Issue #95

by Art Kelly

1. With polls showings the American people overwhelmingly in favor of repealing Obamacare, Democrats have launched a $125 million campaign to try to change public opinion on the new law.

Funding for the Health Information Center will come from unions, foundations, and corporations. It will have a staff of 10 to 15 people. Sheila O’Connell, former political director of the pro-abortion EMILY’s List, is a on the board of directors.

Politico reports there is an “urgency among Democrats” to explain and defend the unpopular Obamacare.

Since the elderly have been especially hostile to Obamacare, the President spoke this week at a seniors center in Wheaton, Maryland. The Associated Press reported that he claimed “the guaranteed Medicare benefits that you've earned will not change.”

That was quickly refuted by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who pointed out that Obamacare “takes a half-trillion dollars out of Medicare to fund a new government program."

A recent issue of this newsletter revealed how the Obama Administration is sending out, at taxpayers’ expense, a propaganda mailing to all seniors to try to convince them that the new heath care law will be beneficial.

The latest Rasmussen poll shows a hefty 58% of the people want to repeal the legislation. However, that figure represents a 5% decline from the 63% who favored repealed just two weeks ago.

Nonetheless, only 23% of voters believe the quality of health care will improve under the new plan, but 51% say it will get worse. Furthermore, 57% predict that the cost of health care will go up, while a scant 17% think it will go down.

If Republicans campaign heavily against Obamacare, a significant victory is possible.

In part for these reasons, Rasmussen Reports found that, if the congressional elections were held today, Republicans would win 44%--35%.

Democrats are hoping the $125 million they will spend to sell Obamacare might turn things around for them.

2. The Washington Post reports that several liberal organizations are concerned the President’s new commission on deficit reduction might propose cutting Social Security benefits.

Conservative leaders should speak out against this as well, since Social Security is not in any way contributing to the federal deficit. In fact, Social Security surpluses have actually been used for many years to finance the federal government's operations.

As of the end of April 2010, the federal government had already borrowed more than $2.558 Trillion from the Social Security Trust Fund to spend for NON-Social Security purposes.

No one knows how this money can be repaid.

The enormous debt that is owed to Social Security can be prevented from getting even bigger if legislation is enacted to stop the misuse of Social Security surpluses. But liberal groups have always opposed legislation such as:

The Social Security Preservation Act, HR 219, by Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) and 18 cosponsors, to require the Trust Fund to contain real assets, such as certificates of deposit in FDIC-insured institutions.

The Savings for Seniors Act, HR 1712, by Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and 21 cosponsors, to require Social Security surpluses to be saved in a special account and not spent on the general operations of the federal government.

Conservatives should insist Social Security surpluses be saved, not spent.