium from the start has been the website to keep the public informed on the direct engagement with the power in Washington throughout the election and up until now.

Unlike the then candidate Barack Obama’s surrogate and spouse Michelle Obama, reportedly dictated the The View  show hosts on the permissible questions that debarred the co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck from straying in the contrived conversation.

The press media also confirmed on the restrictions imposed by the Obama campaign that prohibited many reporters and anchors from asking relevant questions with the candidate and the talking heads.

The prevalent censorship on free speech and the Nuclear Policy signed with Russia on April 9, 2010 – especially the overtone against the non signatories of NPT and reservations to use nuclear weapons is extremely disturbing and deserves scrutiny.

There were verbal attacks against me on the delay in rebuking the administration on the health care legislation scandal.

It’s easier to view the situation from one’s own perspective.

According to the news media, certain African American legislators were in the process of creating a preventive measure to grant immunity to Obama Presidency against impeachment following the inauguration.

Besides, it was necessary to be mindful of the repercussions such as the racial discord, two wars and the stock market in the aggressive removal of the President of the United States, found guilty of treason.

Therefore, the systematic procedure was to hold the elected official to the highest office accountable to the people, who have been betrayed in the national legislation that was bound to impact millions of lives.

Hence, soon after I exposed the unethical bargain with the health insurance industry,

I waited for the explanation from the President of the United States and the Congress leaders who shared the recognition as the victorious team of historic health care reform.

I ask the Press Corps and the media,

Why are you not pursuing those members in this matter, who are the signatories to this legislation?

Isn’t Congress leaders and other legislators’ responsibility to review the content prior to casting their vote?

I was never presented with the details of the bill, until the report from the New York Times, which none of the critics, who are attacking me bothered to analyze and bring it to public attention.

So much for their investigative journalism in the liberal frontier.

The President then conveniently sent me a letter in the usual manner – glorify privately and vilify publicly.

There was no request from the President to share with the public, I still went ahead and published the content to honor democracy.

Subsequently, there is no remorse or acknowledgment from the President of the United States, elected to the office to protect the republic interest.

Up until such time, I was a mere blogger to indefinitely campaign for elections.

If my word was the rule of law,

Why was my plea prior to the final health care vote, to modify the legislation to universal health care in the letter published on the website to President Barack Obama discarded?

After them being caught in the act of ethical compromise that I detected on my volition, I was bullied with death threats and implicated as an accomplice to turn the tide against me, the public watchdog all along.

Any domestic and global policy submission through the web site was initiated exclusively due to my commitment to the higher calling to serve humanity.

When there is divine intervention the integrity is measured by the solemn oath to serve the people not just in the United States but also across the globe and I’m expected to deliver the humanitarian goals determined by the Supreme cosmic force.

Unlike the tradition in contemporary politics, there is neither carte blanche nor financial gains in humanitarian service. The rules cannot be circumvented for the appointee’s agenda.

Whatever is being organized, it’s in coherence with universal convergence for a new beginning and a bright future.

I hope this would put the derogatory demagoguery to rest. If it doesn’t then it would be to the offenders’ downfall caused by their recalcitrant behavior.

People in glass houses should not cast stones at others.

The content is in reference to the events unfolding at present.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics | 1 Comment 

For the Record

April 6, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

I have never been on the White House payroll or received any payments in cash or kind from the authorities and any political parties, or anyone remotely associated or affiliated to the political, corporate and any form of organizations in the United States or anywhere in the world.

Furthermore, the humanitarian work has been entirely a free service, on a “volunteer” basis from the beginning and up until now.

Any communication received from or sent to the White House and the political party has been published for the worldview throughout my involvement in politics.

The painting that was mailed by the Chairman of the Democratic National Party, Gov. Tim Kaine with a request to contribute to electing the Democratic Party members was published on the website prior to the final health care vote that I did not endorse.

Unlike the public network pledging to be the ‘voice for democracy,’ who attacked me for not doing so, yet applying my current donation for the negative attributes towards whistle blowers is the irony in public affairs.

Is mudslinging a sign of insecurity or a “Free Speech” misnomer?

I have never met the then candidate and now the President Barack Obama in person nor had verbal conversations during the campaign and until now.

All communications have taken place via email and conventional mail up until last year.

Subsequently, the communication has been through regular mail only.

The materials were all published on the website and available for public review.

Therefore, for journalism to thrive in honor of democracy, I request certain members unnecessarily engaged in unsubstantiated allegations to refrain from defamation of persons dedicated to humanitarian service.

Instead, invest their time and my donations for a productive cause.

Solidarity in promoting truth and justice is required from the media and the press corps, the only hope for democracy to succeed.

Human values are determined by their actions and the noble virtues reflected through their courage to face those challenging the ideals.

I remain steadfast in lending the voice to the voiceless and will continue to strive for peace on earth.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics, Featured | Leave a Comment 

Response to President’s Statements on National Health Care Legislation

April 6, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

With respect to the content from President Barack Obama’s letter, the explanation is not necessarily accepted as ‘satisfactory.’

Hence, the White House must provide reasons to the legitimate questions raised in the analysis on National Health Care legislation and more to be submitted shortly.

Democracy thrives when the voice of the people are heard especially, with the legislative matter that affects millions of lives.

Avoiding the subject only arouses suspicion and creates confusion among the vast majority yet to be convinced on the ethical aspect of the legislation.

Since the Presidency was sworn in on transparency and accountability premise, it’s important to exemplify the pledge through action in the critical moment of public frustration.

Therefore, I request the authorities not to evade the issue any longer and be forthright in their response to the press and the public on the “insurance industry” favored health care reform.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

President’s Statements on Health Care Legislation

April 5, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Hon. President Barack Obama

Dear Mr. President,

Thank you for your letter on the health care legislation.

I deeply appreciate your kind remarks and present the main content of your letter for public reference.

“We succeeded where seven presidents did not.

We mobilized and organized. We helped secure the dream of our nation’s founding.

Our success marks a new season for our country – one in which mothers, fathers, sons and daughters no longer live in fear of a system that works better for the insurance industry than it does for ordinary people.

What we have done here is remarkable. It is historic. And many believed this day would never come.

With all the punditry, with all of the lobbying, with all of the game-playing that too often passes for governing, it’s been easy, at times, to doubt our ability to finish the job on health insurance reform.

We would not fall prey to fear. We would not settle for an easy way out. We would not stop until we passed this reform.

We passed this reform for 5th-grader Marcelas Owens, whose mother died because she didn’t get the health care she needed after she got sick, lost her job and her health insurance. Marcelas’ message to Congress was simple: “Finish health care reform. No other kid should lose their mom because they don’t have health care.”

We passed this reform for Ryan Smith, a small business owner with five employees. Ryan was doing his part to provide health insurance to his employees, but cannot keep up with rising health care costs.

We passed this reform for Natoma Canfield, who wrote to tell me that she could no longer afford her health insurance policy. Since losing her health insurance coverage in January, Natoma has been diagnosed with Leukemia and is fighting for her life.

And we passed this reform for my mother, who argued with insurance companies even as she battled cancer in her final days.

In Marcela, Ryan, Natoma, my mom and so many other Americans, we are reminded of what this fight was about. It wasn’t about politics. It was about doing the right thing, and taking care of the hardworking people that make our country great.

Now we need to begin the process of implementing these historic changes.

To ensure a successful, stable transition, many of these changes will phase into full effect over the next several years.

But for millions of Americans, many of the benefits of reform will begin this year – some will even take effect this week.

Small businesses will receive significant tax cuts, this year, to help them afford health coverage for all their employees. Seniors are going to receive a rebate to reduce drug costs not yet covered under Medicare. Young people will be allowed coverage under their parents’ plan until the age of 26. Early retirees will receive help to reduce premium costs, and children will be protected against discrimination on the basis of medical history.

But we’re not stopping there.

Uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions can join a special high-risk pool to get the coverage they need, starting in just 90 days. And Americans with insurance will be protected from seeing their insurance revoked when they get sick, or facing restrictive annual limits on the care they receive.

We’re also making investments to train primary care doctors, nurses, and public health professionals, and we’re creating state-level consumer assistance programs to help patients understand and defend our new rights. These changes will benefit all Americans.

We did it…And America is better for it.”

Sincerely,

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Federal Program Evaluation on Mortgage Refinance and Foreclosures

April 1, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Please refer to the details laid out in the preceding articles from other news organizations published on this website under the title ‘Mortgage Refinance and Foreclosures.’

Information is also available in the article, @www.mercurynews.com

“By Sue McAllister – San Jose Mercury News, Saturday, March 27, 2010 – Thank you.

“Titled – Debt Relief – Mortgage program: Who will benefit?

Answers to how the federal plan will work and whom it will help”
———————————————————————————–

Program Evaluation – By Padmini Arhant

Making Home Affordable program targets the vulnerable homeowners on the verge of losing their homes.

Mortgagees who are unemployed, underwater and delinquent in their payments could seek assistance upon they meet the criteria.

Aligning mortgage debt with the asset value in order to help people retain ownership is a prudent measure to stabilize the struggling housing market.

It’s evident from these news reports that the program is well intended but the burden rests on the taxpayers through,

Federal Housing Administration insured loans absorbing the entire risk on potential loan default,

And,

Incentives to lenders to reduce principal value for the underwater and unemployed customers provided from the TARP funds…

The finance sector responsible for the subprime mortgage crisis is exempt from any liability.

On the contrary, they are being coerced with the federal funding that appears to be inadequate to rescue the vast majority from foreclosures and loan qualifications.

Federal programs or reform requires oversight to ensure the rules adherence by the industry.

Again, an independent / non-profit consumer rights agency is appropriate to avoid the conflict of interest.

As stated by the consumer advocates, the bankruptcy procedure for loan modifications is more reliable than the service offered by the federal partnership with lenders.

When a particular method is not yielding the desirable results, it is best to choose the option with a positive outcome.

Since the rules are ignored by the industry, setting consequences for non-compliance is an effective approach to limit the program failure.

If the borrowers are subject to terms and conditions then it should be applicable to the lenders as well.

Finally, the program would be beneficial with the banks accepting a fair share of monetary obligations in the principal reduction and the refinancing structure, having been the beneficiary of taxpayer bailout.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Economy, Featured | Leave a Comment 

National Health Care Legislation

March 29, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Last week, President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress achieved a historic victory in passing the health care legislation.

The legislative components and the effective period are presented below:

According to the New York Times report March 22, 2010

By Robert Pear and David M. Herszenhorn – Thank you.

Source: Speaker of the House, Congressional Budget Office, Kaiser Family Foundation, MCCLATCHY – TRIBUNE

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE HEALTH CARE OVERHAUL LEGISLATION, WHICH WILL:

1. 90 days after enactment: Provide immediate access to high-risk pools for people with no insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

2. 6 months after enactment:

Bar insurers from:

Denying people coverage when they get sick

Denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions

Imposing lifetime caps on coverage

Require insurers to:

Allow young people to stay on their parents’ policies until they turn 26

3. Within a year: Provide a $250 rebate to Medicare prescription drug beneficiaries who reach the coverage gap called the “doughnut hole”

4. Jan 1, 2011: Require individual and small group market plans to spend 80 percent of premium dollars on medical services; large group plans would have to spend at least 85 percent

5. 2013: Increase the Medicare payroll tax on dividend, interest and other unearned income for singles earning more than $200,000 and joint filers making more than $250,000

6. 2014: Provide subsidies for families earning up to 400 percent of poverty level ($88,200 a year for a family of four)

Require most employers to provide coverage or face penalties

Require most people to obtain coverage or face penalties

7. 2018: Impose 40 percent excise tax on high-end insurance policies

8. 2019: Expand health insurance coverage to 32 million people

———————————————————————————————–
Late deals added to bill’s revisions – By Alan Fram Associated Press – March 22, 2010 – Thank you.

The latest changes to the bill include:

Tax-exempt insurers would have to pay a new fee levied on insurers on only half their premiums.

An Aug.1, 2010, deadline on new doctor-owned hospitals to apply to the government for eligibility to serve – and get paid for Medicare patients would be extended to Dec. 31.

A new 2.9 percent excise tax on medical devices would be lowered to 2.3 percent.

But it will be broadened to apply to some lower-cost devices it hadn’t initially covered, though hearing aids, contact lenses and other items would be excluded.
————————————————————————————————–
Review and Analysis – By Padmini Arhant

There have been numerous questions by the anxious uninsured and they are being presented in this analysis.

Congressional Report dissection:

Clarification from the legislators would be helpful in understanding the criteria in the following categories:

1. 90 days after enactment: Provide immediate access to high-risk pools for people with no insurance because of pre-existing conditions.

From the concerned individuals – the uninsured with pre-existing conditions but are unsure of their acceptance in the high-risk pool due to variations in the health issue.

A. Who are the qualifiers under the ‘high-risk’ pool in the ‘insurers’ language?

B. Should the insured expect escalation in premium costs due to their ‘pre-existing’ diagnosis as compared to the healthy individuals?

C. If there is a difference in coverage costs; by what percentage will it affect them?

As per the Associated Press report, March 24, 2010 –

D. “But a provision to protect children in poor health has a gap. Insurers would still be able to deny new coverage to kids with health problems until 2014.”

Is it possible for these kids to access care under ‘high-risk’ pool, which is expected to be effective in three months from now, i.e. June 2010?

Therefore, specifics are required in this respect.
————————————————————————————————–

2. 6 months after enactment – October 2010,

The legislative component reverses the status quo for those who are currently insured and,

A. Have difficulties on coverage during their illness including children with pre-existing conditions.

B. Parents are permitted to keep their adult offspring until age 26, on their policy.

C. It prohibits the insurers from limiting coverage and policy cancellation when the patients require treatment.

Unequivocally, it’s a crucial piece of legislation.

However, it could have been made effective immediately rather than a six months delay, due to the nature of the problem.

As it’s well known that in health situations, the cost and cure factor is dependent upon early intervention.
————————————————————————————————–

3. Within a year i.e. in 2010 the legislation involves $250 rebate to Medicare prescription drug beneficiaries upon them reaching the ‘doughnut hole’ or the coverage gap –

Any financial relief to senior citizens and others dealing with enormous health care costs is a welcome change.

———————————————————————————————-

4. Jan 1, 2011 – Enactment calls for ‘marketplace’ insurers to invest premium dollars on medical services by 80 percent for individuals and small plans, whereas the large groups by 85 percent respectively.

Monitoring is essential to ensure such practice among the insurers.

In the absence of oversight, the law would be redundant.

That’s why the independent and non-profit ‘National Consumer Health Rights Agency,’ would be ideal to deliver the service.

————————————————————————————————-

5. 2013: Increase the Medicare payroll tax on dividend, interest and other unearned income for singles earning more than $200,000 and joint filers making more than $250,000

This was the proposal from the House of Representatives to generate revenue for the health care overhaul.

It appears to be preset to meet with the ‘PAYGO’ budgetary requirement to pay for expenditures with funds for the program in progress.

A prudent fiscal policy that is necessary to address the national deficit and approved by the Congressional Budget Office. It’s an important feature of this legislation.

The Republican opposition projected the negative implication of this particular rule on Medicare recipients quoting that ‘the Medicare quality would be affected.’ They need to explain their position.

————————————————————————————————

6. 2014: Provide subsidies for families earning up to 400 percent of poverty level ($88,200 a year for a family of four)

Require most employers to provide coverage or face penalties

Require most people to obtain coverage or face penalties

7. 2018: Impose 40 percent excise tax on high-end insurance policies

8. 2019: Expand health insurance coverage to 32 million people

In reference to Points 6, 7 and 8:

Perhaps, the funds from the Medicare payroll tax mentioned above are allocated for the subsidies and Medicaid beneficiaries.

Similarly, the 40 percent excise taxes on high-end insurance policies set up to eventually expand health insurance coverage to the targeted 32 million uninsured in 2019.

Again, the same reason stated under 2 C of the analysis, applies to these rules of law.

The people who can’t afford health insurance are most vulnerable to health problems that ultimately become the tax payer responsibility as experienced up until now.

Hence, the law being effective in 2014, four years away from the signed legislation and the reality of the 32 million people being covered in 2019 is a legitimate cause for disappointment among the uninsured.

The authorities owe a plausible explanation to the suffering population regarding the distant period setting for the effectiveness of the law, especially 2014 and 2019.

What is happening to this segment between now and then?

Are there provisions for tax credits to the middle class families and Medicaid expansion to cover the interim premium costs by the uninsured and the unaffordable groups in the society?

If so, how is it being paid for?

Since the revenue from Medicare payroll tax and the excise tax are scheduled in 2013 and 2018, to fund the federal subsidies to lower income families in 2014 and the 32 million uninsured in 2019 respectively,

The health insurance reform cannot be truly evaluated until after 2014.

Besides, the health insurance legislation based on ‘private for profit’ strategy is subject to market rates in 2014 and beyond.

Meanwhile, the legislation tackles the problems faced by the “insured” groups in the society that are significant and guaranteed to save lives.

According to the media reports, the House and the Senate leaders confirmed the available votes to implement a ‘Public Option’ in the health care legislation through reconciliation process within the year.

Indicating that – “We have the votes and we need the will to move forward.”

It’s the best hope for the average citizen in the health insurance reform, considering the anticipated changes becoming law not until 2014 and 2019.

Having passed the legislation, the lawmakers can amend the bill to accommodate the genuine requests from the average citizens for whom the reform was initiated.

It’s a matter of honoring the people’s will in a democracy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

U.S. and Russia Nuclear Arms Reduction Treaty

March 27, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The world’s nuclear prolific nations, U.S and Russia agreed to sign a long overdue nuclear weapons treaty or the strategic arms reduction treaty (S.T.A.R.T) reportedly to reduce the warhead arsenals by one-third with the possibility to lead the international community towards a complete nuclear disarmament.

It’s a phenomenal step towards peace and a path to a nuclear free environment.

The U.S. President Barack Obama and the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev deserve praise for the courage reflected in their action against the potent threat to global security in the twenty first century.

Without a shadow of doubt, the leaderships’ initiative is a cornerstone for the NPT (Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty) conferences in the immediate future.

I hope that other nuclear nations would follow suit with their rivals and earnestly strive to depart from the nuclear era.

There is also an urgent need to address the conventional arms race alongside the nuclear proliferation.

If the industrialized and the developed nations prioritize the defense budget divestment to socio-economic development in the domestic and foreign policy,

It would not only expedite the economic recovery but also spearhead the necessity to alleviate hunger, poverty and disease among the poorest nations.

War spending and national security against terrorism consumes enormous proportion in the fiscal budget and the peace efforts in every possible dimension could promote the required economic, social and political progress in the vulnerable regions of the world.

Besides, the volatility experienced globally could be eliminated with the troops withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the U.S. military base overseas.

In addition, transforming the military aid to an economic assistance in Yemen and countries alike is guaranteed to detract the potential recruits targeted by the terror networks.

Further, the improvement in economic conditions is directly related to renunciation of violence.

The global terrorism is attributed to economic plight, social injustice and political instability.

Therefore, any incremental positive measures in the nuclear front and traditional warfare is immensely beneficial to humanity.

Bilateral approach between the nuclear powers, U.S and Russia and their perseverance in the denuclearization including the civilian nuclear program abandonment would deter the controversial Iranian nuclear crisis from worsening.

Moreover, it would set precedence for other nuclear states to adopt similar strategies – resulting in a multilateral decision for a peaceful future.

Another poignant element being, the foreseeable consensus in the nuclear matter removes the obstacles for the clean renewable energy resources desirable to resolve the climate change issue confronting the earth population.

In fact, the U.S. – Russian pact is a great new beginning for a better world.

On that optimistic note, I look forward to the world leaders reaching more milestones in the global affairs.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics, National and Global Security, Politics | Leave a Comment 

Weekly Events Synopsis

March 27, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

This week, President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress secured three major achievements of national and international significance.

Beginning with the latest event:

The world’s prolific nuclear nations, U.S and Russia signed a long overdue nuclear weapons treaty reportedly to reduce the warhead arsenals by one-third with the hope to lead the international community towards a complete nuclear disarmament.

Housing market revival through programs targeting foreclosure for millions of homeowners.

And

National Health Care Legislation – is a historic victory for the democrats and the Obama Presidency.

A review and analysis on these topics is in progress.

Your patience is much appreciated.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Economy, Featured | Leave a Comment 

Successful passage of Health Care Reform

March 22, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Congratulations! To President Barack Obama, the Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Senate majority leader Harry Reid and the Congress members responsible for the successful legislation of the health care reform.

The debate had consumed more than a year and came to fruition last night. With any legislation, the views are expected to be conciliatory and contradictory.

I take the opportunity to wish our President Barack Obama and the legislators continued victory in all their present and future endeavors.

This website will remain committed to the humanitarian cause without being affiliated to any particular political faction in order to maintain objectivity and keep democracy alive.

My contribution is focused primarily on peace and environmental goals for humanity i.e. ‘Save the Planet,’ and ‘Peace on Earth.’

I look forward to the inevitable peace, progress and prosperity through coherence among the global community.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

« Previous Page — Next Page »