Obamacare is more unpopular than ever. 5 reasons why:

Every week there’s another Obamacare headline announcing another failure of the President’s health care program. Americans are starting to take notice. According to a recent survey, Obamcare is “more unpopular than ever” - with over half of Americans viewing Obamacare unfavorably.

Pollsters found the sudden change in opinion unusual. Drew Altman, the Chief Executive of the Kaiser Foundation that performed the survey, said “Normally, when negatives go up, you can tie it to an event,” but that doesn’t seem to be the case here.

However, we know five reasons why Americans are increasingly disappointed, and it has nothing to do with current events. Instead, they all are consistent failures of the Affordable Care Act:

1. To avoid the expensive mandates under Obamacare, businesses are hiring more part-time workers – making full-time jobs harder to find.  Part-time workers are growing increasingly dismal at their full-time job prospects.

2. Premiums are continuing to rise – despite President Obama’s promises. Premiums for health plans through the federal exchange will rise by an average of 13.2% in Florida. In New York, rate hikes as high as 22% have been reported.

3. If you have Obamacare and you like your plan – it’s still going to cost you. People who decide to stick with their existing coverage are at risk for some of the biggest premium increases of all.

4. Small businesses are suffering. A lot. Higher premiums, less benefits, and great uncertainty are making the new health care mandates detrimental to small business owners and workers. Not to mention, the “SHOP” health care market for small businesses, is still not completely functioning.

5. Despite promises of “keeping your doctor” and health care choice – Obamacare is filled with medical limitations. For many Americans, doctors who treated them earlier are now turning them away, even if they haven’t changed insurers.

Obamacare is decreasing in popularity because the problems aren’t going away – in fact, they continue to grow. Our economy is suffering, consumers are facing higher costs and decreased coverage, and promises made are being broken. Americans deserve – and need – better health care alternatives. House Republicans are working to reverse this trend of harmful health care by presenting patient-centered, individualized alternatives that empower Americans’ to make their own health care decisions – not a government to decide for them.

View the original article here

5 reasons Sec. Sebelius actually resigned (VIDEOS!)

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was given an impossible task: making Obamacare work (FYI:  no one can make it work). Despite what she just said in the Rose Garden, here are the actual reasons she’s resigning – countless Americans harmed by this unworkable law:

View the original article here

Looking for Reasons for David Dewhurst’s Failure to Win Big

Even with nine candidates in the Republican primary to replace United States Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, just about everybody bet on Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst to win outright.

Instead, he is in a runoff against Ted Cruz, the former state solicitor general, an energetic opponent who tapped into the anti-establishment vein in the Texas Republican Party. Mr. Dewhurst is still the front-runner, but he is no longer the inevitability presented throughout the spring.

And now the spotlight is brighter.

Mr. Dewhurst and Mr. Cruz don’t have to compete for attention with a presidential race or contests in other states. National political reporters looking for things to cover are more likely than normal to be planning visits to the Texas barbecue trail. They — like the people they cover — are trying to connect the dots this election year, to figure out whether there is any theme or trend in the results.

Did Richard G. Lugar, Republican of Indiana, a six-term United States Senator, lose his seat because of some conservative uprising or did he just fall out of sync with the state that elected him? Was that a result of the Tea Party’s support of Richard Mourdock or was it about some idea that the guy representing the state ought to have a house there?

What about Nebraska? Did Deb Fischer win the Republican nomination for United States Senate because she was more conservative than the two statewide officeholders she beat? Or was it because those two front-runners knocked each other’s brains out and she was the only candidate still standing at the end?

Does the recall election in Wisconsin mean anything? Gov. Scott Walker faced down an effort by the state’s unions and Democrats to undo his 2010 election. Some see that as a reaffirmation of the conservative movement that put him in office.

Is the Texas race connected? Are there signs that the establishment is crumbling and that insurgent conservative partisans are taking over the Republican Party?

Maybe. The folks in the Cruz control room are hoping so, and you can certainly expect them to hype that story line.

Mr. Cruz — who had never previously sought public office and acquired most of his experience as a lawyer in government service — received more advertising and organizing support, in terms of spending, from the Club for Growth and FreedomWorks than from his own campaign. If he can keep those and other outside groups interested through the July 31 runoff, he may have the resources to compete with Mr. Dewhurst.

History is on Mr. Dewhurst’s side. Statewide candidates who collect votes as he did — 44.6 percent in the first round — almost always win their runoffs in Texas elections.

But Mr. Dewhurst ran like an incumbent. He skipped most of the candidate forums around the state this year, opting instead to speak on his own and in his advertising. To someone paying less than full attention, he appeared to be an officeholder seeking another term.

That story line about the insurgents isn’t a great one for him. The Dewhurst camp will point to the nine candidates on the ballot, to the fact that three of them — Mr. Dewhurst, Mr. Cruz and former Mayor Tom Leppert of Dallas — advertised heavily. And they will point to the relative prominence of a fourth candidate, Craig James, who played professional football and worked as an ESPN analyst.

It’s worth noting that Mr. Cruz, Mr. Leppert and Mr. James snagged a combined 51 percent of the primary vote.

This is even more interesting: In early voting, Mr. Dewhurst got 48 percent of the vote to Mr. Cruz’s 30 percent. On Election Day, Mr. Dewhurst’s advantage was skinny; he received 41.5 percent while Mr. Cruz got 38.1 percent.

One more: The non-Dewhursts — Mr. Cruz, Mr. James and Mr. Leppert —  received a combined 47.6 percent during the two weeks of early voting; on May 29, they got 54.4 percent.

Put another way, Mr. Dewhurst tied his three chief rivals in early voting, but they clobbered him on Election Day.

Maybe the connecting dots that matter here don’t go through Indiana, Nebraska and Wisconsin. It’s worth looking at the timeline instead of the map. After delayed primary dates and months of campaigning and advertising, Texans finally got to vote. From the middle of May, when voting began, to May 29, Mr. Dewhurst’s numbers got worse. Mr. Cruz’s got markedly better.

Now they are both in a position to find out what will happen over an extra nine weeks.

View the original article here