Monday, February 25, 2013

Big Apple is REALLY watching what you drink ...

Not to prevent drunk driving, which is a proven killer, but to keep you from drinking too many sugary products Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s bid to prevent New Yorkers from drinking large sodas is far more sweeping than previously thought, the new regulations show.

The Big Apple’s Health Department began sending brochures out last week to businesses affected by the ban, reports The New York Post, and while it was common knowledge that large sodas, such as 7-11’s “Big Gulp” would be prohibited, the measure also affects restaurant and bar sales as well.

For example, pizza deliveries can no longer include a two-liter bottle of soda, restaurants can no longer sell pitchers of soft drinks, and bars can’t include bottle-service mixers when customers order a bottle of liquor. The ban prohibits bars and restaurants from selling sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.

Merchants said they were shocked to see the new rules, and said families will have to pay higher unit prices for smaller bottles. The prohibition does not affect sealed sodas that are sold in grocery stores, so some of the plan’s critics do not understand the ban on two-liter bottles sold through pizza shops.

“It’s ludicrous,” said Robert Bookman, a lawyer for the New York City Hospitality Alliance. “It’s a sealed bottle of soda you can buy in the supermarket. Why can’t they deliver what you can get in the supermarket?”

Families will also feel the pain at children’s party places, since plastic pitchers of drinks will no longer be sold, unless they contain 100 percent juice.

A night of bottle service will also cost more at New York nightclubs, where customers often buy a bottle of alcohol for their tables and get a full complement of mixers to stir into their drinks.

The carafes the mixers come in typically hold 32 ounces, and sodas, cranberry juice and tonic water will be limited, as only water and 100 percent juice can be sold.

There are a few exceptions. The ban doesn’t affect alcoholic drinks, diet sodas or coffee drinks. Customers can also order large fruit smoothies, but only if they don’t have added sweeteners, or large milkshakes if they contain at least 50 percent milk.

Vendors will face $200 fines if they violate the new rules.

DC Circuit finds FOR the Constitution and AGAINST Mr. Obama

Barack Obama, in a devastating display of tyranny, bypassed Congress and violated Federal law seeking to cement his government takeover of the nation's entire financial sector. But he also explicitly violated Article II, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution – which to his surprise, the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit still thinks is in effect.

The Obama Mussolini maneuvers have suffered a setback, it seems. HURRAH!
Friday's decision casts doubt on some 600 hundred decisions the NLRB has made in the past year, ranging from enforcement of collective-bargaining agreements to rulings on the rights of workers to use social media.

The ruling also calls into question the validity of former Ohio attorney general Richard Cordray's recess appointment to head the fledgling Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the actions taken by the agency during his tenure. Obama named Cordray at the same time as the NLRB nominees, and his appointment is the subject of a separate lawsuit in D.C. federal court.

If Obama's recess appointment of Cordray to the newly created consumer board is also ruled invalid, as seems probable, it could nullify all the regulations the consumer board has issued, many of which affect the mortgage business.

So Obama's setback for abusing the Constitution could be HUGE. The three-judge panel ruled Friday that the president does not have the power to bypass the Senate, so now we are in a happy place. Should the Federal courts persist in finding the Constitution relevant, then these blown appointments will have some major repercussions. The unanimous ruling that Obama violated the Constitution in making three illegal National Labor Relations Board appointments last year could invalidate virtually all the work of the NLRB since.

Likewise, the decision will certainly impact Obama's current "recess" appointment of Richard Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) – another illicit appointment made at the same time in the same unconstitutional manner.
Voiding this appointment not only forces Obama's CFPB back to an "uninitiated" state – but any and all the "supervisory actions," rules and regulations it has issued during its busy-body first year of meddling existence as "consumer watchdog" for all financial services industries are INVALID under the law, in terms of jurisdiction and in their effect.

Do-overs, anyone?

The NLRB is a mess, but Obama has just re-nominated Cordray for CFPB – and Obama and THIS nominee need to be stopped!

Obama's hell-spawned new bureaucracy, known as the "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau" (or CFPB for short), is an Orwellian nightmare with sweeping powers to regulate virtually every financial transaction conceivable.
Although Obama managed to sign the CFPB into law during the Pelosi lame duck Democrat majority of 2010 that rammed it through Congress, the agency cooked up by nanny-statist Elizabeth Warren remained relatively harmless unless and until Obama successfully appointed an agency director. As long as no director was nominated by Obama AND confirmed by the Senate, the CFPB remained a part of the Treasury Department, and still subject to congressional and presidential oversight.

But Obama – ever arrogant and impatient "to govern" – refused to wait for Senate confirmation of his nominee. Obama wants what he wants, when he wants it!
So Obama violated the plain meaning of the U.S. Constitution, "deemed" the Senate out of session when it was no such thing, and made an illicit "recess" appointment of one Richard C. Cordray.

The agency immediately transferred to the Federal Reserve for administrative purposes. It promptly became officially unsupervised in unprecedented and malignant fashion. Even in its new quarters, the Federal Reserve has had no real authority over the CFPB. Although the agency is required to make reports to the House and Senate committees assigned nominal oversight, Congress has no direct authority over the operations of the CFPB. ONLY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH HAS ANY CONTROL OF THE CFPB.

And the lawsuits against Obama's shocking abuses have been grinding their way through the Federal court system ever since…

It was NO accident that the director Obama had chosen was an ideologue extremist who would push the regulatory agenda hard and fast. Richard C. Cordray, an ultra-radical leftwing consumerist from Ohio is well loved by mega-law firms who plunder and profit from government investigations, and is generally thought of as the king of "pay to play" litigation with trial lawyers. Just what America needs "directing" all our financial services transactions.

Cordray WAS awaiting Senate confirmation as LAW AND PRECEDENT demand, but after the Senate balked at "Dear Leader's" first pick and the dangers of the vast and intrusive scope of the Democrat-forced legislation, Obama decided to install his puppet without any Senate confirmation at all. 'Constitution? What Constitution? We don't need no stinkin' Constitution.'

Of course, Obama's overreach is not only a direct violation of the Constitution's separation of powers, our system of checks and balances, and over 100 years of precedence, it is also a direct violation of the law that created CFPB in the first place. 
The bill Obama signed clearly specified that the CFPB director MUST be confirmed by the Senate.

But no matter, dictators don't have to play by the rules, or even follow the strictures of the laws they themselves have crafted, enacted and signed. You know, laws are for the little people.

Obama's statement on his Mussolini Moment:
 "I refuse to take 'No' for an answer. I've said before that I will continue to look for every opportunity to work with Congress to move this country forward. But when Congress refuses to act in a way that hurts our economy and puts people at risk, I have an obligation as president to do what I can without them."

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is yet another cog in Obama's wheel grinding America down into Mussolini style fascism, where government controlled industry is the only industry. CFPB is designed to institute and enforce centralized control in our de-centralized, market-based, commercial republic. The problems it is already causing throughout the financial services sector are legion, and it is CERTAIN it will become an intensifying nightmare for private enterprise – but a dream come true for the grasping, faceless Washington apparatchiks who revel in regulating us into poverty and destroying our freedom.

Thankfully, the D.C. Circuit just ruled in favor of the Constitution, and we MUST MAKE SURE OBAMA GETS THE MESSAGE! In America, no man is above the law…

"The CFPB is poised to be one of the least accountable and most powerful agencies in Washington. Created by the deeply flawed Dodd-Frank law, it is subject to none of the checks that independent agencies normally operate under, and will have an unprecedented reach and control over individual consumer decisions," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

The CFPB is the primary moving part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The two corrupt authors of this sanctimonious and suffocating "reform" bill – Chris Dodd and Barney Frank – thankfully have been driven from future Congressional terms by the poisonous record of their nefarious deeds. But their lousy legislation lives on, and MUST BE HALTED!

Obama banked on the conventional wisdom that once this monstrous regulatory agency had been "activated" with the unlawful appointment of a director, this terrible law and its onerous over-regulation would be like the Energizer Bunny, and go on, and on, and on… even if ultimately the Supreme Court ruled his bogus "recess" appointment unconstitutional, there would be NO UNRINGING THE BELL.

We MUST prove him WRONG. Obama is SURE he will NEVER be held accountable for ANY of his crimes against the Constitution.

In the case of CFPB, despite the economic collapse with which we are already confronted, Obama and his faction are happy to have the leviathan CFPB financially crush us little people. And because its director serves a five-year term, that tenure will overlap presidential terms and the director, once ensconced, cannot be removed by the president.

Understand, the "progressive" intent of this rogue law is that the CFPB be an agency created outside the regular constitutional framework and relatively immune to democratic pressures. A virtually independent force, its only senior authority is the Financial Stability Oversight Council, with 10 voting members and five non-voting members, who may vote to stop an action by the CFPB by a minimum of seven of 10 votes.

But NOW we have had the D.C. Circuit confirm what we knew—the only REAL control on unbridled, unchecked Executive branch domination of this agency was its initial confirmation process by the Senate, which Obama unconstitutionally usurped! 

Hence, CFPB went into action in violation of its own statutorily limited powers via an unconfirmed director… and the whole agency initiation is a nullity.

America is still a nation of laws, not men. No tyrants for We the People…

Along with rebuking the overt anti-constitutional actions taken by Obama to activate the CFPB, here is why STOPPING Obama's incessant overreach, this agency and the Cordray nomination are so vital:

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) loves implementing and enforcing new financial regulations—but they strangle economic recovery, slow growth and cost jobs. The CFPB increasingly serves as the primary regulatory authority over consumer financial products, and nearly every federal consumer financial protection statute – but dangerously answers only to Obama administration insiders. The CFPB polices activities relating to financial products and services, seeking to define, identify and punish "unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts or practices," that it gets to define, and routinely examines large depository institutions, and non-depository entities for compliance with federal consumer financial laws.

The CFPB will become the administrator for the "federal consumer financial laws," which include nearly every existing federal consumer financial statute, as well as new consumer financial protection mandates prescribed by the Dodd-Frank Act, such as the new mortgage loan standards set forth in Title XIV. The "enumerated consumer laws" transferred to the CFPB's authority include:

The Alternative Mortgage Transaction Parity Act of 1982;The Consumer Leasing Act of 1976;The Electronic Fund Transfer Act;The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA);The Fair Credit Billing Act;The Fair Credit Reporting Act;The Home Owners Protection Act of 1998;The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act;Subsections (b) through (f) of section 43 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, requiring disclosure when a depository institution lacks federal deposit insurance;Sections 502 through 509 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, protecting the disclosure of nonpublic personal information;The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975;The Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994;The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 (RESPA);The S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008;The Truth in Lending Act (TILA);The Truth in Savings Act;Section 626 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, mandating a rulemaking on unfair and deceptive mortgage lending practices; andThe Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act.
The CFPB will further regulate, as covered persons, anyone who engages in offering or providing a consumer financial product or service. Service providers to covered persons, and affiliates of a covered person acting as a service provider, are also under the regulatory authority of the CFPB. A covered person broadly includes all those engaged in virtually any form of consumer-related financial activities. This agency is a monster, a behemoth, a Leviathan – and its reach will be legion… all this strictly under the purview of the executive branch: A totalitarian's dream come true.

No wonder America's Mussolini refused to take "NO" for an answer from We the People, and our elected Representatives in Congress.

But NOW the courts are saying, 'OBAMA, YOU GO TOO FAR'!

Obama, Cordray and the CFPB MUST be stopped. America already teeters on the edge of fiscal ruin. Obama usurpations MUST be halted TODAY.

Saturday, February 2, 2013

The Cost of Welfare

The Senate Budget Committee reported that in fiscal year 2011, between food stamps, housing support, child care, Medicaid and other benefits, the average U.S. household below the poverty line received $168 a day in government support.

What's the problem with that much support?

According to Mike Huckabee, the median household income in America is just over $50,000, which averages out to $137.13 a day.

To put it another way, being on welfare now pays the equivalent of $30 an hour for a 40-hour week, while the average job pays $25 an hour. And the person who works also has to pay taxes, which drops his pay to $21 an hour.

It's no wonder that welfare is now the biggest part of the budget, more than Social Security or defense. And, as Huckabee so sagely observed, why would anyone want to get off welfare when working pays $9 an hour less?

Blatant Media Bias

By Alex Newman

If Americans needed any further evidence of the blatant bias and disregard for the truth displayed by the increasingly discredited establishment press, the coverage — or lack thereof — of two recent demonstrations in Washington, D.C., provided a perfect illustration. One tiny protest was seeking more gun control and was promptly plastered all over the front pages. The other march, which was virtually ignored by the press despite record-breaking attendance, sought protection for the lives of unborn children.

On January 25, more than 500,000 people, according to reliable estimates, converged on the capital for the annual pro-life March for Life. They came from all across the country in support of protecting the lives of unborn children to mark the 40th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision, which improperly purported to legalize the killing of babies by inventing “rights” not listed in the Constitution or anywhere else.

Despite the massive size of the historic march, the media barely noticed it. According to the non-partisan Media Research Center, the marches did not garner a single “syllable of coverage” from ABC or CBS. While ABC could not find the time to mention the demonstration for life that evening, though, it was certainly not because there were too many other critical stories to tell.

“Anchor Diane Sawyer made time for an update on the supposed controversy over complaints Subway’s ‘foot-long’ subs are sometimes only eleven inches long. Horrors,” noted Brent Baker, vice president for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center, on January 26. “Sawyer allocated 28 seconds to this.”
There were plenty of newsworthy events going on at the March for Life, too. “Can a nation long endure that does not respect the sanctity of life?” asked U.S. Senator Rand Paul (RKy.), one of the many lawmakers who spoke at the rally. “Can a nation conceived in liberty carry its head high if it denies protection to the youngest and most vulnerable of its citizens?”

If the record-breaking march complete with top national leaders was mentioned at all in newspapers, it was barely a footnote. The few outlets that did cover it often used pictures of a few proabortion supporters to illustrate the article, drawing fury from readers. Many media outlets did not a have a single word about the massive demonstration at all.

In fact, the huge story was ignored so completely that it never even hit the “top stories” section in Google news, offering further proof that the establishment press all but ignored the enormous demonstration. Most of the major papers and “media” outlets simply pretended the March for Life never happened.

Imagine, though, if over 500,000 people had marched on Washington for higher taxes on the rich, gun control, in support of killing babies, or other statist causes. Analysts say the press would have been all over it for weeks, asking lawmakers why they were ignoring the will of the people. When more than half-a-million Americans demand an end to the legalized slaughter of millions of babies, however, not even a peep was heard from most of the establishment press.

Compare that media coverage to the attention lavished on a pitifully minuscule “march” the next day demanding more infringements on the unalienable right to keep and bear arms, which was the top story on Google news for hours. While some media estimates acknowledge fewer than 1,000 actually participated in the demonstration despite other claims, the tiny event favoring more restrictions on the Second Amendment became instant front-page news across America, complete with lies and distortions about the numbers in attendance.

USA Today had its homepage covered with articles about the rally. “Thousands rally in Washington for gun control,” read the headline of the paper, which was quickly ridiculed in the comment section of the article. “Despite chilly temperatures and snow-covered ground, supporters came from around the country came to make their statement,” the paper “reported,” despite the same chilly temperatures endured by hundreds of thousands of pro-lifers assembled the day before that never got mentioned. 

The Washington Post, while celebrating the rally in prominent articles, offered a slightly more realistic estimate on the numbers, saying “nearly 1,000 people” had joined the march. CBS was also more accurate when it said that “close to a thousand”  had demanded more restrictions on unalienable rights. Analysts, and especially gun rights supporters and pro-life activists, however, ridiculed the press for putting its hostile and deceptive bias on full display for the world, helping to further discredit the already widely mistrusted establishment media.

As the phony, media-driven gun-control “debate” continues, and as the press continues to ignore the grievances of millions of Americans to push the establishment’s anti-liberty and antiAmerican agenda instead, mainstream media credibility is likely to continue plummeting. Out of the ashes of what critics have started calling the “lamestream media” or the “dinosaur press,” however, the alternative media are rising, growing by leaps and bounds even as the deceitful establishment “news” outlets continue their death spiral into irrelevance. 

Friday, February 1, 2013

Heroic Mom saves twins

A mother’s use of a gun in self-defense sent shockwaves across the nation as Americans are embroiled in a raging gun control debate. CBS News out of Atlanta, Georgia, reported on the story. The mother, who was home with only her nine-year old twins, saw a suspicious man outside her window on January 4 around 1 p.m. The woman called her husband, who was at work, and told him about what was happening. Her worst fears were confirmed when the strange man began trying to break in a door with a crowbar. The husband immediately called 911 to report what was happening, while simultaneously staying on the phone with his wife and talking her through the traumatic ordeal.

The husband kept his cool and gave his wife the best advice he could. He told her to get their .38-caliber revolver. The husband had just taken his wife to a range a few weeks earlier and showed her how to fire a pistol. He told her, as was recorded on the 911 call, “Just remember everything that I showed you, everything I taught you, all right?” The intruder burst into the house and heard the screaming of the mother and her children. Highlighting his deadly intentions, the criminal chased after the woman and her children as they fled, following them into the attic. The mother readied her weapon, and her husband encouraged her to shoot the intruder. She had her gun ready when the suspect opened the door to the crawlspace where they were hiding. The woman frantically fired her gun to defend her life and the lives of her children. The shouts of the husband can be heard from the 911 calls. “Shoot him again! Shoot him!” She continued to fire until she used all six of her bullets. Five shots hit the attacker. The injured assailant fled the scene in his automobile, but crashed the car into a nearby wooded area, owing to the wounds he suffered. The injured burglar was hospitalized in intensive care, and authoritiesreported that he had an extensive criminal record. The husband was grateful that his family was saved thanks to the bravery of his wife. “My wife is a hero. She protected her kids. She did what she was supposed to do as a responsible, prepared gun owner,” he told news affiliate WSB.

Sheriff Joe Chapman agreed that the mother had no choice but to defend herself and her children. Chapman told the news that “had it not turned out the way that it did, I would possibly be working a triple homicide, not having a clue as to who it is we’re looking for.”

Gun Control Does NOT Work

“Gun control does not work,” Chief Daniel said in an e-mail to the Jacksonville Progress. “If it did, Chicago and Washington D.C. would have no violent crime. In fact, while having some of the most draconian gun laws in the U.S., both cities have a higher murder and robbery rate than most other cities.”

Under obamacare, it’s Quit smoking or pay the price — literally

Smokers who thought they were getting a sweet deal from ObamaCare may want to think twice before lighting up again. According to a January 24 Associated Press article, one of the many well-concealed provisions of the bill that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Congress had to pass “so that you can find out what’s in it” could make health insurance cost up to 50 percent more for Americans with cigarette habits — especially longstanding ones.

ObamaCare was ostensibly designed to make health insurance affordable to Americans. It prohibits insurers from turning down or charging more to individuals with pre-existing conditions and even certain conditions (such as obesity) that increase the risk of health problems.

However, the one condition that the law does not protect from high insurance rates is nicotine addiction — despite the fact that smoking is associated with a number of serious health problems including heart disease and lung cancer. In fact, it specifically permits insurers to charge higher rates to older smokers than to nonsmokers or even younger smokers. Under the law, older adults in general may be charged up to triple what younger ones are charged. Smokers may, in addition, be charged up to 50 percent more than nonsmokers for their coverage, but younger smokers may be hit with a lesser penalty than older ones. Plus, the subsidies the government provides to offset the cost of insurance purchased on the individual market cannot be applied to the smoking penalty.

With insurers already being forced to accept individuals with pre-existing conditions at (presumably) below-market rates, they will have a strong incentive to price out of the market anyone else who might prove costly.

In a free market, of course, insurers would have the option of turning down individuals who might prove costly or of charging them rates commensurate with their risks. The United States has not had such a market for decades; state and federal mandates have already grossly distorted the insurance market. ObamaCare only piles on more mandates, distorting it even further and making insurance even less affordable.

Then again, as former Representative Ron Paul likes to say, the name of a bill is usually “exactly the opposite of what the bill does.” Who, then, can really be surprised that the Affordable Care Act fails to live up to its moniker?

Immigration Insanity

Recently, it has been said that our nation’s immigration system is “broken,” and that it needs “reform and a “permanent fix.” No it doesn’t! We have a wonderfully generous immigration policy, which allows more than two million immigrants to come here every year — legally.

In fact, the average since 1940 is 2.1 million legal immigrants per year (according to Numbers USA). That’s more than all other nations of the world combined.

Criticism of the system, that “it takes too long to process immigration papers,” is bogus. The reason it takes a long time is not due to government inefficiency or bad policy but the fact that millions of honorable foreigners are ahead of them in line, waiting patiently to legally come here.

That’s the way the system should work. And it is precisely those people we want to come: the ones who honor, obey, and sustain the law. We don’t want the ones who flaunt the rule of law and disregard proper procedure to try and cut ahead of other foreigners who are doing it correctly. If some of those folks are already here illegally, they must return home and wait their turn. That is compassionate and right.

There is no need for immigration policy reform other than to enforce the rules we already have in place. It is fair, balanced, proper, and treats everyone humanely and equally.

Deported people broke the law, and we should continue deporting them until they get the message, “In America, we are honorable citizens and we obey the law.” All are welcome here if they can accept that premise. There can be no other way.

Captain Jim Green
Heber City, Utah

A 17-Year-Old's Letter to President Obama about Football

Dear President Obama:

I am a 17-year old high school senior who has proudly played football for 11 years. I read with great dismay your recent comments in The New Republic in which you state that you would have to “think long and hard” before allowing a son to play football. With all due respect, I couldn’t sit quietly on the sidelines as your comments kicked off a national debate.
Without a doubt, football is a dangerous game and I agree that it is even more so at the college and professional levels. More concerning about your comments, however, is the trickle down effect they will have on the sport at other levels, including youth and high school, where the number of kids who suffer serious injuries compares to those playing other sports.

Overregulation and parental concern could sideline many young players who could gain a lot from the experience. Thankfully, my parents, one of whom is an orthopedic surgeon, did not deny me this opportunity.

Football taught me that you could achieve almost anything through hard work and dedication. You don’t have to be the biggest, strongest, fastest or best player, but you do have to be the hardest working player, both on and off the field.

Football taught me accountability. In football, you’re accountable to your coaches, your teammates, and yourself. If you do this, you show that you can be trusted and you can become a role model for younger kids in the community.

Football is a bond that will forever tie me to my teammates and community. I have 50 men I can call brothers, and football brought together people in the community of different ages, color and socioeconomic status every Friday night to cheer us on. 

Football taught me how to be a leader. By observing my coaches and former teammates, I witnessed what it takes to be a leader. As Dwight Eisenhower once said, “The supreme quality for leadership is unquestionably integrity. Without it, no real success is possible, no matter whether it is on a section gang, a football field, in an army, or in an office.”

Football taught me that a key ingredient to athletic success is to work hard in the classroom; football made me a better student and academics made me a better football player. For a student-athlete to reach the pinnacle, it takes discipline, time management, passion and commitment.  It also takes sacrifice. The determination that led me to excel in sports helped me to succeed in the classroom and will help me succeed in life. 

My most rewarding memories involve football and I am forever grateful to my teammates, coaches and the game of football for these memories, which go way beyond touchdowns and Friday nights. For these reasons, and others, football is far more than a game; it is a lesson in tradition, teamwork, academic commitment and perseverance. 

I would hate for anyone to be denied the lessons I’ve learned playing football. My sincere hope is that experiences such as mine will be taken into consideration if and when changes are made to the sport.

Nick Bookout is a senior at Gulf Breeze High School (FL), captain of his varsity football and basketball teams, and a National Merit Semifinalist.  Bookout is the son of CFIF corporate counsel Renee Giachino.

Labor Unions Finally Read Obamacare Fine Print, Realize Costs Set To Spike, “Turn Sour” On Obama

It is a well-known fact that nobody in Congress ever reads, or even skims, any law, and especially not the fine print, it passes until long after it has been enacted into law. It appears the same is just as true for the biggest pillar of support for the Obama administration: America’s labor unions, whose liberal vote every election is instrumental to preserving the outflow side of America’s welfare state. As it turns out, it was the same labor unions who enthusiastically supported the primary accomplishment of the Obama administration in the past 4 years, Obamacare, only to realize, long after it has become reality that, surprise, their healthcare plan costs are about to go up. And, as the WSJ colorfully summarizes, they are now “turning sour.”

From WSJ:

Union leaders say many of the law’s requirements will drive up the costs for their health-care plans and make unionized workers less competitive. Among other things, the law eliminates the caps on medical benefits and prescription drugs used as cost-containment measures in many health-care plans. It also allows children to stay on their parents’ plans until they turn 26.
So what are the Unions’ demands to offset what they only now realize will push their overall costs higher? What else: More!

To offset that, the nation’s largest labor groups want their lower-paid members to be able to get federal insurance subsidies while remaining on their plans. In the law, these subsidies were designed only for low-income workers without employer coverage as a way to help them buy private insurance.
Top officers at the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, the AFL-CIO and other large labor groups plan tokeep pressing the Obama administration to expand the federal subsidies to these jointly run plans, warning that unionized employers may otherwise drop coverage.

But, but, they can’t – that’s the whole point, or didn’t they read that part too? Doesn’t matter – to them it is now unfair, nay “unacceptable”:

“We are going back to the administration to say that this is not acceptable,” said Ken Hall, general secretary-treasurer for the Teamsters, which has 1.6 million members and dependents in health-care plans. Other unions involved in the push include the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union and Unite Here, which represents service and other workers.

So now that even the unions have understood that Obamacare is one big tax, maybe it is time to reevaluate its arrival at a time when the already strapped US consumer sees taxes rising, and has their savings extinguished.

Employers and consumers across the country will see big changes under the health law, which goes into full effect next year. Insurers will no longer be able to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. Most individuals will be taxed if they don’t carry insurance, and employers with at least 50 workers will face a fine if they don’t provide it. About 30 million Americans are expected to gain insurance under the law.
John Wilhelm, chairman of Unite Here Health, the insurance plan for 260,000 union workers at places including hotels, casinos and airports, recalls standing next to Barack Obama at a rally in Nevada when he was a 2008 presidential candidate.
“I heard him say, ‘If you like your health plan, you can keep it,’ ” Mr. Wilhelm recalled. Mr. Wilhelm said he expects the administration will craft a solution so that employer health-care plans won’t be hurt. “If I’m wrong, and the president does not intend to keep his word, I would have severe second thoughts about the law.”
Wait, no, you mean that in order to get your vote a career politician… lied? Say it isn’t true.

So what is an administration that has pandered to every demand for welfare increases ever, to do?