‘Mediscare’ and the Pennsylvania Senate Race

Back in August, Cato adjunct scholar Veronique de Rugy expressed concern about Republican campaign rhetoric on Medicare. As Republicans tell it, they want to “protect” and “strengthen” Medicare, whereas President Obama wants to “cut” and “weaken” it. Veronique thinks that the GOP’s “Mediscare” campaign could end up backfiring by making it harder to reform Medicare if Republicans succeed in taking control of Washington.

What I find irritating is that for all the standard platitudes from Republicans about getting federal spending under control, they’re simultaneously attacking Democrats for allegedly wanting to cut the budget’s big-ticket items like Medicare and military spending. Democrats might deserve it for decades of trying to scare the pants off of seniors, but the GOP’s adoption of their tactics is evidence in support of the view that the parties merely represent two sides of the same coin. (Don’t forget the last big expansion of entitlements came from the Republican-engineered addition of a prescription drug benefit to Medicare in 2004.)

That brings me to the Pennsylvania race for U.S. Senate , where Republican challenger Tom Smith is trying to unseat Democrat Bob Casey. Smith is apparently in striking distance after months of running television ads attacking Casey. However, one particular ad being run by the Smith campaign is a good example of how low Republicans have sunk when it comes to Mediscaring:

Details

Reflections on the Loss of Liberty

The Louis E. Carabini Distinguished Lecture, presented at the 2012 Mises Institute Supporters Summit: “The Truth About War: A Revisionist Approach”. Recorded at Callaway Gardens, Georgia, on 26 October 2012. Includes an introduction by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. Also – see Judge Nap’s new book, Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom

Details

States Set to Nullify on Mandates and Drug War: Tenther News for the week of 10-29-12

This episode is made possible in part by the new Nullification Movie. Now available for order at tenthamendmentcenter.com/movie

*******

President Obama and Congress insist they have the authority to force every American to buy health insurance.

Last summer, the Supreme Court put its rubber stamp on that notion, ruling that the federal government does indeed possess the authority to force all 350-plus million Americans into a one-size fits all health care system via its taxing authority.

Florida voters will have the opportunity to tell the feds to go pound the plentiful Sunshine State sand on Nov. 6 when they consider Amendment 1, a health care freedom amendment.

If passed, the amendment will “prohibit laws or rules from compelling any person or employer to purchase, obtain, or otherwise provide for health care coverage.” The proposed amendment would also allow health care providers to accept direct payment for services.

Call it a tax or call it a penalty, in effect, the amendment would nullify the insurance mandate written into the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Amendment 1 would “exempt persons, employers, and health care providers from penalties and taxes for paying directly or accepting direct payment for lawful health care services; and prohibit laws or rules from abolishing the private market for health care coverage of any lawful health care service.”

The Florida legislature placed the amendment on the ballot. It passed the Florida Senate on March 9, 2011, by a 29-10 margin. The House overwhelmingly agreed, passing the measure 80-37 on May 4 that same year. To become part of the Florida constitution, the amendment must garner at least 60 percent of the votes when Floridians go to the polls.

Rep. Scott Plakon (R-Longwood) sponsored the Amendment in the House.

“I say keep your hands off my freedom.”

In Colorado and Washington State, two initiative measures that would nullify parts of the unconstitutional federal drug war are holding strong.

Details