REPEALONOMICS: Taxpayer funded TACTICS for Political OPTICS


Repealonomics: Taxpayer funded TACTICS for Political OPTICS.

The Affordable Care Act of 2010 was passed with the intent of providing affordable access to quality healthcare to all Americans.

The Affordable Care Act puts in place strong consumer protections, provides new coverage options and gives you the tools you need to make informed choices about your health. In this section, learn about how the law affects you.
To explore details please click here.


The discussion around repealing that Act is costing can impact tax payers in three ways.

First of all, the GOP has raised a Vote to repeal 33 times so far. The First vote was on Jan of 2011 and the latest one was in July of 2012. Each week of the House of Congress costs Twenty Four Million dollars to the tax payer. In addition clogging the docket also deprioritizes other key initiatives. Continuing this trend only delays us from moving forward.

Secondly there is a cost of undoing aspects of the Act that’s already been implemented or is in the process for implementation. To list some:

Effective Jan. 1, 2010: Up to 4 million small businesses are eligible for tax credits to help them provide insurance benefits to their workers. The first phase of this provision provides a credit worth up to 35% of the employer’s contribution to the employees’ health insurance. Small non-profit organizations may receive up to a 25% credit.

National program established July 1, 2010
A Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) provides new coverage options to individuals who have been uninsured for at least six months because of a pre-existing condition. States have the option of running this new program in their state. If a state has chosen not to do so, a plan has been established by the Department of Health and Human Services in that state. This program serves as a bridge to 2014, when all discrimination against pre-existing conditions will be prohibited.

Effective for health plan years beginning on or after September 23, 2010
Under the new law, young adults are allowed to stay on their parent’s plan until they turn 26 years old. (In the case of existing group health plans, this right does not apply if the young adult is offered insurance at work.) Check with your insurance company or employer to see if you qualify.

To explore details  of repeal votes please click here.


To explore details of Parts of Act already in place please click here:


Thirdly, the repeal will have impacts on the Deficit. If the law is enacted, CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of $1,168 billion over the 2012–2022 period—compared with $1,252 billion projected in March 2012 for that 11-year period—for a net reduction of $84 billion. (Those figures do not include the budgetary impact of other provisions of the ACA, which in the aggregate reduce budget deficits.)CBO and JCT now estimate that fewer people will be covered by the Medicaid program, more people will obtain health insurance through the newly established exchanges, and more people will be uninsured. The magnitude of those changes varies from year to year.

In 2022, for example, Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) are expected to cover about 6 million fewer people than previously estimated, about 3 million more people will be enrolled in exchanges, and about 3 million more people will be uninsured.

Conversely if the Act is Repealed, it would cause a net increase in federal budget deficits of $109 billion over the 2013–2022 period.

To explore details of Budget impacts please click below:
Impactsof insurance coverage provisions 
Impactsof Repeal 

Sweetopia



How do you like your coffee? Cream and sugar? Black? Or with a sugar substitute?

American adults consume an average of 22 teaspoons a day, or about 355 calories, from added sugars. Every teaspoon has 15 to 16 calories. Sugar is "toxic" in the amount it's consumed by Americans, says pediatric endocrinologist Rob Lustig, a professor of pediatrics at the University of California-San Francisco and one of the country's most vocal critics of added sugars.

A little bit is OK, but it's the quantity that people are consuming that's harmful, Lustig says. "Everyone knows the dose determines the poison. I agree with that. There is a threshold, and right now we are way above that threshold."

The heart association recommends that most American women consume no more than 6 teaspoons a day, about 100 calories, from added sugars, Johnson says. For men, it's 9 teaspoons or about 150 calories. Kids should limit their intake to about the same amount, she says.

The long history of sugar is interwoven with that of trade, religion, colonialism, capitalism, industry and technology. The people of New Guinea were probably the first to domesticate sugarcane, sometime around 8,000 BC; solid sugar is not mentioned in the historical record until AD 500, in India. Originally, people chewed sugarcane raw to extract its sweetness. Indians discovered how to crystallize sugar during the Gupta dynasty, around 350 AD

The first sugar substitute, saccharin, was discovered in the late 1800s and gained prominence in manufacturing during the World Wars, when sugar was rationed. The business of sugar-free foods and drinks began to boom in the 1960s when clinicians realized the importance of controlling weight gain in the management of diabetes.

Since then, as people became more health-conscious and wanted to shun sugar, manufacturers responded with a host of sugar substitutes. They are:

Aspartame, approved in 1981 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and now in more than 6,000 foods and drinks


  • Acesulfame-K, FDA-approved in 1988
  • Sucralose (Splenda, SucraPlus), approved in 1998 for limited use and in 1999 for general use
  • Neotame, approved in 2002

Now we call them artificial sweeteners. How do they work? The basic idea of what would make a good sugar substitute is simple.

On the surface of the tongue, certain proteins act as detectors for specific tastes. The sweetness receptor is made of two proteins in what is believed to be a structure like a Venus’ flytrap. When a sugar molecule attaches to the receptor, the receptor jogs neurons that send a signal to the brain that says something sweet has just been tasted. An artificial sweetener is simply a calorie-free substance that excites the same sweetness receptors.

The pros and cons of sugar versus substitutes have been a popular topic for debate over the years. The topic of sugar substitutes can be complex and confusing. One problem is that the terminology regarding sugar substitutes is often open to interpretation. For instance, some manufacturers call their sweeteners "natural" even though they're processed or refined, as is the case with stevia preparations. And some artificial sweeteners are derived from naturally occurring substances — sucralose comes from sugar, for example. Sometimes sugar substitutes are categorized by whether or not they contain calories.

As part of an overall healthy diet, sugar substitutes are believed to reduce calories and the risk of cavities. Interestingly, controlled studies that compare weight loss between people who use sugar substitutes and those who consume sugar show very little difference in weight loss between the two groups, although over the long term, sugar substitutes can help maintain weight loss.

Sugar is headed towards a new world of scrutiny and regulation. Some key trends in the public and private sector topping news:


  • Walt Disney announced that it's going to stop advertising junk food to kids on its TV channels, radio station and website by 2015
  • New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg outlined a plan to ban large-size sugary beverages sold at the city's restaurants, movie theaters, sports venues and street carts.
  • Some states and cities are working on "soda taxes" on sugary drinks. And in recent years, major health groups have discouraged the consumption of large amounts of added sugars.

Increasingly, the focus is being placed on sugar, the sweetener with a history that goes back 8,000 years. Is something so sweet really that harmful to health? Or is it just being maligned as people look for a scapegoat for the obesity epidemic.

The American Heart Association says in a statement that research has tied a high intake of added sugars to many poor health conditions, including obesity, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes and other risk factors for heart disease and stroke.

For additional details check outรจ

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)