The Obama Public Option Poison Pill For A Government Health Care Monopoly–Single Payer System–Betting Your Life and Paying Though The Nose

Posted on June 23, 2009. Filed under: Blogroll, Health Care, Investments, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Medicine, Politics, Quotations, Rants, Raves, Regulations, Resources, Science, Taxes, Video | Tags: Barack Obama, free our health care now, Health Care Reform, Health Savings Account, HSA, Medical Insurance, National Health Insurance, President Obama, Public Option, Single Payer, Single Payor Health Care, Socialized Medicine |

Pay Through The Nose

Ronald Reagan Speaks Out Against Socialized Medicine

The progressive radical socialist Democratic Party’s goal is a single payer Federal Government Health Care Monopoly where every citizen is required to participate and pay for the  the Government provided  healthcare–National Health Insurance aka Socialized Medicine:

BILL MOYERS JOURNAL | Single Payer Health Insurance | PBS

Is Single-Payer Health Care On Or Off The Table?

Democratic Socialists Support Single Payer Health Care

Elizabeth Kucinich describes HR 676 – Single Payer Healthcare

Highlights of Congressional single payer health care hearing

Obama’s Health Care Reform Goals

Before running  and getting elected President, State Senator Obama said when speaking before a union audience that a  single payer system is what he favored. 

Obama on single payer health insurance

He also said during the campaign that he favored a single payer system if he were going to design a health care system from scratch.

Why did he change his mind?

While the number of Americans having health care insurance varies from day to day, roughly 80-95% of Americans are covered by an health insurance plan, most of them are voters.

Of those who have health insurance coverage, approximately 70%-85% are satisfied with their health insurance plan and care.

This means that the vast majority of Americans do not want nor need a single payer health care system –National Health Insurance–Socialized Medicine.

President Obama is misleading the American people, if not actually lying, when he says that he wants to increase competition in the health insurance market by having a Federal Government provided public option for health care insurance.

First, it is not the function of government to run a business such as providing health care insurance.

Second, with hundreds of insurers and providers of health care insurance and care, the last thing the health care industry needs or wants is more competition, especially from the government.

Third, a Federal Government provided public option would overtime not increase competition but actually reduce competition by driving or crowding out private insurers.

How would this be accomplished?

A government health insurance  provider would be in a position to dictate both benefit levels and  reimbursement rates or the percentage of billable charges that they would pay.

This is exactly what the  the Federal Government currently does with Medicare.

As a result private insurers are paying for charges or costs not reimbursed by Medicare or the Federal Government and shifted and charged to patients with private insurance health care insurance plans.

By having a take it or leave reimbursement level  lower than what private insurers pay for usual and customarily charges, the public option would have both the lowest benefit levels and reimbusement rates and in turn the lower prices or premiums.

Congressman Ellison Talks About a Public Option for Health Reform

The “Public Option” Myth

The majority of health insurance premiums are paid by employers as part of an employee’s total compensation package. 

As private insurer premiums rose relative to the public option insurer, more and more businesses would cancel their group insurance and tell employees to go get their health care coverage with the public option insurer.

Within ten years or less all the private insurers would be driven out of business with the result that you arrive at a single payer health care system. 

A single payor system is and remains the aim of the progressive radical socialists of the Democratic Party–a Federal Government monopoly of health care where all Americans would be coerced into the plan.

Once this happens, the Federal government bureaucracy and not the American people would decide what coverage you had, whether your medical conditions would be treated and when.

Socialized medicine will have arrived in the United States.

Government sovereignty not consumer sovereignty would rule the day.

The Path from Public Healthcare Options to Socialized Medicine

The American people want to be able to choose a plan that meets their needs as to the type of coverage included in the plan, price or monthly premiuim, deductibles, co-payments, out-of-pocket maximums, and life-time maximums and affordability.

The American people want consumer sovereignty not government sovereignty in the form of a government health care monopoly–single payer–run by a health care czar!

A public option is a trojan horse for a single payer system.

Both President Obama and his progressive radical socialists in the Senate and Congress are selling the American people a bill of goods.

If the Democratic Party and President Obama truly wanted to increase competition in the health insurance market they should give individuals the same tax advantages as employers have and allow individuals to deduct the cost of their health insurance premiums for individual and family plans.

Competition could also be increased by allowing both individuals and employers purchasing health insurance from companies not licensed to do business in the state.

Also, employers should be allowed to pay for and purchase not only group plans but also individual health insurance  plans if that is what an employee wants.

Individual plans have the added benefit of portability so they move with the individual from job to job.

Health Saving Accounts (HSAs) should be expanded to allow them with both group and individual plans with a higher maximum limit on annual contributions of $10,000 per person.

The Democratic Party opposes all of the above for it would not result in a Government monopoly single payer system and would actually significantly reduce the number of the uninsured American citizens.

Affordability, choice, fairness, portability, and plan customization of their health insurance and care is what the American people want–consumer sovereignty not government sovereignty or monopoly.

The Democratic Party’s single payer preferred solution is all about Government control where a government bureaucracy controls what treatments and drugs you can obtain from your doctor and hospital. 

A government monopoly single payer system results in rationing and delays in treatment in order to cut cost.

Any candidate of any party that gives any indication to the American people that they are going  to replace, tax, or threaten the American  people ‘s health care and insurance coverage, can deservedly  expect to be defeated in the next election.
Send a message both to President Obama and your Senators and Representative by signing the Free Our Health Care Petition:

http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/

Please take a minute to sign this petition keeping Government control OUT of healthcare.

http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/

Ten Steps to a Patient-Friendly

Health Care System

http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Ten_Steps.pdf 

Your very life may depend upon it!

Even President Obama had to step away from his original plan of a mandatory single payer health care system.

For now President Obama supposively supports more competition with insurance companies by proposing a public option or government health care insurance that will lead to a Government monopoly of health care–single payer. 

Why make such radical changes?

The reason most often given is to provide medical care or more accuratley medical insurance for the roughly 50 million people living in the United States that do not have insurance.

Who are these estimated 50 million medically uninsured individuals?

20 to 30 Million: Illegal immigrants living and working in the U.S.

10 to 15 Million: American citizens who can afford health insurance but elect not to purchase the coverage

10 to 15 Million: American citizens between jobs and currently unemployed

5 to 10 Million:  American citizens who qualify for Medicaid or are uninsurable due to a pre-existing condition but could apply for a state insurance program.

While the actual numbers change from day to day and the ranges are large, the 50 million “uninsured number” used repeatedly by the progressive radical socialists clearly overstates the health care insurance problem.

The American people simply will not abide their current health insurance benefit plan being taxed nor will they pay for illegal aliens and people who can afford to pay for health care but freely chose to buy something else.

This cuts the problem in half.

The sooner the unemployed obtain jobs, the sooner they have enough money to purchase health care insurance on their own or receive coverage through their employer.

This leaves between 5 and 10 million people that are poor, destitute, or uninsurable due to a pre-existing condition.

The majority of these people either qualify for Medicaid and need to apply or can be  covered by various state special insurance programs that they need to apply for to obtain coverage.

This leaves less than 5 million people without health insurance and the means to obtain coverage.

This does not mean that the health care system cannot be improved, far from it.

Instead of building a “trojan horse” in the form of a government or public option insurer, serious consideration should be given the Patient Choice Act:

The Patients’ Choice Act (1 of 4)

The Patients’ Choice Act (2 of 4)

The Patients’ Choice Act (3 of 4)

The Patients’ Choice Act (4 of 4)

“…The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009 is the Republican-back healthcare reform strategy. The Act will offer a $5,710 tax cut to families and a $2,290 cut to individuals, while taking away tax incentives to employers that provide healthcare. The plan was introduced on May 20, 2009, by Senators Tom Coburn and Richard Burr and Representatives Paul Ryan and Devin Nunes.

http://www.mahalo.com/patients-choice-act-of-2009

The American people need an insurance plan that is both affordable and portable–they take the coverage with them when they leave one employer to go to work with another employer.

Since government state mandated coverages,  the performing of unnecessary tests and procedures as protection against frivolous  malpractice lawsuits, and no caps or maximums for damages, can  easily add 25% to 50% to the cost of health insurance, these issues need to be addressed in any attempt to try and control rising health care costs.

The progressive radical socialists of the Democratic Party are attacking Health Saving Accounts that American consumers find very beneficial in meeting their health care needs.

Health Saving Account combined with high deductible health insurance plans are becoming increasingly popular:

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs): Solution or Problem?

DeMint on Health Savings Accounts

Health Savings Accounts

Time to Consider a Health Savings Account

How to Buy Health Savings Accounts

The American people are not in the mood for another entitlement program to help a few million Americans when over 15,000,000 are currently unemployed. 

The American people do not believe that illegal aliens should be working in the US and strongly feel that except for emergency care, no tax payer money should be provided for their care.

The American people understand that by providing a public option the progressive radical socialist Democratic Party  are trying to destroy their own health insurance plan.

The American people are watching and will closely examine President Obama’s newly designed health care program.

DeMint on Tea Parties and the Need for Freedom to Increase, not Government

Join The Second American Revolution and Celebrate Independence Day at An Ice Tea Party!

Liberty Launch Countdown to The Celebration of Independence Day–Saturday, July 4, 2009–Ice Tea Party Time To Freeze Government Expenditures, Deficits, Debts and Taxes–Expect 30 Million Nationally in 1,000 Cities and Towns and 1 Million in Washington D.C.!

Background Articles and Videos

1 Of 5 What To Expect With OBAMA’S Proposed “HEALTH CARE REFORM” / March 12, 2009

2 Of 5 What To Expect With OBAMA’S Proposed “HEALTH CARE REFORM” / March 12, 2009

3 Of 5 What To Expect With OBAMA’S Proposed “HEALTH CARE REFORM” / March 12, 2009

4 Of 5 What To Expect With OBAMA’S Proposed “HEALTH CARE REFORM” / March 12, 2009

5 Of 5 What To Expect With OBAMA’S Proposed “HEALTH CARE REFORM” / March 12, 2009

Single-Payer National Health Insurance

“…Single-payer national health insurance is a system in which a single public or quasi-public agency organizes health financing, but delivery of care remains largely private.

Currently, the U.S. health care system is outrageously expensive, yet inadequate. Despite spending more than twice as much as the rest of the industrialized nations ($7,129 per capita), the United States performs poorly in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates. Moreover, the other advanced nations provide comprehensive coverage to their entire populations, while the U.S. leaves 45.7 million completely uninsured and millions more inadequately covered.

The reason we spend more and get less than the rest of the world is because we have a patchwork system of for-profit payers. Private insurers necessarily waste health dollars on things that have nothing to do with care: overhead, underwriting, billing, sales and marketing departments as well as huge profits and exorbitant executive pay. Doctors and hospitals must maintain costly administrative staffs to deal with the bureaucracy. Combined, this needless administration consumes one-third (31 percent) of Americans’ health dollars. …”

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_resources.php

4 reasons why Obama’s health plan is no bargain

Analysis: While a goal of reform is to cut costs, the emerging package may do just the opposite.

By Shawn Tully, senior editor at large

“…The plans contain four proposals that will substantially weaken the ability of the market, already limited by burdensome regulation, to restrain medical spending.

First, they will impose rich, standard packages of benefits, with low deductibles, for all Americans. Those policies, typically containing everything from in-vitro fertilization to mental health benefits, are usually far more expensive than anything most people would pay for with their own money.

Second, the plans would impose on a federal level the doctrine of community rating, in which all customers have to be offered the same rates, regardless of their health risks. Community rating forces young people to pay far more than their actual cost, a main reason for today’s 46 million uninsured, while it subsidizes older patients.

Third, Obama would ban consumers from buying private insurance across state lines, perpetuating the price differences in today’s fragmented market, instead of allowing all Americans to shop anywhere for the best deals.

Fourth, both plans propose what’s known as a “public option,” or a Medicare-style plan that would compete with the private offerings. The previous three proposals would make the private plans extremely expensive. With the same subsidies, the Medicare-style plan could put them out of business. …”

http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/11/news/economy/obama_health_plan_no_bargain.fortune/ 

Obama’s Health Care Reform: What Will It Do to Seniors?

by heritage.org

Fact Sheet #31

Seniors Pay for It

• Cuts Medicare to Pay for New Public Plan: Some of the projected savings for financing Obama’s health agenda, including the creation of a new public plan, would come by squeezing savings out of Medicare. At a time when Medicare is dangerously close to bankruptcy, it is shortsighted to funnel funds into the creation of another government-run program instead of shoring up Medicare.
• Undercuts Private Plan Options in Medicare: Another key element of Obama’s Medicare agenda is to chip away at current government payments to highly popular Medicare Advantage plans. The program is popular among seniors, especially those on a fixed income, because it offers an integrated benefit package that gives better benefits and better value.
• Price Controls on Prescription Drugs: Under the guise of “negotiated prices,” the Obama agenda also includes the imposition of a price-control regime on the Medicare prescription drug benefit. The government doesn’t “negotiate” prices; it fixes them. Ironically, this part of the Medicare program is the only one that has shown budget savings over the past two years.

Seniors Lose Choice and Access

• Jeopardizes Access to Doctors: Medicare savings would largely result from a ratcheting down of existing payment formulas and lowering reimbursements to doctors and hospitals. Cutting reimbursements often encourages medical professionals to increase their volume of services, resulting in higher program costs, undermining the objectives of the original cuts. Cuts in reimbursement also discourage doctors from seeing new Medicare patients.
• Millions of Seniors Could Lose Their Coverage: Today, one in five seniors is enrolled in a Medicare Advantage private plan, including 40% of black seniors and over 50% of Hispanic seniors. In spite of their growing popularity, key congressional leaders oppose these private health plans and want to cut them.
• Limits Access and Choice to Prescription Drugs: Many supporters of government direct purchasing of prescription drugs highlight Veterans Affairs (VA) as a model. As a matter of fact, one-third of veterans who had been in the VA system actually paid to join Medicare Part D to get better access to needed prescription drugs. …”

http://www.heritage.org/Press/FactSheet/fs0031.cfm

Obama’s Health Care Agenda: How it Will Hurt American Families

by heritage.org

Fact Sheet #33

“…What It Will Do

• It Undermines Parental Authority: Instead of empowering parents, President Obama’s health care plan will chip away at the fundamental rights parents have in key health care decisions for their family by centralizing crucial health care decision-making over plans and benefits in Washington.
• It Puts Federal Bureaucrats in Control of Health Care Decisions: The President’s health agenda would result in a major transfer of regulatory authority over health insurance and the kinds of benefits and medical treatments that families get in their health coverage. This could also compromise the rights of families to secure the kind of health coverage that is compatible with their ethical, moral, or religious convictions.
• It Shackles Families with Unknown Costs: President Obama promised American families that under his health plan the average family would save $2,500. But independent analysis shows that less than 11 percent of American families would actually see that level of savings with the reforms proposed by the Administration.  …”

http://www.heritage.org/Press/FactSheet/fs0033.cfm 

The Obama Health Care Plan: A Closer Look at Cost and Coverage

by Greg D’Angelo and Paul L. Winfree

WebMemo #2114

“…Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) has put forth an ambitious health care plan.[1] The plan proposes:

• Expanding eligibility for existing public programs, including both Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP);
• Creating a National Health Insurance Exchange to serve as a federal regulator of private insurance plans that would compete alongside a new National Health Plan;
• Providing income-related subsidies for those without employer-sponsored health insurance while mandating that children have coverage; and
• Requiring that medium and large employers provide coverage or pay a tax, while extending tax credits to small businesses and creating a government reinsurance program to cover businesses’ catastrophic health costs.

Differing Estimates

Analyzing proposals based on campaign documents and media accounts is inherently difficult, as these materials lack the level of detail necessary for a rigorous econometric analysis. Nonetheless, several organizations have done so, using a variety of assumptions and methodologies.[2] Most notable are the Lewin Group,[3] Health Systems Innovations Network,[4] and the Urban Institute-Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center.[5]

The best independent research shows that the Obama plan would cover roughly half of the 45 million uninsured through an expansion of public coverage; rely on soft methods of cost-savings; and require significant increases in federal expenditures.

Coverage. According to the Lewin Group, the Obama plan would reduce the number of uninsured by 26.6 million in 2010 if fully implemented in that year. The plan would also bring about significant shifts in sources of coverage. While 21.6 million people would lose their private health insurance, 48.3 million people are projected to obtain public coverage through Medicaid, SCHIP, or the new National Plan. Private employer-sponsored coverage would decline by 13.9 million, and private non-group coverage would decline by 7.7 million. Meanwhile, 18.6 million employees would buy into the new public plan through their workplace (as their employers switched to this plan from private coverage), 13.1 million individuals would buy into the public plan in the non-group market, and 16.6 million individuals would become newly enrolled in Medicaid or SCHIP. Therefore, the expansion of coverage under the Obama plan would be driven by enrollment in public coverage. This would entail a crowd-out of existing private non-group and private employer-sponsored insurance.

http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/wm2114.cfm

How to Talk to Washingtonians About Health  Reform

A presentation by Herndon AllianceDecember 5, 2007

http://www.herndonalliance.org/pdf/states/WashingtonPresentation12-07.pdf

Why Americans Don’t Want Single-Payer

“…But we progressives are not the ones who need to be convinced. In any great national political debate, there are partisans on our side and partisans against us. To achieve victory, we have to persuade people in the middle—and they don’t know what we know about health care.

Consider three central facts:

• Nearly all persuadable voters—those who don’t automatically side with or against us—have health insurance. (In fact, about 94 percent of voters are insured. The uninsured, unfortunately, don’t tend to vote.)
• About 3/4ths of insured Americans are satisfied with their health insurance.
• When Americans hear about a health care proposal, they immediately think “how is it going to affect me and my family.” That’s their overarching, overwhelming concern.

That means when average American voters consider a new health care policy, their paramount concern is that the policy allows them to keep the health insurance they have. Union members—who usually can be counted on to support progressive policy—are among the most adamant that they be permitted to keep their health insurance. Why? Because unions tend to negotiate better insurance for their members than the rest of us have! …”

http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/140513/why_americans_don’t_want_single-payer/

Single-Payer Health Care

“…Single-payer health care is a term used in the United States to describe the payment of doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers from a single fund. It differs from typical private health insurance where, through pricing and other measures taken by the insurer, the level of risks carried by multiple insurance pools as well as the coverage can vary and the pricing has to be varied according to the contribution of risk added to the pool. It is often mentioned as one way to deliver universal health care. The administrator of the fund could be the government but it could also be a publicly owned agency regulated by law. Australia’s Medicare, Canada’s Medicare, and healthcare in Taiwan are examples of single-payer universal health care systems.

According to the National Library of Medicine’s Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) thesaurus, a single-payer system is:

An approach to health care financing with only one source of money for paying health care providers. The scope may be national, like the Canadian system, state-wide, or community-based. The payer may be a governmental unit or other entity such as an insurance company. The proposed advantages include administrative simplicity for patients and providers, and resulting significant savings in overhead costs.^[1]

Single-payer health care does not necessarily mean that the government or some government agency delivers or controls health care services. It may pay for health professionals and services that are delivered in either private or public sector settings according to the needs and wishes of the patient and his or her doctor.

Single-payer is one alternative proposed for health care reform in the United States, and as such, has been the subject of active political debate for decades. A national health insurance system, though not necessarily a single payer system, is the reform proposal that has the greatest level of support amongst medical professionals^[2] and the general public,^[3] though some in Congress and the health insurance industry have tried to deflect calls for such reform by insisting that the U.S. should adopt a “uniquely American solution”^[4] that would protect the profits of private insurers, thus ruling out a single-payer system. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_payer 

Fact Sheet: America’s Uninsured
The media repeat claims of 40 million to 50 million uninsured Americans, but facts from the Census Bureau and research organizations discredit it.

By Julia A. Seymour
Business & Media Institute
6/23/2009

“…The media claim that there are 40 million to 50 million uninsured Americans and use that statistic to bolster calls for universal government-run insurance coverage. The inaccuracy has been repeated by print and broadcast journalists for years, but the true extent of the uninsured “crisis” is much smaller than those reports let on.

Myth: There are between 40 million and 50 million uninsured Americans. President Obama referred to “46 million uninsured Americans” in May 2009.

Fact: Anyone who reports that there are more than 46 million uninsured is exaggerating since the Census Bureau puts the number of uninsured at 45,657,000 people.

Fact: Nearly 10 million (9.7) of the 45.7 million uninsured are “not a citizen.” That makes every media claim of uninsured Americans higher than 35.9 million is wrong. …”

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090623160905.aspx

Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007

“…For reporting purposes, the

Census Bureau broadly classifies health insurance coverage as private

coverage or government coverage. Private health insurance is a plan provided

through an employer or a union or purchased by an individual from

a private company. Government health insurance includes the federal programs

Medicare, Medicaid, and military health care; the State Children’s

Health Insurance Program (SCHIP); and individual state health plans.*

People were considered “insured” if they were covered by any type of

health insurance for part or all of the previous calendar year. They were

considered “uninsured” if they were not covered by any type of health

insurance at any time in that year. …”

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf

“…Health Insurance Coverage: 2007

Highlights:

• Both the percentage and number of people without health insurance decreased in 2007.  The percentage without health insurance was 15.3 percent in 2007, down from 15.8 percent in 2006, and the number of uninsured was 45.7 million, down from 47.0 million. ¹
• The number of people with health insurance increased to 253.4 million in 2007 (up from 249.8 million in 2006).  The number of people covered by private health insurance (202.0 million) in 2007 was not statistically different from 2006, while the number of people covered by government health insurance increased to 83.0 million, up from 80.3 million in 2006.
• The percentage of people covered by private health insurance was 67.5 percent, down from 67.9 percent in 2006.  The percentage of people covered by employment-based health insurance decreased to 59.3 in 2007 from 59.7 percent in 2006.  The number of people covered by employment-based health insurance, 177.4 million, was not statistically different from 2006.
• The percentage of people covered by government health insurance programs increased to 27.8 percent in 2007, from 27.0 percent in 2006.  The percentage and number of people covered by Medicaid increased to 13.2 percent and 39.6 million in 2007, up from 12.9 percent and 38.3 million in 2006.
• In 2007, the percentage and number of children under 18 years old without health insurance were 11.0 percent and 8.1 million, lower than they were in 2006—11.7 percent and 8.7 million.  Although the uninsured rate for children in poverty decreased to 17.6 percent in 2007, from 19.3 percent in 2006, children in poverty were more likely to be uninsured than all children.²
• The uninsured rate and number of uninsured for non-Hispanic Whites decreased in 2007 to 10.4 percent and 20.5 million (from 10.8 percent and 21.2 million in 2006).  The uninsured rate for Blacks decreased to 19.5 percent in 2007 from 20.5 percent in 2006.  The number of uninsured Blacks in 2007 was not statistically different from 2006, at 7.4 million.    
• The percentage and the number of uninsured Hispanics were 32.1 percent and 14.8 million in 2007, lower than 34.1 percent and 15.3 million in 2006.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthin07/hlth07asc.html

The Obamacare Show: Bombed

By Michelle Malkin  

President Obama’s Health Care Town Hall, Green Bay

Why Doesn’t America have Single-Payer Health Insurance?

Barack Obama’s Health Care Plan (Ad)

Understanding Obama’s Health Care Plan

The Future of Health Care: The Candidates’ Plans

http://fora.tv/2008/09/16/The_Future_of_Health_Care_The_Candidates_Plans

The NCPA Story

The National Center for Policy Analysis

http://www.ncpa.org/

Dr.John Goodman–Free Our Health Care Now

“…I believe the best features of the US health care system are greatly at risk in the health care reform considered by Congress. If you agree with me, go to http://www.freeourhealthcarenow.com/ and sign the petition today. If you have already signed the petition, feel free to post your comments below.

http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/free-our-health-care-now/

Related Post On Pronk Palisades

Liberty Launch Countdown to The Celebration of Independence Day–Saturday, July 4, 2009–Ice Tea Party Time To Freeze Government Expenditures, Deficits, Debts and Taxes–Expect 30 Million Nationally in 1,000 Cities and Towns and 1 Million in Washington D.C.!

Second American Revolution–Tea Party Celebrations–Washington Fair–July 4, 2009–An Open Invitation To The American People

The American People Celebrate Independence Day–Saturday, July 4, 2009–By Marching in 1000 Cities and Towns and Attending Ice Tea Parties To Freeze Federal Government Spending, Taxes and Deficits–30 Million Expected Nationally–1 Million In Washington D.C.!

Independents Lead The The Second American Revolution Surge–Independence Day–Saturday July 4, 2009 In Washington D.C.–Tea Party Time–On To Washington–Dare You To Move!

Glenn Beck Listens To Tea Party Americans–Videos 

United States Economic Depressions–The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly–Obama’s Depression–Over 15,000,000 Americans Seek Full Time Job! 

The Obama Depression (OD) Starts July 4, 2009–30 Million Americans March To Tea Parties In Washington D.C. and Over 1,000 Cities and Towns Across America!

Operation Family Freedom (OFF): Millions Celebrate Washington Fair, Saturday, July 4, 2009–The Second American Revolution