addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupsimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Winning the Affordable Care Act Argument - General Monthly Meeting

  • Oct 22, 2013 · 6:30 PM
  • This location is shown only to members

Join us at 6:30pm to welcome our new members, enjoy light refreshments and socialize at a meet and greet before the meeting at 7pm.

Stacy Hahn running for District 2 (Candy Olsen Seat) for Hillsborough County School Board in 2014 will discuss her outlook and what we can expect from her.

Also Mark Grosenbaugh will  lead a discussion on Mark Levin's "The Liberty Amendments" - The Amendment To Establish Term Limits for Members of Congress.

And our headliner - Winning the Affordable Care Act argument/ObamaCare and You with Dr. David McKalip.  Dr. David McKalip was most recently a candidate for St. Petersburg City Council and is a prominent brain and spinal surgeon.  Dr. McKalip has led the fight against ObamaCare from its' onset and has extensive knowledge of the Affordable Care Act.

Please join us for this special presentation and question/answer session.

DON'T FORGET YOUR SHOES! - Time is running out on our shoe drive.




Join or login to comment.

  • Mark G.

    One problem area that Mark Levine does not address -- but that clearly should be -- is Executive Orders. I understand their original intent, but their use has come to create something of a monarchy. They should be eliminated entirely, or have some sort of oversight by the legislative branch.

    1 · October 24, 2013

    • Joseph M.

      They are only supposed to be used in regards tp the necessary and proper execution of legislation already passed by Congress. We really just need someone to challenge an Executive Order with the Supreme Court. If Roberts is derelict in his duty again, then we make an Amendment.

      October 24, 2013

  • Mark G.

    "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." My personal friend, Thomas Jefferson, penned those words. That's what The Founders' view of The Constitution was -- a means of controlling the federal government. Over the last 100 years, some of the chain's links have been worn-down, others have broken, and some have been cut, so that the federal government has moved-off into areas it was not intended to be. That should be the goal of any proposed Amendment -- to restrict and restrain an over-reaching federal government; that includes the executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

    2 · October 24, 2013

  • A former member
    A former member

    We are being unrealistic in our call for a Constitutional Convention, notwithstanding our views on the proposal's potential. Instead, our approach should be to gradually erode the power of the beast with passage of singular but potentially popular constitutional amendments, such as term limits and balanced budget. Concurrently, we should be looking to form coalitions with all political parties in opposition, with the view toward forming a concerted effort for support and passage of constitutional amendments and election of political candidates.

    October 23, 2013

    • Mark G.

      As for any proposed Amendment by the States (versus from Congress), they would have to come from a Convention of States. There is no other means of doing it per The Constitution. And it could be that only one or a dozen and one come out of said Convention. Those go to the States for a vote, and it could be that all or none get the required 75% margin for inclusion as an Amendment to The Constitution. Specifically regarding term limits for Congress, that would have to be a Constitutional Amendment, just as it was for President.

      October 23, 2013

    • Joseph M.

      I thought I covered that when I called it a Convention to Amend the Constitution.

      October 23, 2013

  • Greg F.

    Ref: Convention of States
    Should not occur. The Constitution isn't being enforced now, why would one think that going thru all the trouble, time, and expense of a COS would suddenly make it so?
    Rather to direct all that energy into one concerted effort, either on the national or local stage, to affect the change we desire. A domino affect wherein when one truth is finally acknowledged (ie, 2nd Amendment upheld once and for all ?), others may follow in quick succession (prayer restored in schools !). It will take a dedicated effort by a singular group with strong purpose! We are too fragmented at the moment. If three hundred million U.S. citizens do not want Obamacare, why, then, is there seemingly no hope to repeal it?
    Oh, and don't send any more money to the GOP!

    October 23, 2013

    • Mark G.

      Some of the proposed Amendments would help to ensure that The Constitution would, indeed, be followed and enforced. Term limits for Congress and the Supreme Court would help; an over-ride of Supreme Court decisions by The States would help; a re-defining of The Commerce Clause to what The Founders intended would help. Your Obamacare question is perfectly sound. Under these proposed Amendments, The States could vote to overturn the Supreme Court decision. Or if the Commerce Clause were re-defined back to original intent, the Federal government would have no say in the sale of insurance products to begin with.

      1 · October 23, 2013

  • Linda R

    The more one hears, the more to fear.

    October 23, 2013

    • Steve

      True. This drives me to create value rather than getting caught in the fear. I wonder how I can create something that will have these fears be inconsequential.

      October 23, 2013

  • Pam H.

    I just qualified for Medicare, and my union is concerned about the future of our healthcare benefits, which is now my supplemental. I just hope I continue staying healthy! Oh, beware of candidates bearing gifts!

    October 23, 2013

  • Steve

    The Doctor was great. I realized last night that medicare is essentially worthless. The political candidate for school board was not convincing. She's been captured by and is working for the rulers, not the taxpaying people. She sounded like Obama in that way. Never did she speak to a free man's heart regarding his children or grandchildren's education.

    1 · October 23, 2013

  • Edward D.

    The Dr. knew his stuff.

    October 23, 2013

  • Laura

    1. How do you feel about insurers increasing Part D Medicare insurance premiums, to pay for their own billable service that would ultimately be used for their own statistical information presented to congress? (a one-time, or two-time nurse practitioner in-home visit available for a pre-selected group of subscribers, both healthy and non, hired by the insurer) 2. How do you feel about the insurer not only profiting, but also asking those Nurse Practitioners during the in-home visit to acquire several pages of questions pertaining to the subscribers health conditions, and prior histories for the insurers own records? 3. How would you feel if this "cherry picked" group, which may statistically be 10% unhealthy, and 90% unhealthy, would be reported to congress to increase insurance premiums? 4. How would you feel if the invoice for each non-essential in-home visit performed was $300? How do you feel about a physician pwned company to providing the NPs, is happening in Clearwater?

    October 22, 2013

    • Steve

      My insurer wanted to send out someone to give me a physical exam and kept calling to set up an appointment. I told them I would not do it and if they want any information on me, go the single source for my medical information - my doctor. That was the last I heard from them about this. All I know is that there has to be some reason why they are doing this. I guess their need for information is the reason. What I envisioned was two sources for my medical info and the possibility of contradictions regarding my medical data.

      October 22, 2013

    • Laura

      Steve, the NP asks 12 pages worth of genetic history questions, personal prior health history questions, and about smoking. The "in-home" visit only checks your BP, ears, eyes, and listens to your heart. They do not order any diagnostic tests and do not follow up with any doctor. They state that the subscriber gets a copy of the report, but neglects to tell them that the subscriber has to write a letter and send it off to the correct address to obtain a copy, and doctors are not automatically provided a copy either. (only in situations of reportable incidents).

      October 22, 2013

70 went

Our Sponsors

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy