Saturday, May 22, 2010

Letter to Editor - Obama, AZ, and Calderon

My letter to the editor: 
 President Obama, while hosting Mexico President Calderon, said:  “In the United States of America, no law-abiding person — be they an American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico — should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like.”  We can all agree.  As our President must know by now, the Arizona Immigration law concerns only those people who are ILLEGALLY in our country ( as per our federal laws) and who are also committing a crime.  They are not just "visiting", and they are costing America billions of dollars in education, healthcare and penal system costs, among others.  While doing so, they demand that we accede to their demands!   They are, however, specifically protected by this bill against a perusal of their papers unless they are breaking the law!  Just maybe our President (as well as our Attorney General Eric Holder and our Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano) should actually read the law to which he refers prior to condemning it.  Shamefully, the Democrats in Congress actually gave Calderon a standing ovation for condemning Arizona's law.  Perhaps Obama should have asked Calderon to describe his country's immigration and illegal entry laws.  He might have asked Calderon if it is true that for him, "Where there is a Mexican, there is Mexico”.  With those words Calderon is accepting the chants of brazen illegals who believe our American Southwest is part of Mexico, and they want it back. Obama said, “We are no longer defined by our borders.”  Then I ask why our country has a Border Patrol. 
Wolf Blitzer, while interviewing Calderon, asked if Mexican police go around asking for papers of people they suspect are illegal immigrants.  His answer?  "Of course! Of course!  And Calderon dares to condemn our "possible" use of profiling!
Mexican and Arab illegals are entering our country through the Mexican border.  Perhaps the man who was elected to uphold this country's laws, to represent all American interests, to keep our country secure, who took an oath to uphold our Constitution - should keep that in mind as he continues to denigrate America around the world.   Perhaps we Americans now understand some of what Obama meant by his campaign promise to “fundamentally change America.” 

Friday, May 21, 2010

Elena Kagen; Smart Pills; and Shocking Math Lesson; Blogger and a Free Press; and Sermons Spouting the Government Message

In what should come as a shock to absolutely nobody, Elena Kagan's newly surfaced college thesis centered on socialism...and not in a critical way.
In it, she thanks her brother, "whose involvement in radical causes led me to explore the history of American radicalism in the hope of clarifying my own political ideas."
An in part of her conclusion, she states:
The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half a century after socialism's decline, still wish to change America. Radicals have often succumbed to the devastating bane of sectarianism; it is easier, after all, to fight one's fellows than it is'to battle an entrenched and powerful' foe. Yet if 'the history of Local New York shows anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst enemies. In unity lies their only hope. ...

The Birmingham News is reporting:  Jefferson County geometry teacher uses wrong example to teach angles --- assassination of President Barack Obama

The teacher was appar­ently teaching his geometry students about parallel lines and angles, officials said. He used the example of where to stand and aim if shooting Obama.

"He was talking about angles and said, 'If you're in this building, you would need to take this angle to shoot the president,' " said Joseph Brown, a senior in the geometry class.

[This is shocking, dangerous and inappropriate!  I think he should have been arrested, actually.]  

Congress about to limit political speech of bloggers?

The bill, however, would radically redefine how the FEC regulates political commentary. A section of the DISCLOSE Act would exempt traditional media outlets from coordination regulations, but the exemption does not include bloggers, only “a communication appearing in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication…”    "The purposeful lack of exemption for bloggers looks ominous indeed — and could be used to harass smaller, unfunded bloggers out of the realm of political debate."
World Net Daily reports: A George Soros-funded, Marxist-founded organization calling itself Free Press has published a study advocating the development of a "world class" government-run media system in the U.S.
A newly released book, meanwhile, documents Free Press has close ties to top Obama administration officials.
The current Top 25 movers and shakers right now looks more like a list of books for history buffs. Almost every single one of the top 25 are about the Constitution, the Founders, and faith. 
Nancy Pelosi is proposing sermons from our churches' pulpits:  "On the subject of immigration, because I think the church is going to have to play a very major role in how we, how people are treated. The cardinals, the archbishops, the bishops that come to me and say we want you to pass immigration reform and I said but I want you to speak about it from the pulpit. I want you to instruct your, whatever the communication is — they — the people some oppose immigration reform are sitting in those pews and you have to tell them that this is a manifestation of our living the Gospels."  [And they said George W. Bush had a difficult time constructing a sentence?]
“Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships recently issued its report of recommendations and the Obama administration is about to take faith-based initiatives to a whole new level.
“The president’s council envisions the government and religion partnering to push the good news of global warming, climate change and green issues.  Yes, the religion of environmental and social justice.  [What ever happened to the "separation of church and state?]
American Thinker writes: Recall, one of the few times Obama has been honest was his campaign era gaffe when he touted his desire to spread the wealth.
More recently, he hectored us (which he often does) that sometimes he thinks people just earn too much money. Now his OMB director denies that Obama pledged not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. He says it was just a preference of Obama's  (and now Obama himself just says he is agnostic on tax raises).
A few years ago, he expressed dismay that the Constitution was a roadblock to redistributing wealth

'The decision is not whether or not we will ration care - the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open" is what Dr. Donald Berwick, President Obama's nominee to head the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, said in an interview published in Biotechnology Healthcare in June 2009.
The question is whether the Senate will confirm Berwick with open eyes.
And how will that care be rationed? It seems Berwick is a great fan of Britain's National Health Service, specifically its Orwellian-named National Institute for Clinical Excellence, or NICE. NICE is the body that decides what health treatments are available in Britain and who is worth receiving them.
In the 2009 interview, Berwick opined: "We can make a sensible social decision and say, 'Well, at this point, to have access to a particular additional benefit (new drug or medical intervention) is so expensive that our taxpayers have better use for those funds." Sounds like denial of care to us.
John Brennan:  Current Position: Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (since May 2009) After the attempted bombing of a Northwest jet on Christmas Day 2009, Brennan became the point person in defending the Obama administration's war on terror. He said "the system is working. It's just not working as well as it needs to constantly." [Now that's a good one!]
Brennan seemed at ease speaking to the largely Muslim audience, which included Islamic law students. In fact, he broke out his Arabic at some length, drawing a warm reaction from the crowd.  [If I could get the written Arabic, I could get the translation, which sure would be interesting.....]
From the New York Times: The House Armed Services Committee has dealt a blow to President Obama’s hopes to shutter the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, by unanimously approving legislation that would prohibit creating a detention center inside the United States.  The House committee unanimously approved a defense bill for 2011 that bans spending money to build or modify any facility inside the United States to house Guantánamo detainees, according to a summary of the bill.

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Arizona's Laws; Our President with Calderon

                                        On the left is a photo of one "pathway" from Mexico to America...I have heard from a politician that Arab garb is among the cast off clothing......

In the words of our President, while meeting with the President of Mexico in addition to saying that "we are no longer defined by our borders" (!): 
“We also discussed the new law in Arizona, which is a misdirected effort — a misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system, and which has raised concerns in both our countries….
“And I want everyone, American and Mexican, to know my administration is taking a very close look at the Arizona law.  We’re examining any implications, especially for civil rights.  Because in the United States of America, no law-abiding person — be they an American citizen, a legal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico — should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like.” 
[With all due respect, Mr. President (well, maybe not) - the law is talking about those people who are ILLEGALLY in our country as per our federal lawsThey are not just "visiting", and they are costing us Americans billions for their usage of our education system and our health care and penal systems among others.  While doing so, they are demanding that we accede to their demands!  And finally, they are specifically protected against a perusal of their papers unless they are breaking the law!  And maybe, just maybe, our President should actually read the law to which he refers prior to condemning it.  Perhaps he should have asked Calderon just what his country's immigration and illegal entry laws are.  Or he might have asked Calderon if it is true that for him, "Where there is a Mexican, there is Mexico."  With those words Calderon is accepting the chants of brazen illegals who believe our American Southwest is part of Mexico.  We should not believe that these are "just words".  Perhaps the one who was elected to uphold our country's laws, to represent Americans' interests (not Mexicans'), who took an oath to uphold our Constitution - should keep all that in mind as he continues to denigrate us around the world. 
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has signed a bill targeting a school district’s ethnic studies program, hours after a report by United Nations human rights experts condemned the measure.
State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district’s Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people.
Public schools should not be encouraging students to resent a particular race, he said.
The measure signed Tuesday prohibits classes that advocate ethnic solidarity, that are designed primarily for students of a particular race or that promote resentment toward a certain ethnic group.
The measure doesn’t prohibit classes that teach about the history of a particular ethnic group, as long as the course is open to all students and doesn’t promote ethnic solidarity or resentment.
Six UN human rights experts released a statement earlier Tuesday saying all people have the right to learn about their own cultural and linguistic heritage, they said.

“The governor believes … public school students should be taught to treat and value each other as individuals and not be taught to resent or hate other races or classes of people,” Senseman said.
[About this development I have this to say:  The reasoning for the law is sound, as ethnic studies can be taught to ALL; the UN does not have authority to tell dictate to us our "rights"; the current system does not promote the assimilation of ethnic groups into the American "melting pot"; and this Administration, unfortunately, will probably go along with this statement without even having read the law.]  "The world is a dangerous place not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." - Albert Einstein
In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce said a boycott war is bad for both sides, and said he would "be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements" to end the electricity flowing to Los Angeles.
"I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands," Mr. Pierce said. "If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy."
Austin City Council’s decision to forgo business investments and contracts with the State of Arizona has caused at least two political organizations in Texas to announce they will boycott the City of Austin.
Austin City Council’s decision to forgo business investments and contracts with the State of Arizona has caused at least two political organizations in Texas to announce they will boycott the City of Austin.
The Washington Post writes:  In the legal battle over Arizona's new immigration law, an ironic subtext has emerged: whether a Bush-era legal opinion complicates a potential Obama administration lawsuit against Arizona. The document, written in 2002 by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, concluded that state police officers have "inherent power" to arrest undocumented immigrants for violating federal law. It was issued by Jay S. Bybee, who also helped write controversial memos from the same era that sanctioned harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects. The author of the Arizona law -- which has drawn strong opposition from top Obama administration officials -- has cited the authority granted in the 2002 memo as a basis for the legislation. The Obama administration has not withdrawn the memo, and some backers of the Arizona law said Monday that because it remains in place, a Justice Department lawsuit against Arizona would be awkward at best. "The Justice Department's official position as of now is that local law enforcement has the inherent authority to enforce federal immigration law," said Robert Driscoll, a former Justice Department Civil Rights Division official in the George W. Bush administration who represents an Arizona sheriff known for aggressive immigration enforcement. "How can you blame someone for exercising authority that the department says they have?"

[Do people actually still believe that this President has wholesome things in mind when he promised "to fundamentally change America"?  Do they continue to see him as a post-racial President?  I see him, as I predicted when he was campaigning, as a President for whom every disagreement is racial in content.  He is leading Americans to hatred more than I could have anticipated, dividing us in every way he can.  While bowing before Arab leaders and mistreating our allies, he leads us to hate and/or to denigrate greedy Capitalists and Wall Street; healthcare insurance companies and greedy doctors doing such things as unnecessary surgery just to make a buck; conservative bloggers and Fox News; those supporting legal immigration only; those who are in the Tea Party; those for small-government and states rights; and more than anything else, those who are critical for any reason of President Obama  - the "won".]

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Global Warming's "Hockey Stick" Data and Other Global Change News

[I am beginning to wonder if any scientist has studied whether the ash spewed by erupting volcanoes may block the sun and it's warmth, causing the planet Earth to cool.....]
Powerline blogs: Michael Mann's infamous "hockey stick" graph, which purported to show steady temperatures on Earth for around a millenium until the 20th century, is the source of much of the misguided hysteria that surrounds the global warming movement. Mann achieved the hockey stick through mathematical errors or mathematical tricks, take your pick. Recently Virginia's Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, filed a Civil Investigative Demand for documents from the University of Virginia relating to the work done by Mann while he was at the University. Cuccinelli wants to know whether taxpayer funds were used to help Mann perpetrate a hoax.
Cuccinelli's subpoena has been greeted with howls and protests from warmists and others who view inquiry into a scientist's work as an infringement of academic freedom--the freedom, that is, to make stuff up, hide or falsify data, and thereby impose trillions of dollars of costs on consumers, all while being supported by taxpayers. (In other contexts, this is commonly known as "fraud.") The Science and Environmental Policy Project puts the controversy into context:
It is a remarkable fact that warmists claim the right to keep their data secret and avoid any critical assessment of their work, while at the same time demanding that every country in the world fashion its energy policies on the basis of their alleged findings. No doubt there is a precedent, somewhere, for such arrogance. But I am not sure there is any precedent, anywhere, for governments being stupid enough to accede to such unreasonable demands.
The infamous 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, one of the largest in U.S. history, dumped more than 10 million gallons of crude into Prince William Sound.
While the amount of oil and its ultimate fate in such manmade disasters is well known, the effect and size of natural oil seeps on the ocean floor is murkier.
A new study finds that the natural petroleum seeps off Santa Barbara, Calif., have leaked out the equivalent of about eight to 80 Exxon Valdez oil spills over hundreds of thousands of years.
There is effectively an oil spill every day at Coal Oil Point (COP), the natural seeps off Santa Barbara where 20 to 25 tons of oil have leaked from the seafloor each day for the last several hundred thousand years.

The oil from natural seeps and from man-made spills are both formed from the decay of buried fossil remains that are transformed over millions of years through exposure to heat and pressure.
"One of the natural questions is: What happens to all of this oil?" said study co-author Dave Valentine of the University of California, Santa Barbara. "So much oil seeps up and floats on the sea surface. It's something we've long wondered. We know some of it will come ashore as tar balls, but it doesn't stick around. And then there are the massive slicks. You can see them, sometimes extending 20 miles [32 kilometers] from the seeps. But what really is the ultimate fate?"
Based on their previous research, Valentine and his co-authors surmised that the oil was sinking "because this oil is heavy to begin with," Valentine said. "It's a good bet that it ends up in the sediments because it's not ending up on land. It's not dissolving in ocean water, so it's almost certain that it is ending up in the sediments."
The team sampled locations around the seeps to see how much oil was leftover after "weathering" — dissolving into the water, evaporating into the air, or being degraded by microbes.
Microbes consume most, but not all, of the compounds in the oil.  "Nature does an amazing job acting on this oil but somehow the microbes stopped eating, leaving a small fraction of the compounds in the sediments," said study co-author Chris Reddy, a marine chemist with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Falmouth, Mass. "Why this happens is still a mystery, but we are getting closer."
Support for this research, which is detailed in the May 15 issue of Environmental Science & Technology, came from the Department of Energy, National Science Foundation, and Seaver Institute.,2933,520839,00.html
As the Boston Herald reported:  the Cape Wind project [the windmill project off the coast of the Kennedy compound], which started out as a $650 million offshore wind farm, has ballooned to more than $2 billion in construction costs and a potential $6 billion hit to ratepayers when debt service, profits, maintenance and other costs are included.

The $6 billion cost to electricity customers doesn’t include an estimated $600 million in taxpayer subsidies that Cape Wind developers could reap from federal tax credits to cover a portion of the final construction price.
The staggering figures, calculated by the Herald and confirmed by numerous industry sources, are sparking concerns that Cape Wind is already mirroring the Big Dig tunnel project that started out costing $2.8 billion and ended up decades later at more than $20 billion.
Regarding the Cap and Trade bill comes this from Real Clear Politics: What do we expect from these countries and ourselves? The bill would mandate we reduce emissions by 83 percent by 2050. Roll up your sleeves, because we all will be doing organic farming. Or, as Pat Michaels of the Cato Institute points out, we "will allow the average American the carbon dioxide emissions of the average citizen back in 1867, a mere 39 years from today."
The fabricated cap-and-trade "market" is a well-documented concoction of rent-seeking corporations that will work diligently with Washington to ensure taxpayers always foot the bill. As the legislation stands now, oil companies would also have to pay emissions allowances -- outside the cap-and-trade market -- which are nothing more than another gas tax.

Fox News:  One of the tools the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration uses to predict how oil spills on the surface of water may behave, suggests that more than a third of the oil may already be out of the water.
About 35 percent of a spill the size of the one in the Gulf, consisting of the same light Louisiana crude, released in weather conditions and water temperatures similar to those found in the Gulf now would simply evaporate, according to data that The Associated Press entered into the program.
The model also suggests that virtually all of the benzene — a highly toxic flammable organic chemical compound and one of the chief ingredients in oil — would be stripped off and quickly vaporize.
Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., have managed to write a cap-and-trade energy bill that should be greeted with guffaws from both believers and skeptics of man-made global warming. At a cost of billions of dollars and millions of jobs across America, the proposal would produce virtually no reduction in global temperatures even after being in force for decades. Using the MAGICC/SCENGEN climate model originally developed for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and assuming no other nation adopts the same measure, Kerry-Lieberman would reduce the average global temperature 0.077 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050, compared with what it would be if the bill were not adopted. That is one-fifth of one degree, which, as Knappenberger notes on the MasterResource blog, is a "scientifically meaningless reduction."

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

America is Now Officially Evil; Obama Needs to be a Dictator; Barack Points the Finger of Blame

 Okay, I need to know.  Do any of you actually think we need to apologize for attempting to keep our borders secure, to control immigration by expecting it to be done legally?  If we don't control immigration we would be opening our country's doors to everyone in the world.  How can they all be cared for, housed, given employment, education and healthcare? We now have our Asst. Secretary of State declaring to the Chinese that we Americans are oh so bad, nearly equal to the Chinese in our record of human rights violations!  Following is the shocking story.  We Americans should be outraged that once again, and in perhaps its worst example, our government is apologizing for evil America......

The New York Post writes this Editorial:  Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner reports that in recent talks with China, US officials put America's human-rights record on a par with Beijing's.
"Part of a mature [US-Chinese] relationship is that you have an open discussion, where you not only raise the other guy's problems, but you raise your own, and you have a discussion about it, about your own [problems]," Posner said.  "We did plenty of that."
Moreover, he said, "experts from the US side" talked about America's "treatment of Muslim Americans in an immigration context."  They even ripped Arizona's new immigration law "as a troubling trend in our society." Bragged Posner: "We brought it up early and often."
No doubt they did.  It's hard to know where to begin here.
Perhaps with the way China deals with its Muslim population -- the Uighurs?
Last year, Chinese riot police killed hundreds of them.
America, by contrast, freely admits Muslim immigrants (Pakistani-born Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad comes to mind) -- and the White House can't bring itself to use the term "Islamist terrorist" even as Islamist terrorists are doubling down on their efforts to kill Americans in the streets.
China, of course, ships North Korean refugees found on their side of that bleak border back to Pyongyang -- where certain, agonizing death awaits them.
There are no valid comparisons here.
China is one of the most flagrant violators of human rights on the planet, and for the Obama administration even to hint that America is on the same plane is despicable.
Once more, for emphasis.
Posner shames America.  [And along with Posner, Hillary Clinton has now been tainted by this belief, as she has not condemned it.  Good luck with that hope of ever being our President, Hillary!]

 Texas doctors are opting out of Medicare at alarming rates, frustrated by reimbursement cuts they say make participation in government-funded care of seniors unaffordable. Two years after a survey found nearly half of Texas doctors weren't taking some new Medicare patients, new data shows 100 to 200 a year are now ending all involvement with the program. Before 2007, the number of doctors opting out averaged less than a handful a year. “This new data shows the Medicare system is beginning to implode,” said Dr. Susan Bailey.


Janet Napolitano Admits She Hasn't Read Arizona Law But Says She Wouldn't Sign It. [She continues to prove why she is incompetent in her job.]

Woody Allen has a strange take on the democracy that allowed him to become rich and famous.
The "Scoop" director said it would be a cool idea for President Barack Obama to be dictator for for a few years.   Why?
So he could get things done without all the hassle of opposing views getting in the way.

Press Freedom, Sure. But No Questions. Obama signs press freedom act -- then refuses press questions...

From CBS News:  So after he signed the bill, and as the press "wranglers" began aggressively herding us out of the room, I asked if he still has confidence in BP. He ignored the question so I tried this: "In the interest of press freedom, would you take a couple questions on BP?"
That did elicit a smile, and he told me I was free to ask questions. Someone else shouted, "Will you answer them?"
He said he's not holding a press conference today as we were escorted out the door.;contentBody


Front Page Magazine writes:  The threat from Islam seems to be growing. For example, the last twelve months saw the largest number ever of attempted and successful terrorist attacks on American soil. Meanwhile, books such as Paul Sperry’s Infiltration, and Sperry and David Gaubatz’s Muslim Mafia warn that Muslim Brotherhood agents have penetrated deep into the corridors of power and influence.
Yet official America is still in denial. The words “jihad,” “Islam,” “Islamic terrorism” and just plain “terrorism” are off-limits in polite government and military circles. Attorney General Eric Holder couldn’t even bring himself to use the term “radical Islam” when questioned on the subject the other day.

Monday, May 17, 2010

Arizona Governor Speaks Her Mind on Obama!

Arizona Governor, Jan Brewer, takes on the Commander-in-Chief!  "We are a nation of laws, and the rule of law, not of men. Our purpose today is to help the rest of the nation understand the crisis which confronts our state. Our nation’s government is broken. Our border is being erased. And the president apparently considers it a wonderful opportunity to divide people along racial lines, for his personal political convenience. It’s fair to ask whether he intends to be the Commander-In-Chief or the Comic-In-Chief?"

Obama Panel's Cancer Warning; Healthcare Details; and Grandfathered is the Key Word

The President’s Cancer Panel released a report entitled “Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk,” which led to this NY Times’ headline: U.S. Panel Criticized as Overstating Cancer Risks. Big writes: The verb “overstating” doesn’t go half far enough, but coming from the Times that’s still pretty damning. The report was a collection of conjecture, unrelated factoids and, more than anything, a shrill call for more: more government, more studies and, of course, more money. Even the American Cancer Society found it a bit over the top.
Yahoo News reports:  an obscure part of the [healthcare] law allows states to restrict abortion coverage by private plans operating in new insurance markets. Capitalizing on that language, abortion foes have succeeded in passing bans that, in some cases, go beyond federal statutes.
"We don't consider elective abortion to be health care, so we don't think it's a bad thing for fewer private insurance companies to cover it," said Mary Harned, attorney for Americans United for Life, a national organization that wrote a model law for the states.
Abortion rights supporters are dismayed.
"Implementation of this reform should be about increasing access to health care and increasing choices, not taking them away," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., a member of the Senate leadership.
Since Obama signed the legislation law March 23, Arizona and Tennessee have enacted laws restricting abortion coverage by health plans in new insurance markets, called exchanges.
Millions of Americans could lose some important benefits of the new health overhaul law depending on how the Obama administration chooses to interpret one term: "grandfathered." Under the law, existing, or "grandfathered" health plans are exempt from several consumer protections, including a requirement that beginning as early as September prohibits health plans from charging co-payments and other cost-sharing for certain preventive health services such as immunizations and cancer screenings. The issue has touched off a debate over how grandfathering is defined, with some consumer and employer groups squaring off. Consumer groups say that if the definition.
Some employers are concerned that changes they typically make every year to their employee health coverage — such as changing a policy's co-pays or deductibles — could alter a plan's grandfathered status.

Read more:

[In a demonstration of just how unready for office was this administration, it is being reported now by the AP]:  In the wake of the Times Square bombing plot, the Obama administration said on Sunday it wants to work with Congress on possible limitations of the constitutional rights afforded terrorism suspects — even for American citizens.
Attorney General Eric Holder said changes may be needed to allow law enforcement more time to question suspected terrorists before they are told about their Miranda rights to a lawyer and to remain silent under interrogation.
The Miranda warning — a bedrock guarantee of a suspect's constitutional rights — has come under more intense study because accused Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad is a U.S. citizen of Pakistani origin. The administration declared on Sunday that he was working under the direction of the Pakistani Taliban. [Since this one IS an American citizen, perhaps in this case a trial for treason would be in order.]