Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

760 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Read what Newt says...

Front Page | Forward to a Friend | Printer Friendly | Post Comments

July 22, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 29

The Press Conference President Obama Could Give
(Today's Newt Gingrich Letter has been written with Nancy Desmond, CEO of the Center for Health Transformation)

Last week, the Federal Reserve made a little noticed, but astonishing announcement. In addition to projecting unemployment over 10% in the coming months, they also projected no net new jobs over the next five years.

Let me repeat that to drive the point home: no net new jobs over the next five years.

This is an amazing and sober prediction about the health of our economy, one that should make every lawmaker pause and reassess the priorities of government.

In this environment, almost every decision for lawmakers should come down to one question: Since small businesses create ¾ of the jobs in America, would this piece of legislation create a better or worse environment for small business job creation?

It is in this context that tonight's press conference with President Obama on health reform should be judged.
The Opportunity Buried in the Bad News
Until now, President Obama has more or less allowed Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her allies in the House to dictate the terms by which health reform would be accomplished.
Sponsored Content

Disappointingly, they have chosen an expensive, big-bureaucracy health care plan that would raise taxes on small businesses.

The reaction from moderate Democrats, Republicans, health professionals, indeed, from most Americans, has been growing opposition, and despite a massive majority in the House, it looks unlikely today that Speaker Pelosi can coerce this legislation through Congress like she did the energy tax.

As a result, President Obama could be stuck tonight trying to defend an indefensible piece of high tax legislation in the middle of a recession with growing unemployment and massive deficits. It's a task that will be even more difficult in the wake of CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf's recent testimony before the Senate Budget Committee that the proposed legislation would actually increase the long term trajectory of federal spending in healthcare.

But what if President Obama used the announcement from the Federal Reserve to, in effect, start the health-reform debate over?

What if he said tonight, that given the continued trouble of our economy, he is asking Congress to go back to the drawing board to craft a pro-jobs, pro-growth, pro-reform health bill that would gain bipartisan support?

What would that bill look like?
A Pro Jobs, Pro Growth Plan for Health Reform
The fact is America desperately needs real change in our health and healthcare system. Americans are paying more and more money for less and less quality care.

At the Center for Health Transformation, we have been working for the past six years to develop solutions for the problems in our health care system, which don't rely on higher taxes, bigger government, and more bureaucrats.

We believe we can have a system in which every American has access to better health with more choices at lower cost.

We believe we can have a system in which the individual and his or her doctor have the knowledge and incentives to make wise choices; a system in which fraud and waste are rooted out, in which quality and best practices (not volume of services) are rewarded and in which prevention, health and wellness are central.

And most importantly in today's troubled economy, we believe we can have a system that will also be central to job creation and to America's economic recovery.
Six Straightforward Steps to Better Healthcare
To create a system that delivers more choices of higher quality health care at lower cost we need to take the following six straightforward steps:
Stop Paying the Crooks. First, we must dramatically reduce healthcare fraud within our current healthcare system. Outright fraud - criminal activity - accounts for as much as 10 percent of all healthcare spending. That is more than $200 billion every year. Medicare alone could account for as much as $40 billion a year. (Please visit for the information about our latest CHT Press book, Stop Paying the Crooks, edited by Jim Frogue.)

Move from a Paper-based to an Electronic Health System. As it stands now, it is simply impossible to keep up with fraud in a paper-based system. An electronic system would free tens of billions of dollars to be spent on investing on the kind of modern system that will transform healthcare. In addition, it would dramatically increase our ability to eliminate costly medical errors and to accelerate the adoption of new solutions and breakthroughs.

Tax Reform. The savings realized through very deliberately and very systematically eliminating fraud could be used to provide tax incentives and vouchers that would help cover those Americans who currently can't afford coverage. In addition, we need to expand tax incentives for insurance provided by small employers and the self-employed. Finally, elimination of capital gains taxes for investments in health-solution companies can greatly impact the creation advancement of new solutions that create better health at lower cost.

Create a Health-Based Health System. In essence, we must create a system that focuses on improving individual health. The best way to accomplish this is to find out what solutions are actually working today that save lives and save money and then design public policy to encourage their widespread adoption. For example, according to the Dartmouth Health Atlas, if the 6,000 hospitals in the country provided the same standard of care of the Intermountain or Mayo health clinics, Medicare alone would save 30 percent of total spending every year. We need to make best practices the minimum practice. We need the federal government and other healthcare stakeholders to consistently migrate to best practices that ensure quality, safety and better outcomes.

Reform Our Health Justice System. Currently, the U.S. civil justice system is the most expensive in the world-about double the average cost in virtually every other industrialized nation. But for all of the money spent, our civil justice system neither effectively compensates persons injured from medical negligence nor encourages the elimination of medical errors. Because physicians fear malpractice suits, defensive medicine (redundant, wasteful treatment designed to avoid lawsuits, not treat the patient) has become pervasive. CHT is developing a number of bold health-justice reforms including a "safe harbor" for physicians who followed clinical best practices in the treatment of a patient. You can learn more at

Invest in Scientific Research and Breakthroughs. We must accelerate and focus national efforts, re-engineer care delivery, and ultimately prevent diseases such as Alzheimer's Disease and diabetes which are financially crippling our healthcare system.
The Last Thing We Need is a Plan That Raises Taxes and Eliminates Jobs
Sponsored Content
OUTRAGE!! Billion-dollar drug company hides astounding discovery of a natural cancer killer.

10,000 times stronger than chemo-but without the side effects!

One pharmaceutical company actually made the 'discovery of the century' - a miracle breakthrough that could save you or someone you love from the ravages of cancer. But...

They hid the secret for SEVEN FULL YEARS...with no plans to tell anyone about it ever!

Click here to read the full story of this astounding breakthrough-and the dozens of other underground cures not yet available to mainstream medicine...

Clearly, the last thing America needs is more taxes on job producers, whether it is in the form of a national energy tax, automatic tax increases in 2010 when the 2003 tax relief measures expire, or a healthcare plan that will raise taxes, eliminate jobs, and allows Washington bureaucrats to make decisions that ought to be made by individual Americans together with their families and doctors.

President Obama has a choice tonight, as does America.

We can make health and healthcare into a major source of job creation, economic revival, and improved health and well-being for every American.

Or we can make it into a government-run system that will destroy our economy along with our health.

To learn more about our plan for reforming health without raising taxes, eliminating jobs or raising the deficit, please visit

Your friends,

Newt Gingrich and Nancy Desmond

"On the road again..."
9,356 Posts
Newt would make a helluva President. He needs to keep his levelheaded common sense opinions coming over the next 3 years. People are listening.

Premium Member
4,020 Posts
I like Newt a lot. He used to have some balls. That article was unfortunately a puff piece, no specifics. None of that stuff was even attempted when the Repubs. had Congress.

760 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Take Home Pay Raise

Front Page | Forward to a Friend | Printer Friendly | Post Comments

July 29, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 30

America Needs a Take-Home Pay Raise
by Newt Gingrich

It's a frustration I hear all the time.

With the mainstream media, Washington insiders and the so-called "experts" in elite universities all singing off the same leftwing song sheet, there is a desperate need for the facts and the arguments that support time honored American values and principles that lead to safety, prosperity and freedom.

The Left can rely on the mainstream media to put out the spin it needs.

Meanwhile, Americans are exposed to far fewer voices that explain why America has been an exceptional nation, and how to keep it that way.
For the Left, "Stimulus" Means Bailing Out Politicians and Paying Off Big Business Through Big Bureaucracy
Take just one example: the economic stimulus bill. President Obama and his allies in Washington and the elite media rammed through a $787 billion bill, asserting that the best way to get our economy moving again is through economic "stimulus," which means giving politicians more money to pay off big businesses through big bureaucracy.
Sponsored Content
ObamaCare Makes Private
Health Insurance Illegal!

House and Senate Democrats are working behind closed doors to pass President Obama's government-run healthcare plan. According to Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ), a leader in the fight against Obama's healthcare experiment:

"Passage of act will guarantee one thing - choice in health care will cease to exist. Don't be fooled. If enacted, this legislation will restrict the healthcare options you have today. If any changes whatsoever are made to your plan, the government will say no."

ObamaCare must be defeated!
Take Action Now!

But what the economy really needs is a plan that gives small businesses more resources and more incentives to create good, permanent, well-paying jobs.

The Left argues that "stimulus" is how you grow the economy, but most Americans know that you grow the economy by creating the conditions for better job creation.

So how do Americans, in the Margaret Thatcher tradition of "first you win the argument, then you win the vote," make the case for growing jobs when Washington and the elite media are busy making the case for growing government through "stimulus"?

I think we've found a way.
President Obama Doesn't Get It - Energy and Health Care Taxes Kill Jobs
I spent most of last weekend talking with local groups of small businessmen and women in New Jersey and Ohio about the need for jobs. The concern among the people I met with was clear and undeniable.

Everyone I spoke to was outraged that Washington is considering job killing health care policies - just after passing a job killing energy bill - when federal officials are forecasting 9 and 10 percent unemployment for the next five years.

President Obama and his team don't seem to grasp what every American I met with implicitly understands: New energy taxes will kill jobs. Health care taxes will kill jobs. Meekly accepting automatic tax increases will kill jobs and put off economic recovery.

Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First
At American Solutions, we believe it's time for a fundamentally different approach - a plan for creating jobs that you can apply to your own family or business budget and decide if it works for you.

We've boiled it down to a simple phrase: Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First.

It is a step-by-step program that you can share with your friends and the small business owners you know.

Read it here and use it to tell Washington politicians that their number one priority ought to be job creation.

Use it to convince small business owners that we need a jobs creation program that is real, that works in the world market, and that creates permanent, long-term economic growth.

Use it to tell your friends and neighbors that a pay raise may not be possible in this economy, but a take-home pay raise is within our reach.

Four Very Bold "Reagan-Style" Tax Changes
Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First consists of four very bold tax changes.

1. A 50 Percent Cut in Payroll Taxes for Two Years

For workers, this means cutting Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes in half for two years -a substantial take-home pay raise for every person who has a job.

For employers, a 50 percent cut in the Social Security and Medicare tax match means more money to hire new workers and invest in new technology.

For the economy as a whole, it would bolster small businesses and lead to an explosion of jobs.

2. Abolish the Capital Gains Tax

To compete with China for news jobs and investment we need to match their capital gains tax: It's zero.

If we want our children and grandchildren to live in the most productive country in the world, we need more than short-term, government make-work jobs. We need the investment required for new factories, new companies and new technologies to create long lasting jobs.

Abolishing the capital gains tax would produce such investment.

3. Reduce the Corporate Tax Rate

The Left loves to demonize corporations, but when you add together state and federal taxes, American corporations pay the highest taxes in the world.

We believe that by matching the Irish corporate tax rate of 12.5 percent, America would become the most desirable economy in the world to open a factory, create a new job or develop a new production.

And that means more jobs for American workers.

4. Eliminate the Death Tax Permanently

By taxing Americans a second time after they die, government does a fundamentally immoral thing: It tells us that it wants us to work all our lives, save all our lives, and provide for our families. And then it takes the fruit of that hard work when we die.

If we want to be a pro-work, pro-savings and pro-family nation, it's past time we stop punishing Americans who work, save and provide for their families.
Workers Understand What a 50% Cut in Payroll Taxes Means for Their Families
When I explained the Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First plan to people in Ohio and New Jersey this weekend, they instantly understood that this plan would be good for them personally, but also for the economic competitiveness of the country as a whole.
Sponsored Content
Retirement, "Plan B" - Receive Paychecks Every 12 Days For Life

Without ever doing a moment's work, you can now legally sneak onto the "payroll" of over 1,000 of America's best companies.

You receive a check as often as every 12 days, and annual income can run as high as $120,000 or more. Learn more here

Employers in manufacturing, services, large and small businesses understood that this would allow them to invest more and create new jobs.

And workers understood in very real terms the difference a 50 percent reduction in payroll taxes would make for themselves and their families.

If you're interested in learning more about Jobs Here, Jobs Now, Jobs First, just go to Tell your friends to do the same. Sign our petition and help send Washington the message that America doesn't work if Americans aren't working.

Let the other side make the case for job-killing higher taxes and "stimulus" that has big politicians paying off big business through big bureaucracy. We'll make the case for jobs.

This is one debate we should be eager to begin.

Your friend,

Newt Gingrich

760 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Newt Gingrich 8/26/09

Front Page | Forward to a Friend | Printer Friendly | Post Comments

August 26, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 34

Facta, Non Verba:
Three Reasons Why Government Can't Run Health Care
by Newt Gingrich

Facta, non verba.

For those of you who have forgotten your Latin, it means "deeds, not words."

There's been a lot of overheated rhetoric about health care reform, but this saying is one that all Americans should return to when considering plans for a government-dominated health system. Sponsored Content

In other words, we should judge government, not by its words, but by its deeds.

With this simple principle in mind, what follows are three examples why government can't - and shouldn't - run our health care system (at least not any health care system you or I would want to be dependent on).
Reason No. 1: Government Can't Be Trusted With a Credit Card
Every family knows about making a budget and living within its means. Government, to put it bluntly, does not.

What if your husband had come home last Friday night and announced that he had racked up almost 30 percent more debt on the family credit card - including the mortgage and car loans - than he had told you about just a month ago?

Would you trust him to go out and start spending money to remodel the kitchen? And do you think he could get a loan to do it?

But that's exactly what the Obama Administration did with their weekend news dump. They announced late Friday that the amount of money they don't have but are nonetheless planning on spending over the next ten years isn't the astonishing $7 trillion they estimated in May but is instead an astounding $9 trillion.

Add this to the fact that, after the administration sold its health care reform proposal on the grounds that it will reduce costs to the Treasury, the independent Congressional Budget Office determined that the House plan will actually cost an astounding $1 trillion-$1.5 trillion in the next ten years, which will be added directly to the federal debt. The director of the CBO testified before Congress last month that "n the legislation that has been reported we do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount. And on the contrary, the legislation significantly expands the federal responsibility for health care costs."

Which do you have more faith in, the government's happy talk of "bending the cost curve" or its record of out-of-control spending?

Deeds, not words.
Reason No. 2: Government Can't Even Give Away Money Effectively
As the inimitable Andy McCarthy of National Review put it, "Compared to the infinite complexity of healthcare and health-insurance, cash-for-clunkers is kindergarten stuff. You trade in your old car for a new one that gets (slightly) better mileage and the government gives you money - between $3,500 and $4,500. How hard is that?"

Too hard for government bureaucrats, it turns out.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has boasted that the cash-for-clunkers program provided "a lifeline to the automobile industry, jump starting a major sector of the economy and putting people back to work.''

But look at the deeds, not the words.

Last week, cash-for-clunkers ended in a bureaucratic morass of red tape, failed promises and unanticipated costs.
Air Traffic Controllers Manning the Cash-for-Clunkers Hotline
Only a government bureaucracy could mess up a program designed to give away free money.

The government wizards who set up cash-for-clunkers initially budgeted to sell 250,000 cars in three months.

The program sold that many in four days.

And because the central planners who think they can provide government "competition" to the private health insurance market failed to accurately estimate how many government workers it would take to administer cash-for-clunkers, they had to take employees from the FAA - air traffic controllers, no less - to help manage the demand.

And what about the car dealerships the program was supposed to help in the first place? Even though the rebates were supposed to be paid within 10 days, only 7 percent of federal promises under cash-for-clunkers have been paid so far, leaving dealers with millions of dollars in unfunded government promises.
More Than Bureaucratic Incompetence, Political Business as Usual
Sponsored Content
What life-saving therapy are they hiding from YOU?

The headlines should have been blazing. The biggest health discoveries of our time-effective treatments for almost every disease. Breakthroughs like:
a side-effect free cholesterol buster-that costs 4 cents a day
a natural cancer killer 10,000 times stronger than chemo
And if Big Pharma had their way, you'd never hear about a single one.

But they can't keep these cures a secret forever-and one team is working round-the-clock to make sure you find out about every last one.

Keep reading...

But there's more to the cautionary tale of cash-for-clunkers than just bureaucratic incompetence.

This is a case study in what happens when politicians get involved in the marketplace.

Despite all the rhetoric of jump starting the auto industry, politicians' priorities are to give free goodies to their constituents. So as far as they're concerned, cash-for-clunkers has been a resounding success.

Forget the fact that they're spending money they don't have, or that car dealerships are left holding millions of dollars in empty government promises. They're not concerned with the long-term, just the next election.

So tell us again why should we think bureaucrats and politicians will perform any better with our health care?
Reason No. 3: Government Would Rather Pay Crooks Than Manage Efficiently
There's been a lot of worrying about the inevitability of government rationing health care under the Democratic reform bills in Congress.

Economists have known about this inevitability for a long time. Well, Americans can stop worrying. Government is rationing care already - and doing it in a particularly stupid way.

Studies have shown that early use of home health care after hospitalization - allowing patients to go home and be visited by a nurse to manage their care - saves Medicare billions of dollars.

So here is a case where an innovative government program actually saves the government money. Home health care is both more compassionate and more efficient. It reduces the likelihood a patient will be readmitted to a hospital by allowing her to heal in a more familiar setting.
Home Health Care Works, So Naturally Medicare Bureaucrats Cut Its Funding
So naturally bureaucrats at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services cut $34 billion from this compassionate, efficient program last week.

And if the House health care reform bill becomes law, an additional $56.8 billion will be cut from the program - an amount equal to almost the entire federal budget for home health care services in 2007.

What makes rationing care to the homebound all the more immoral is the fact that there is a much bigger pot of savings available to Washington if it only had the political will to look.
Instead of Seeking Savings from the Homebound, Why Not the Crooks?
As a new book by the Center for Health Transformation's Jim Frogue details, criminals rip off the taxpayers to the tune of $80 billion to $120 billion each year in the current Medicare and Medicaid programs.

We're not talking about inadvertent bill errors but outright fraud. Government health programs are currently paying men maternity benefits, giving taxpayer dollars to pizza parlors that are supposed to be HIV transfusion centers, and even paying dead patients federal health care benefits.

If ever there was a reason not to turn our entire health care system over to government it is this: Government can't run the health care programs it already has. It would rather ration compassionate, effective programs than do the hard work of rooting out and punishing the crooks who are stealing our taxpayer dollars.
Facts are Stubborn Things
Americans have already heard a lot of rhetoric about health care reform, and we can expect to hear a lot more.

But as Ronald Reagan used to say, facts are stubborn things. And the facts of government's track record in managing our money and delivering on its promises speak louder than any televised presidential speech or stage-managed town hall ever could.

So as the summer winds down and the debate rages on, let this be our mantra:

Facta, non verba.

Make a bumper sticker out of it.

Put it on a tee-shirt and wear it to a town hall.

And when someone asked you what it means, tell them that before we hand over more of our lives to government, we should consider how they've treated us so far.

Your friend,

Newt Gingrich

Newt's Quick Links:
Real Change Is Back: I'm pleased to announce that the paperback version of my book, Real Change: From the World that Fails to the World that Works was No. 9 last week on the Washington Post bestseller list. To get a copy for yourself or someone you care about, click here.

760 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
September 9, 2009

If a friend has forwarded you this message, visit to subscribe to FREE conservative news alerts from Newt Gingrich, Ann Coulter, Pat Buchanan and Chuck Norris.

September 9, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 36

Grading the Big Speech:
A 10-Point Citizens' Checklist on Health Reform

by Newt Gingrich
President Obama has had a month to listen to the American people.

For a month, angry Americans have gone to town hall meetings in large numbers to oppose more spending, more government, and more Washington centered bureaucracy.

For a month, the polls have gotten worse and worse for big spending, big deficit, high taxes, and big government.

But on Labor Day, President Obama gave us a sign he hasn't been listening. He gave a campaign-style speech in which he accused his critics of spreading "lies" and failing to offer their own solutions for health care reform.

Tonight President Obama has another opportunity to show us if he's willing to listen to us, or to his party's leftwing.

Below is a ten-point checklist you can use to judge for yourself.

Facing a Far Left Revolt, the President Has a Choice to Make
In his speech to Congress this evening, President Obama has a choice to make.

Sponsored Content

The Radical Left Will Not Stop Until They Succeed in Socializing Medicine.

SIGN NOW Before it is TOO LATE!

He has to choose between listening to what the American people are telling him, and what the Left is telling him.

A recent Gallup poll revealed that only 13% of the American people want permanently expanded government.

In sharp contrast, the liberal base of the President's party views government run health care as nonnegotiable.

The Left is already threatening primary opposition to President Obama if he doesn't stick with them and seek to impose radical change on the American people.

As MSNBC's Keith Olbermann said last week "If it's necessary to find somebody else to run against him, I think liberals would do it, no matter how destructive that may seem".

Despite the Hard Line of the Left,
Health Care Reform Is Still Possible
Despite the intransigence on the Left, bipartisan health reform supported by a huge majority of Americans is still possible.

The question is whether the President can reach out to the majority of us.

So to understand the President's speech tonight – his most important speech since his Inaugural address – do these three things:

Forget the details

Forget the rhetoric.

And ask yourself this:

Is this a speech designed to bring together Americans to pass bipartisan health reform?

Or is this a speech designed to appease the Left?

Here's a ten-point checklist to help you decide for yourself. Print it out and use it to judge the President's speech tonight.

In his proposals for reform, does the President include litigation reform, which 84% of Americans believe will help reduce costs and which is the number one goal of doctors in any health reform?

Does he include a section onsaving money by stopping payments to crooks who are bilking the taxpayers for $70-120 billion each year in Medicare and Medicaid fraud? For 88 percent of Americans, this is the first place they would look to find savings in our health care system. Is President Obama willing to look there?

Does his speech reject higher taxes, which the vast majority of Americans believe will make the current economy even worse and increase unemployment even more?

Does it reject all government rationing of health services which the American people have vocally opposed at town hall meetings across the country?

Does it reject any government run, bureaucratic health plan?

Is President Obama open to four or five bipartisan bills which could pass with big bipartisan majorities? Or does he insist on a single omnibus bill of 1000-plus pages like the one that failed when Mrs. Clinton tried to pass it in 1993-1994?

Is he for sustaining the Senate rule of 60 votes to ensure a bill that has wide, bipartisan support? Or is he prepared to destroy long-standing Senate tradition and ram through a radical bill with 51 votes?

Does President Obama give any indication he is forincreasing the power, information and choice of the individual and their doctor or is he giving more power to the government?

Does he focus on health, wellness, prevention, early detection and health management to avoid or control the severity of chronic diseases? Or does he spend his time talking only about acute care?

Does his plan invest in science and technology in order to increase innovation and accelerate the discovery and adoption of new discoveries and breakthroughs in diseases such as Alzheimer's, cancer and diabetes?
Share Your Scores With Me At

760 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Newt 9/30/09

September 30, 2009 | Vol. 4, No. 39

Dishonesty, Intimidation,
Hypocrisy and Medicare Advantage

by Newt Gingrich

The editorial writers at the New York Times thought they were getting the White House's back when they defended cuts to Medicare Advantage last week. In fact, they were validating the blatant dishonesty of administration and congressional officials pushing for the cuts. In their editorial last Sunday, the Times writers revealed in stunning fashion the lies that have been used to convince increasingly skeptical seniors that their Medicare Advantage benefits won't be sacrificed to pay for government-run health care.
1 - 8 of 8 Posts