We at CFIF have steadfastly highlighted the consumer benefits of the proposed T-Mobile/Sprint merger…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
WSJ Urges Regulators to Approve T-Mobile/Sprint Merger

We at CFIF have steadfastly highlighted the consumer benefits of the proposed T-Mobile/Sprint merger, and cautioned the federal government against any pointless and destructive objection to the deal.  In today's Wall Street Journal, its editorial board encourages the Department of Justice (DOJ) to move forward on the deal:

The Justice Department lost its lawsuit to block AT&T's purchase of Time Warner.  Yet now the antitrust cops are holding up T-Mobile's merger with Sprint even though it could give AT&T more competition in wireless.  What gives?

A year ago, T-Mobile announced plans to acquire Sprint for $26 billion in stock, yet the merger is still stuck in government antitrust purgatory.  The Federal Communications Commission keeps pausing its 180-day shot clock on the merger…[more]

April 22, 2019 • 04:07 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Dems' Plans Sabotage Workers Print
By Betsy McCaughey
Wednesday, July 25 2018
Unlike single-payer in the United Kingdom, which allows residents to buy private insurance, Medicare for All outlaws any escape from the government-run system. Even if you're desperate for better care, you're trapped.

Would you rather show up at work on time or stretch out on the sofa and watch TV? Stupid question. Most people punch a clock out of necessity. But progressive Democrats want to make work optional, and to guarantee a slew of benefits to everyone, whether they get off the couch or not. It's a slap in the face to America's workforce.

Some 70 Democrats in the House of Representatives  more than one-third of the party's representatives  endorsed a plan on Thursday to outlaw private health insurance and force all Americans into a government-run system. Let's be clear. This plan is not about helping the needy. The plan would rip away medical coverage from half of all Americans, including the 157 million who get their insurance the old-fashioned way  earning it through a job. The plan, dubbed "Medicare for All," would prohibit employers  even giant companies that self-insure  from covering workers, retirees or their families.

Union workers with gold-plated health benefits would have to give them up and settle for the same coverage as people who refuse to work at all. Why work?

Apparently, the Democratic Party no longer believes in work.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration is taking the opposite route  beefing up work incentives. Last Thursday, the president's Council of Economic Advisers revealed that about half of able-bodied adults who collect benefits, such as food stamps, housing aid or Medicaid, work zero hours, while the nation's working stiffs pay the tab.

Why should people toil if they can take it easy and get freebies instead? No wonder nearly 1 out of every 5 working-age adults collects these benefits. Dependence soared during the Obama administration, while workforce participation plummeted.

The Trump administration wants to reverse this grim trend. The administration is urging states to require able-bodied adults on Medicaid to do something  work, go to school, go to job training, get addiction treatment, take English as a second language or care for a family member. But House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., bashes these efforts as "mean-spirited," and left-wing advocacy groups are suing to stop them.

No surprise. After all, back in 2010, Dems sold Obamacare to a doubting public with the argument that it would allow them to quit their jobs in the "pursuit of happiness." Obamacare's Medicaid expansion and health plan subsidies would liberate them, Pelosi promised. "Just think, if you could be a photographer, a writer," instead of being locked in a job to get health coverage. The Congressional Budget Office warned that the Affordable Care Act would reduce the incentive to work. Astoundingly, Democrats considered that a positive.

And the predictions are coming true. Medicaid rolls are nearing 74 million, and are projected to reach 87 million within a decade.

Even more outrageous, the progressive wing of the party is ready to sabotage those working stiffs. Congressional bigwigs like Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., are staying quiet about the Medicare for All proposal. It won't become law anytime soon. But confrontational progressives like Democratic Party Deputy Chair Keith Ellison, D-Minn., New York's newly nominated congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and salivating presidential wannabes Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., are pushing hard for it, showing where the party is headed. They don't care that employees with on-the-job coverage would be the biggest losers. Working people be damned.

Unlike single-payer in the United Kingdom, which allows residents to buy private insurance, Medicare for All outlaws any escape from the government-run system. Even if you're desperate for better care, you're trapped. The idea is no one should receive more or better care by earning it.

That's crazy. People who work hard should have the freedom to spend their earnings on top-of-the-line health insurance, if that's what's important to them. Democrats used to be the party of working people. But the party's fast-becoming their worst enemy.


Betsy McCaughey is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research and a former lieutenant governor of New York State. 
COPYRIGHT 2018 CREATORS.COM

Question of the Week   
How many times in our nation’s history has a presidential election been decided by the U.S. House of Representatives?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"SAN FRANCISCO -- Facebook said on Wednesday that it expected to be fined up to $5 billion by the Federal Trade Commission for privacy violations. The penalty would be a record by the agency against a technology company and a sign that the United States was willing to punish big tech companies.The social network disclosed the amount in its quarterly financial results, saying it estimated a one-time…[more]
 
 
—Mike Isaac and Cecilia Kang, New York Times
— Mike Isaac and Cecilia Kang, New York Times
 
Liberty Poll   

Does Joe Biden's entry into the Democratic race for president virtually seal the general election as Trump vs. Biden, or will one of the other Democrats be the candidate?