It's time for your latest Obamacare update, and it will come as no surprise to you that things are not getting any prettier for this monstrosity.
Let's just take a jog down Obamacare Avenue and see what is popping out at us from the storefronts this week. Roll down your windows so you can get a clearer look:
-- Obamacare devotees are still clinging to the idea that this law will expand coverage, but the most recent information indicates that it may fall short of this goal, too, just as it has failed in every other respect. Forbes reports that instead of expanding coverage to those who don't have it, Obamacare is just pushing people who are already covered out of the private market into Obamacare exchanges. Multiple surveys reveal that only around 11 percent of those on the exchanges were previously without coverage. And get this: A whopping 52 percent of those who declined Obamacare coverage said that "affordability" was the reason. Thirty percent cited "technical challenges in buying the plans." What's that you were promising about increasing accessibility, Mr. President? Affordability?
— We continue to read that full-time workers are being forced into part-time work and that those working part-time are seeing a sharp reduction in their hours as a result of Obamacare. A manager of an El Paso, Texas, Taco Cabana said that every one of his full-time workers had his hours cut to less than 30 hours a week during the summer so the company wouldn't have to provide the workers with health insurance in 2014. As a result, he said, "they've had to look for second jobs." A sales clerk for Dillard's said that he has been able to work no more than 28 hours per week since last fall and that "everyone they're hiring is part-time now." The manager also threw in the disturbing comment that he is not planning on buying health insurance and will just pay the penalty. If he gets sick, he said, he'll "just go to Juarez," Mexico.
These are hardly isolated cases. Why would they be? It's only logical that typical employers and employees throughout the country will make similar decisions based on the economic coercion of Obamacare. Are these the results President Obama was aiming for, or are they unfortunate unintended consequences? With unemployment being one of the major problems facing this nation today, you'd think rational government leaders would do everything they could to get people back to work. But the next time you hear Obama mouthing his phony fealty to "jobs" or announcing another pivot in that direction, understand that he's doing just the opposite -- through Obamacare, onerous regulations elsewhere across the board and obscene taxing and spending. The Obama government is not friendly to American workers or to the unemployed, who need jobs, not an incentive to stay home.
-- The Weekly Standard informs us that health insurance consultant Robert Laszewski recently noted that though Obamacare is virtually certain to boost insurance costs even more than it already has, he doesn't believe insurers will "be losing a lot of sleep over it," because American taxpayers will bear some 75 percent of this burden. Apparently, the rumors are true; a provision in the (un)Affordable Care Act will result in more than $1 trillion being transferred from taxpayers to insurance companies, according to projections from the Congressional Budget Office. How is that for transparency in government? How do you think that would have gone over if Obama had been upfront about this prior to the vote on Obamacare? During the 2012 presidential campaign?
-- Guy Benson reported on Townhall's website that David Kurtz of "the lefty website TPM" shared an email from a 32-year-old liberal in New York who said that though he is a strong supporter of Obamacare, he wouldn't be able to afford insurance under Obamacare. This dim bulb nevertheless pronounced Obamacare a step in the right direction, in keeping with the liberal ideological penchant for allowing emotions to outweigh facts.
— A poster on Free Republic said his "family doctor of over 12 years" retired from his practice at the end of 2013 because of changes in the health care law. Of course, that's anecdotal, but we've all read the surveys of high percentages of doctors considering a similar course of action. This could end up being a very big deal — with Obamacare chasing out our best and brightest from the profession.
— A computer security expert told "Fox News Sunday" that the notorious Obamacare website is even less secure than it was in November. David Kennedy of TrustedSec LLC also testified to Congress that the site is — get this — "100 percent" insecure and that personal information for consumers at HealthCare.gov is at risk. Before the congressional hearing, Kennedy told Reuters that the government has still not plugged the 20-plus vulnerabilities that security experts identified after healthcare.gov went live. Though the administration rejects this assessment, Kennedy stands by his statement. "It's not just myself that's saying this website's insecure; it's also seven other independent security researchers that ... came to the exact same conclusion."
I would tell you about the ongoing threat Obamacare constitutes to religious liberty and the many other problems it is causing, but I've run out of space. But this list should suffice, don't you think? Feel better now?DAVID LIMBAUGH, a Washington Examiner columnist, is nationally syndicated by Creators Syndicate.