Lars Larson: Illegal Obamacare and illegal aliens

Well, now we know the truth about what’s going to happen under Obamacare if this abomination of a health care bill becomes law. And, let’s hope that it doesn’t.

For the latest information I’ll credit the folks at the Washington Examiner. They pointed out that the bill calls for illegal aliens to get health care. Now, does it say that in those words? Of course not. They’re not that stupid. But, the fact is, they are going to get health care and here is why.

It’s being pointed out that within the bill, if a person walks in and attests that they are citizens of the United States then they are entitled to health care. No check is done. They merely need to assert the idea that they are citizens of the United States. The U.S. government will not check.

Kind of like the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, that most states use and most employers use with illegal aliens today. It’s a travesty. It shouldn’t be happening.

“For more Lars click here”

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 04:00 | Posted in Measure 37 | 24 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Jerry

    I must have free health care even if it means illegals will get it, too.
    Thanks to Obama you will all pay for my health care, which is only right.

  • Bob Clark

    To me the distinction between Democratic party philosphy and Republican party philosphy can be boiled down to how the two parties approach economic problems. The Democratic party tends to focus on restricting demand. To control healthcare costs, the Democrats reduce the availability of selected treatments which they view as too costly. In effect, the public cries healthcare costs are too high, and the Democratic party response is to say: “no problem; we’ll just slap on price controls, and make you stand in line longer for reduced treatment choices.” It’s kind of reflective of a fixed-pie mentality.

    The Republican approach-at least those of the Reagan genre-is to foster the increase of supply. Deregulate, simplify, and reduce government involvement allowing more consumer choice. This approach is not borne out of a fixed pie mentality, but one of spurring economic growth and prosperity.

    With the Democratic party approach, we will go down a road of fiscal irresponsibility not unlike that of the recent meltdown in California. In the end, social services actually suffer greatly as the government being financially tapped out is forced to make drastic cost cuts starting with healthcare and welfare, just as in California.

    Nationally, it really is a choice between growing or facing decline and mediocrity. I no which of these I prefer.

  • john and Margaret Di Simone

    I am disgusted that this government would even consider giving health care to illegal aliens. what can we do to stop this?

    • v person

      “Illegal” aliens are already given care at some clinics and all emergency rooms. The bills in play try to prevent them from purchasing, with their own money, insurance through the exchanges. That is a self-defeating sop to the know-nothings, whose own kids will be infected at school by the kids of “illegals” who can’t get proper care.

      And citing the “Washington Examiner” as a reliable source? Please. Its not a serious newspaper. It is a giveaway vehicle for advertising with a self proclaimed conservative editorial slant.

      • D-E-A-N

        As a gay liberal man I have to agree with you.

    • Major Spinkel

      Move toCanada.

  • Rupert in Springfield

    Well, the Dems did pass the test vote yesterday. Looks like they stripped removal of the anti trust exemption for insurance companies out of it.

    Illegals? Oh come on, you have to have been smoking something to think they wouldn’t get covered. If you think for five seconds that five seconds after the bill is passed there wont be some yahoo in front of the Supreme Court yammering on about his rights to health care without having to prove he is a citizen you are crazy. I don’t care what they right into the bill, what we will get is don’t ask don’t tell.

    You think hospitals are going to be turning away illegals? Not on your life. They will do what police departments do – “sorry, enforcing immigration laws is a federal responsibility, not ours, nope, we can’t even check and call ICE, too much work, sorry.”

    I’m kinda excited though. If health care is passed by years end it will be my first prediction about the Obama administration to be wrong.

    Oh the suspense of it all. I still don’t think they will but I am just all a -twitter about it!

    • v person

      “Oh come on, you have to have been smoking something to think they wouldn’t get covered. If you think for five seconds that five seconds after the bill is passed there wont be some yahoo in front of the Supreme Court yammering on about his rights to health care without having to prove he is a citizen you are crazy. ”

      You have to be smoking something even better to think that an illegal alien could take a case to the supreme court on this or any other matter, let alone within 5 seconds. He/she would have no standing to bring a case.

      “You think hospitals are going to be turning away illegals?”

      At emergency rooms, they don’t do so now. Why would they in the future? You think doctors, who after all take an oath, would let some person bleed out in the parking lot because they don’t have proper documentation with them? No. Bill or no bill that won’t change.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        >You have to be smoking something even better to think that an illegal alien could take a case to the supreme court on this or any other matter, let alone within 5 seconds. He/she would have no standing to bring a case.

        Are you seriously under this impression? Illegals have no standing in front of the Supreme Court?

        Illegals have standing in front of the Supreme Court, have brought cases and have won them. I can not imagine how ignorant someone would have to be to think illegals cannot have a case before the Supreme Court.

        My guess is that you will abandon this train of thought rather quickly. It did give me my first laugh of the working week so at least your foolishness has accomplished something.

        This is a classic Dean moment. It’s kind of like a fortune cookie – The man who can never admit he is wrong, can never learn, and thus is never right.

        >At emergency rooms, they don’t do so now. Why would they in the future?

        Um, because that is one of the basis upon which we are being sold this bill, that illegals will not be covered. Republicans have brought up this very point, what is the enforcement mechanism. It’s a major problem for the Democrats in passing this monstrosity. Obviously they want illegals covered but can’t admit so openly. This is why Republicans have made a big deal in pointing out the lack of enforcement. Guess you missed that.

        > Bill or no bill that won’t change.

        So now you are saying people who don’t have coverage now ( illegals are about 25% of the uninsured 40 million figure BO was using up until a few months ago )will not see their circumstances change under the bill, that nothing will be different?

        Um, so we will still have people wandering into ER’s without insurance? Illegals are about 25% of the 40 million uninsured figure BO was using up until a few months ago (genius guy finally figured out he better drop that figure if he was going to say illegals wouldn’t be covered). Uh Oh, I think you see which way this one is going.

        • v person

          OK. Name a case an illegal alien has brought and won in the US Supreme Court and I’ll cede the field.

          “Um, because that is one of the basis upon which we are being sold this bill, that illegals will not be covered.”

          Yes, and they are not “covered” under this bill. Its much ado about absolutely nothing from people like yourself who would not support this bill no matter what it has or doesn’t have. its a red herring.

          “Um, so we will still have people wandering into ER’s without insurance? Illegals are about 25% of the 40 million uninsured figure BO was using up until a few months ago”

          Yes. People will still go to emergency rooms who do not have insurance. The bill in the senate is not comprehensive enough to cover all American citizens, and provides no coverage for an estimated 12 million illegal aliens. So at less than 100% coverage, some people will end up in emergency rooms who did not need to be. Thank the opponents and wobbly centrist Democrats for watering down the bill.

          And by the way Rupert, the latest official uninsured estimate is 47 million, a number that has been rising steadily since 2000. The reason Obama changed his number is because he adjusted to the latest data, 47 million minus the estimated number of illegal residents, updated in September 2009.

          And consider this. An illegal resident who has a job with insurance already has insurance. An American citizen with a job that does not offer insurance has none. That is the current system, and the only thing that changes under the proposal on the table is that the American citizen will most likely now get insurance if it passes.

          If you want to get illegal residents out of the country the answer is pretty simple. Go after those who hire them. Arizona has done that and it appears to be working. We could save a lot of money on border patrols.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            >OK. Name a case an illegal alien has brought and won in the US Supreme Court and I’ll cede the field.

            Sure – We had one decided just last May 4th

            FLORES-FIGUEROA v. UNITED STATES

            So now I am curious, how in the world did it pop into your head that illegals have no standing in the Supreme Court?

            Did you just make it up? I mean you accused Lars of doing that in every post over the last year even though you admitted you hadn’t read them all.

            Oh well, just another Dean moment.

          • v person

            I’m no constitutional scholar, and neither are you, but I don’t think the the case you cite supports your point that an illegal resident can or would sue to gain access to the proposed insurance exchange. Yes, Flores was able to make a case that ended up in the Supreme court, and he was able to knock 2 years off his sentence, but he had already been convicted of a federal crime, so presumably that gave him a right of appeal based on simple due process. It does not translate that he or any other illegal resident who has not been charged with or convicted of anything has a right to challenge a law preventing them from taking part in a health insurance exchange. I think you are presuming way too much. I mean, why haven’t illegal residents sued the feds to be eligible for any number of potential benefits? Either they lack standing, or in order to make such a claim, an illegal resident would have to step out of the shadows and risk deportation. That this hasn’t happened is telling.

            But, you did pass the test I presented. You cited a case of an illegal resident being able to make it to the Supreme Court. It has nothing to do with access to federal benefits, but no matter. I’ll cede the field on this one as promised.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            Yawn – Yet again Dean can’t say forthrightly “I was wrong”. No surprise there, the man who can never admit he is wrong is at it again.

            So here we go, round two – this is way too easy Dean, you are slipping.

            So of course you start Dean Weasel Number One ( change subject to an argument Dean thinks he can win ).

            The fact is you are wrong, illegals do have standing in the Supreme Court. I proved it with my first example.

            Now you are falling into my trap. Yep I am mean as hell. I just wanted to get a second shot in at you because I knew you would persist in this absurdity.

            So here we go, slap down numero dos.

            The fact is one doesn’t have to be a constitutional scholar for this argument, one just has to follow the Supreme Court. I do, you don’t but still you make stuff up.

            Want an example?

            Try Plyler v. Doe.

            That’s the case where illegals got a freebee, entitlement to public edumacation under the 14th amendment. You think they wont get health care under the same ruling? you are in dreamland baby.

            You simply don’t know what the hell you are talking about, and you are making things up out of thin air. Exactly what you accuse Lars of doing. Anyone who makes up a statement as ridiculous as you did simply hasn’t been paying a whole lot of attention to how the Supreme Court has interpreted the 14th amendment.

            You are wrong and yet again cannot admit it, case closed.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            >I’m no constitutional scholar, and neither are you

            Oh, and by the way, might want to speak for yourself on that one. I am something of a constitutional scholar, at least in terms of Supreme court decisions. I can name them fairly readily so next time, don’t go making stuff up.

            Lesson learned Dean, lesson learned.

          • v person

            Ok Rupert, it took me a while but I checked in with the DNC, NAACP, ACORN, Moveon.org, Sierra Club, Doctors Without Borders, NPR, Code Pink, Nancy Pelosi, Bernie Sanders, Barney Frank, Pete Seeger, Barbara Streisand, Al Franken, and the White House. I told them, cap in hand, that Rupert has me dead to rights. He presented a factual instance that supports his position. I told them I saw no recourse but to….sniff….burble….gasp….admit I was….er….wron…..but before I could get that last word completely out they all stopped me and reminded me that if I actually admitted to being…you know….that word…then I would break the code. The code that you have been onto for months or even years that we liberals never admit to being…you know…less than mostly right. I begged. I pleaded. I whined. But no way. They would not let me do it. If I write that I was wrnnnngggghhh….that word…..then I will be drummed out of the church of liberalism forever more and risk tearing back the curtain on our wizardry, so to speak. I just can’t risk that. Not even for your sake. I hope you will understand and if not forgive, cut me some slack. Some props.

            They did grant me leave to say Mazeltov Rupert! You made an argument backed up by facts. This is a big step. Something I’ve been encouraging you to do for a long long long long time. They all encouraged me to encourage you to keep it up. Use of verifiable facts to back up opinion that is.

            Whew! That was hard.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            You know, instead of going through all the absurdity, why can’t you just simply admit you were wrong?

            I’ve done it three times with you – two for getting peoples names wrong (one the Sen Maj Leader, forgot the other one), once for going with an out of date figure for the percentage if the budget interest on the national debt (I was still using the 20% figure).

            Instead you have to go through this whole routine that this is the first instance of me presenting a factual argument ( “That’s a big step” ). What condescending hogwash. Why don’t you try just being man enough to admit you were wrong and leave it at that.

            There is something uniquely childish about one who attempts to condescend to another who clearly knows more about the subject at hand. Given that more childish approach, as opposed to admitting to error in a forthright and adult manner, it was obvious which path you would take.

            You will always be Dean, the man who can never be wrong and thus is incapable of learning.

          • v person

            I got some names wrong and used an out of date budget figure? That is the sum total of my previous errors I failed to admit to? OK. Mea Culpa. My bad. I’ll cop to 2 mystery names and a budget error. I was WRONG Rupert.

            Now the price you pay for that admission is you can never again make the claim that I and all other liberals in the world never ever admit we are… you know….that word.

          • Rupert in Springfield

            >I got some names wrong and used an out of date budget figure? That is the sum total of my previous errors I failed to admit to?

            Good lord, could you please learn to read? I never listed the errors you had made. I was talking about errors I had admitted to forthrightly when you called me on them.

            Got it? Not you, me.

            Here’s the quote:

            “I’ve done it three times with you – two for getting peoples names wrong (one the Sen Maj Leader, forgot the other one), once for going with an out of date figure for the percentage if the budget interest on the national debt (I was still using the 20% figure).”

            The sentence starts with the word “I’ve” is it really that hard to read a simple sentence?

            Seriously?

          • v person

            I (me) took the “I’ve done it 3 times with you” as in 3 times you (the I in I’ve) corrected me (being myself) and I (me) failed to admit. I’m (that being me) more than happy that I (still me) don’t have to cop to any past error. And impressed that you (Rupert) have only made 3 that you (Rupert again) can’t quite remember any important details about. That suggests we (both you and me) are nearly flawless. Its surprising we (me and you) don’t agree more often.

            But I’ll (I as in me) yell you (Rupert) what. I”ll (me) join you (Rupert) and admit to having made at least 3 errors at some point in the past on Catalyst posts. Wrong names, budget numbers, bad predictions, whatever. You (Rupert) can pick any 3 you want. That way we are even and can start fresh. And if I (me) say I (me) was wrong 3 times and click my (I) heels together we (both you and me) could end up in Kansas. In which case the local politics would better favor you (Rupert).

            Whaddaya say there Rupert old buddy old pal? Are we (both you and me) square? Can we (both me and you) move on now?

      • D-E-A-N

        As a fellow gay liberal man, I have to agree with you.

  • Jan

    Can you imagine the unfunded mandates the federal government will heap on the states? There goes education, opps can’t afford to maintain the state parks or the highways. The truly needy will be denied coverage and more and more of those with insurance will not be able to see a doctor. Anyone who can will travel abroad for health care services, India anyone?

    The federal government will print more money, but the states must balance their budgets.

    • Moe

      I thought education was already gone. Have you seen our grad rates?

  • ceccil91

    California is the state with the largest illegal population. California is the state with the worst economic conditions, with deficits in the 20 billions going forward. Could there be a connection?

  • Brittanicus

    GET–YOUR–POSTCARD WRITTEN OR PHONE WASHINGTON.

    The open border movement has started a drive to get those who approve of another disastrous AMNESTY, to send postcards to Washington. Well anti-illegal immigration, pro-sovereignty and–NO–Comprehensive Immigration Reform can do-one-better? Opponents of AMNESTY should call their politician at 202-224-3121, or go there in person to their offices. SPELL OUT TO THE SCREENER OR AID, to take your name and phone number, stating decisively–NO AMNESTY. Then every American, black white, red or brown person, who see this as a treasonous portrayal of American and legal immigrant workers, should also buy a postcard and bombard your Senator or Representative. We can stop this travesty to our immigration laws, because under President Obama, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, Sen.Gutierrez D-IL, Sen.Harry Reid (D-NV), Speaker N. Pelosi (D-CA), Sen. Diane Feinstein D-CA, and the rest of the cast of Un-American characters, will have us paying billions of dollars, to support the 20-30 million plus already here, and then the rolling uncountable numbers that will attack the border once the word is heard from Belize to China.

    Another Amnesty will just start a stampede, which all taxpayers will have to support. As the fence is now, the underfunded barrier will not stop the human deluge. It is a catastrophe waiting to happen and a matter of survival in America. A majority of tourists who overstay their tourist visa are illegal aliens. Neither crossing the border or overstaying tourist visas, is a violation against THE RULE OF LAW. Unlike other countries–entering America without permission is a minimal offense/’.This is thanks to globalists, business organizations that politicians have catered to for generations. If our laws–WERE ENFORCED–from the beginning, not weakened or dismantled by previous White House occupancy we would not have been–INVADED? NOW WRITE YOUR POSTCARDS AND REMEMBER TO PUT A STAMP ON IT. GOOGLE–your local and state policy makers or find their electoral address, email address and phone numbers. Even your local phone book has this information. THE OTHER SIDE THINKS WE DON’T HAVE THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE, TO STOP THIS CRAZY MOVE TOWARDS THIS ILL-CONCEIVED AMNESTY? THEY WILL SOON FIND OUT THAT THEY ARE–DEAD WRONG!

    We can derail the open border zealots, ACLU, Council of Foreign Relations, Catholic Church, and other congregational faiths and the business owners–NOT FORGETTING FOREIGN NATIONALS–AS WE CAN BEAT THEM AT THEIR OWN GAME? Want to save America from OVERPOPULATION, rising illegal immigrant crime, paying for all their education, health care and other unrevealed government ENTITLEMENTS? VOTE THE MORONS OUT! VOTE SEN. HARRY REID, JOHN McCAIN OUT NEXT YEAR Demand E-Verify as a permanent addition to 287 (g) local police restriction, ICE audits of piratical business. Demand E-Verify to eject illegal workers taking your jobs, so they will leave when unable to obtain a job. EVERYBODY IN THE WORKFORCE MUST BE IDENTIFIED–THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED FOR YEARS–AND NEW HIRES–EVERYBODY? OTHERWISE IT’S A GOOD EXCUSE FOR OPPONENTS TO FILE A DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT AGAINST BUSINESSES WITH DEEP POCKETS. THAT WAY THE COMMUNIST (FOUNDER) ACLU WILL BE UNDERMINED BY THEIR RELENTLESS PURSUIT OF DESTROYING E-VERIFY, 287 G, ICE RAIDS AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES.

    This is a battle we must–WIN–against illegal immigration, but we must have an orderly flow of legal newcomers specially professional people in the highest pinnacle of Engineers, computers and other skills. We cannot, shouldn’t accept anymore poor people, when our nation has millions of mixed gender at the bottom rungs of the employment ladder living in poverty. NO AMNESTY, but amendments to the 1986 (IRCA) can achieve this goal, even though the American people are constantly lied to by those in power. Prior to any new laws all those potential immigrants waiting in other lands, already processed should be given first priority in receiving a work visa. While we spend billions of taxpayer dollars on the incessant wars, some of The People’s money should have been appropriated for the originally designed border fence, not the single-layer barrier that was underfunded, with no intention of stopping the rush of desperate humanity to satisfy the money-craving business community.

    NUMBERSUSA will show you the illegal immigrant costs and the enforcement gradings of those in Washington. CAPSWEB will explain irreversible population growth in California and nationwide. Other sites of interest on Immigration enforcement is ALIPAC and AMERICAN PATROL and THE DARK SIDE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. OH! DON’T FORGET THE 28 CENTS POSTCARD TO THOSE WHO THINK THEY CONTROL US.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)