What would President Obama's approval rating be if we had a media willing to hold him accountable for something?

Another week and more computer "glitches" and "cost surprises".

In New Jersey, residents are opening their mail and finding out this, according to The New York Post:

"Substitute "false political promises" for "easy money," and you have a good idea of the flim-flam Garden Staters are finding with ObamaCare.  

That's the gist of a Star Ledger story that begins as follows: "Hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans opened the mail last week to find their health-insurance plan would no longer exist in 2014 because it does not cover all the essential benefits required by the Affordable Care Act."  

The story goes on to say the changes will hit more than 800,000 New Jerseyans.  

Some defenders say it's still an improvement, because these people will get more coverage. But that wasn't the promise. 

In 2009, President Obama put it this way: 

"No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. If you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan."  

Just as New Jersey's web site for insurance fraud says, we're sure President Obama would never think of robbing a bank or stealing a car.  

Too bad he, too, found the temptations of insurance fraud just too hard to resist."

Add to this the "part time work" effect of ObamaCare, as posted by Andrew Puzder:

"The logic for businesses is simple. If you have three employees working 40 hours per week they will produce 120 labor hours. Five employees working 24 hours per week also produce 120 labor hours. Employers must offer the three full-time employees health insurance or pay a penalty. They have no such obligation to the five part-time employees, making part-time employment less costly. Make something more expensive and employers will use less of it; make something less expensive and they will use more of it.  

This unintended consequence of ObamaCare must be addressed. The bipartisan "Forty Hours Is Full Time Act" introduced in the House and Senate earlier this year offers a viable solution. The bill redefines a full-time employee as one who works 40 hours a week or 174 hours a month based on a 52-week year. That change to ObamaCare would encourage economic growth and job creation. 

Congress and the administration can solve this problem. A good first step would be for the White House to admit that there is a problem."

So higher costs and "part timers" is what we have to show for ObamaCare so far.

What would President Obama's approval rating really look like if the media was holding him accountable for results?  He'd be around 30%!


P.S. You can hear my chat with Clayton Moore, businessman, US history professor & and software specialist, here.  



Another week and more computer "glitches" and "cost surprises".

In New Jersey, residents are opening their mail and finding out this, according to The New York Post:

"Substitute "false political promises" for "easy money," and you have a good idea of the flim-flam Garden Staters are finding with ObamaCare.  

That's the gist of a Star Ledger story that begins as follows: "Hundreds of thousands of New Jerseyans opened the mail last week to find their health-insurance plan would no longer exist in 2014 because it does not cover all the essential benefits required by the Affordable Care Act."  

The story goes on to say the changes will hit more than 800,000 New Jerseyans.  

Some defenders say it's still an improvement, because these people will get more coverage. But that wasn't the promise. 

In 2009, President Obama put it this way: 

"No matter how we reform health care, we will keep this promise to the American people: If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. If you like your health-care plan, you will be able to keep your health-care plan."  

Just as New Jersey's web site for insurance fraud says, we're sure President Obama would never think of robbing a bank or stealing a car.  

Too bad he, too, found the temptations of insurance fraud just too hard to resist."

Add to this the "part time work" effect of ObamaCare, as posted by Andrew Puzder:

"The logic for businesses is simple. If you have three employees working 40 hours per week they will produce 120 labor hours. Five employees working 24 hours per week also produce 120 labor hours. Employers must offer the three full-time employees health insurance or pay a penalty. They have no such obligation to the five part-time employees, making part-time employment less costly. Make something more expensive and employers will use less of it; make something less expensive and they will use more of it.  

This unintended consequence of ObamaCare must be addressed. The bipartisan "Forty Hours Is Full Time Act" introduced in the House and Senate earlier this year offers a viable solution. The bill redefines a full-time employee as one who works 40 hours a week or 174 hours a month based on a 52-week year. That change to ObamaCare would encourage economic growth and job creation. 

Congress and the administration can solve this problem. A good first step would be for the White House to admit that there is a problem."

So higher costs and "part timers" is what we have to show for ObamaCare so far.

What would President Obama's approval rating really look like if the media was holding him accountable for results?  He'd be around 30%!


P.S. You can hear my chat with Clayton Moore, businessman, US history professor & and software specialist, here.  



RECENT VIDEOS