Ethan A. Huff,
Natural News 
Feb 2, 2011
If Obamacare is everything the administration claims it to be, then why are government officials secretly handing out exemption waivers to friends and insiders? A Washington Times report explains that since the health care bill was passed last year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has issued at 733 exemptions-and-counting to friends of the White House in order to shelter them from the massive insurance rate hikes that the rest of America will get stuck paying, that is if the bill is not overturned or declared unconstitutional.
It began with 111 waivers, which gradually rose to 222, and that has now topped 733. Recipients include various cities and states, businesses, and unions, including the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). SIEU, of course, contributed $27 million to the Obama campaign back in 2008, so perhaps the union’s waiver was a friendly “thank you” gift.
According to the report, more than 500 of the 733 waivers were quietly issued back in December, but were not revealed until after the recent State of the Union address. In fact, the reality of such waivers has been largely hush-hush from the administration of supposed “transparency” all along, probably due to the fact that they expose the health care scam for what it truly is.
One of the cornerstones of the health care bill is Section 2711 of the Public Health Service Act, which outlines an increase in the annual cap of insurance benefits. On the surface, this sounds like a good thing, and it is something that the Obama administration has been hailing. But what is overlooked is the fact that someone will have to foot the bill for this increase which, based on the administration’s actions, equals everyone who is not a “friend” of the White House.
Several U.S. states are now in the process of declaring the whole of Obamacare void, including Montana, Wyoming, Oregon, and Maine. And U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson declared Monday that the bill is unconstitutional, making him the second federal judge to have ruled against its validity.
- A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Sources for this story include: