Tag: health care

Federal Watchdog Reveals Rampant Obamacare Fraud; 90% Of Bad-Doc Applicants Approved In Undercover Test

A new bombshell report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) details a long-running vulnerability in the Affordable Care Act exchanges, showing that weak verification controls continue to expose federal subsidies to significant fraud and abuse. 

“Preliminary results from GAO’s ongoing covert testing suggest fraud risks in the advance premium tax credit (APTC) persist,” the report reads. “The federal Marketplace approved coverage for nearly all of GAO’s fictitious applicants in plan years 2024 and 2025, generally consistent with similar GAO testing in plan years 2014 through 2016.”

According to the report, GAO conducted undercover tests by creating fictitious applicants with fake identities and fraudulent or never-issued Social Security numbers to see how the federal Marketplace would respond. Over the past two years, 90% of those fake applicants were approved for subsidized coverage despite lacking required documentation. In plan year 2024, all four of GAO’s fabricated applicants were approved and received about $2,350 per month in subsidies paid to insurers, even though they failed to provide proof of Social Security numbers, citizenship, or income. GAO scaled up the test for 2025 to 20 fake applicants; 18 were still enrolled as of September 2025, generating more than $10,000 per month in subsidies

More broadly, GAO’s preliminary analyses identified vulnerabilities related to potential SSN misuse and likely unauthorized enrollment changes in federal Marketplace data for plan years 2023 and 2024. Such issues can contribute to APTC that is not reconciled through enrollees’ tax filings to determine the amount of premium tax credit for which enrollees were ultimately eligible. GAO’s preliminary analysis of data from tax year 2023 could not identify evidence of reconciliation for over $21 billion in APTC for enrollees who provided SSNs to the federal Marketplace for plan year 2023. Unreconciled APTC may not necessarily represent overpayments, as enrollees who did not reconcile may have been eligible for the subsidy. However, it may include overpayments for enrollees who were not eligible for APTC.

A big problem with reconciling these Obamacare subsidies is when someone uses a Social Security number that doesn’t actually belong to the person getting the insurance. GAO’s early look at federal Marketplace data found more than 29,000 Social Security numbers in 2023 that showed over a full year of subsidized coverage. One number was used so many times that it totaled more than 26,000 days of insurance across more than 125 plans – the equivalent of more than 71 years of coverage tied to a single number.

The pattern continued in 2024, with nearly 66,000 Social Security numbers being linked to more than a year of subsidized coverage. This can result from identity theft, fake identities, or simple typing errors. According to the GAO, determining the true owner of a Social Security number can be complicated, so it’s examining these cases and other examples of overlapping coverage more closely.

CMS officials say the federal Marketplace lets people sign up even when a Social Security number is already in use. They claim this helps the real owner of the number get coverage in cases of identity theft or simple typing mistakes. The system uses a model that analyzes various pieces of personal information to distinguish applicants, and CMS runs this check monthly to clear out duplicate accounts. They also say applications with repeated Social Security numbers are supposed to go through a data-matching process in which people send in documents to verify their identities. However, even with those explanations, the setup makes it far too easy for fake applicants to slip through, and clearly, they do. The way the system works gives fraudsters plenty of room to abuse Social Security numbers long before anyone notices.

GAO notes that its “covert testing is illustrative and cannot be generalized to the enrollee population.”

Keep reading

23,000+ Canadians died waiting for health care in one year as Liberals pushed euthanasia

Over 23,000 Canadians have died while on waitlists for medical care as Liberals focused on euthanasia expansions.

According to government figures published on November 26 by Canadian think tank SecondStreet.org, 23,746 patients died on government waiting lists for health care between April 2024 and March 2025.

“What’s really sad is that behind many of these figures are stories of patients suffering during their final years – grandparents who dealt with chronic pain while waiting for hip operations, people leaving children behind as they die waiting for heart operations, so much suffering,” SecondStreet.org President Colin Craig explained.

“It doesn’t have to be this way. If we copied better-performing European public health systems, we could greatly reduce patient suffering,” he continued.

According to the data, collected through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, there has been a three percent increase of deaths while on waitlists compared to last year. The number is likely much higher, as the reports did not include figures from Alberta and some parts of Manitoba.

Data further revealed that 100,876 Canadians have died while waiting for care since 2018, thanks to increased wait times and insufficient staffing.

“It’s interesting that governments will regularly inspect restaurants and report publicly if there’s a minor problem such as a missing paper towel holder,” Craig noted. “Meanwhile, no government reports publicly on patients dying on waiting lists. It’s quite hypocritical.”

At the same time, the Liberal government has worked to expand euthanasia 13-fold since it was legalized, making it the fastest growing euthanasia program in the world. Meanwhile, Health Canada has released a series of studies on advance requests for assisted suicide.

As LifeSiteNews reported earlier this week, so-called “Medical Assistance in Dying” is responsible for more than 5 percent of all deaths in Canada in 2024.

At the same time, internal documents from Ontario doctors in 2024 that revealed Canadians are choosing euthanasia because of poverty and loneliness, not as a result of an alleged terminal illness.

Keep reading

A story of censorship – starting in the 1970s

It’s difficult to know precisely when the censorship and the oppression really began, and it’s always been difficult to know who was behind it. But there has been no doubt in my mind that it has for a long time been very real.

In the 1970s and 1980s, I wrote and campaigned a good deal about animal experiments (of which I always heartily disapproved on scientific grounds as well as on humanitarian grounds) and the police in general, and special branch in particular, started taking a close interest in my work from that time on.

Whenever I went to speak at an anti-vivisection rally, I would have my own video cameraman. He would follow me around and film me and everyone I spoke to.

Robin Webb was the Animal Liberation Front’s official press officer and he had his own police cameraman too. When we met and talked, our two devoted cameramen would stand beside us filming us both. I photographed a bunch of policemen who were following me once and wrote an article about them in the Sunday People. One of the photographs was captioned `The Hand of Plod’.

On one occasion, I was prevented from travelling to a demonstration by a police sergeant who threatened to arrest me simply for driving on the road. I sued the Chief Constable. The judge didn’t like me suing a policeman.

The son of a dear friend of mine worked for Special Branch and told me (via his father) that although they followed all my activities closely, they did not regard me as dangerous in a physical sense. “Following my activities closely” meant that they tapped my telephone, sucked messages off my fax machine and every time I moved house, someone arranged for one or two plainly marked telecom vans to sit parked outside my gate for days at a time. Whenever I asked what they were doing, the men inside the van replied that they were just making sure that my telephone line worked well. And this without my ever making a complaint about a dodgy line.

Another MI5 operative confirmed what I had been told.

The oppression was very heavy in those days because animal rights campaigners were pretty much the only reason for the existence of MI5, GCHQ and Special Branch. My phone and fax machine were constantly tapped.

After that, other campaigns attracted the attention of the various branches of MI5, Special Branch and GCHQ.

My successful campaign to force the government to issue controls on benzodiazepine tranquillisers resulted in my phone not working and my mail disappearing.

And then there was AIDS.

AIDS was the first attempt to control the world with a pandemic. And it was the similarity between the way AIDS was promoted and the way the coronavirus hoax was being promoted which helped me understand the truth about covid right at the beginning – in February and March 2020.

In the 1980s, I wrote a good deal about AIDS. I did a great deal of research and wrote a number of articles for The Sun (for which I was the medical correspondent for ten years), and in a number of them, I explained precisely why the Government and the medical establishment were creating entirely false fears. It was clear from all the medical literature that AIDS was not going to kill us all. (The official line, supported and promoted with great enthusiasm by the British Medical Association and the rest of the medical establishment, was that by the year 2000, everyone in the world would be in some way affected by AIDS.)

For the first months of the scare, I appeared a good deal on television and radio to debate the whole AIDS scare.

Keep reading

Michigan wasted millions on deceased Medicaid enrollees

Michigan made $39.9 million in Medicaid payments to deceased enrollees over a two-year period a decade ago, with a total of $249 million spent across 14 states.

This is according to a new report titled the “Welfare Walking Dead” from the non-profit the Foundation for Government Accountability, which looked at federal audit data from the Office of Inspector General, among other research.

In an exclusive interview with The Center Square, Jonathan Bain said that every taxpayer should be concerned with these findings. Bain is a senior research fellow at the FGA and authored the report.

“The average citizen should care about these findings because it’s yet another example of government waste that’s rooted in inefficiency and lack of care and precision,” Bain explained. “Every dollar that is lost to waste, fraud, or abuse is a dollar that cannot be spent to benefit the truly needy—folks like pregnant women, low-income kids, or seniors.”

Of the 14 states the audit looked at, the report found that Michigan reported one of the highest amounts of Medicaid payments to the deceased. States that surpassed it included California at $70.9 million and Ohio at $51.3 million.

Other states, including ones with much higher populations than Michigan, reported much lower Medicaid payments to the deceased. That included Florida at $26.2 million and Illinois at $4.6 million.

Bain said there is action that states can take to ensure fraud is not happening.

“States have the tools to identify these deceased enrollees,” he said. “The issue is that they either aren’t doing the proper cross checks to discover them, or their Medicaid Management Information Systems aren’t being updated to reflect that a deceased enrollee has been flagged.”

The report found that most of the states audited did not routinely enter death information into their Medicaid Management Information Systems.

Keep reading

Sen. Liz Warren Loses It! Blames Trump for EVERY Health Bill in America Except Her Own 

Sen. Elizabeth Warren used a Senate hearing this week to deliver yet another dramatic, inaccurate attack on President Donald Trump—this time claiming that Trump is responsible for rising health-care premiums across the country. 

Speaking Wednesday on Capitol Hill, Warren accused the administration of “ripping away coverage,” “skyrocketing premiums,” and “creating a health-care crisis.” 

But her argument collapsed under the weight of basic facts she failed to address.

Warren began by declaring that “health care in America is already too expensive,” a rare point of agreement. 

But instead of acknowledging that premiums, deductibles, and co-pays rose for ten consecutive years under Democrat leadership, she blamed President Trump for conditions he inherited from the Affordable Care Act. 

During the hearing, she claimed Trump worked with Republicans to pass what she called the “Big Beautiful Bill,” insisting it stripped coverage from “15 million people.” 

This talking point has been repeatedly debunked: the bill only removes health coverage for illegal immigrants and sets a 40-hour work requirement for able-bodied adults.

In a revealing moment, Warren asked witness Mr. Levitis whether premiums would “double next year.” 

Levitis confirmed that certain ACA benchmark plans could spike—but he also identified the real driver: the ACA’s collapsing risk pools and concentrated market exits, not Trump’s actions. 

For a 60-year-old couple earning around $85,000, he cited approximate increases of $24,000, a cost surge that directly reflects the structural failures built into the ACA.

Rather than acknowledging this, Warren tried linking premium increases to tariffs and “input costs”—a stretch with no measurable connection to health-care pricing. 

She then claimed the solution is to “permanently extend ACA tax credits,” a policy that would cost taxpayers roughly $23 billion next year alone. She omitted the obvious: these subsidies don’t lower costs. 

They simply shift costs to taxpayers while insurers raise premiums in the background.

Warren repeated the long-debunked claim that Republicans have “tried 70 times” to dismantle the ACA, ignoring that most votes were symbolic amendments, budget procedures, or messaging resolutions. 

Keep reading

Can You Be Vaccinated Against Your Will While Under Anesthesia?

A nurse whistleblower from within the hospital system has come forward with a grave warning: the term “vaccine” is quietly disappearing from medical consent forms — replaced with the broad and deceptive category of “Biologics” or “Biogenics.”

Under this new classification, patients could be injected with vaccines and other biological products —against their will, and without their explicit consent — even while unconscious under anesthesia. (source)

Evidence that giving vaccines against the patient’s will has been ongoing for some time:

• Patients in U.S. hospitals were given COVID-19 vaccines without their knowledge or consent while under sedation. Lawsuits are pending. (source)

• Legal teams claim health care workers have confirmed the practice, calling it an “abominable covert act.” (source)

• A mother in the UK fights to stop a hospital from vaccinating her Down syndrome child under sedation against her will. (source)

• Medical journals propose administering vaccines during “perioperative periods” to boost compliance, raising ethical concerns. (source)

The whistleblower warns that the danger lies in how these new forms are written. Patients and guardians may believe they are signing standard medical consent documents — but the language now allows for broad authorization of all biological agents, including vaccines.

Keep reading

Bio-Digital Vaccine Passports and ‘On Patient Medical Recordkeeping’

Did you know that the only safe medical data is data that is stored inside your own body?

I didn’t know that either until Nic Hulscher recently discovered some very interesting research papers about ‘On Patient Medical Recordkeeping’ technology.

The quote below is from an article that was published in PubMed six years ago, in December 2019: “Accurate medical recordkeeping is a major challenge in many low-resource settings where well-maintained centralized databases do not exist, contributing to 1.5 million vaccine-preventable deaths annually.”

It took humans several hundred years to figure out that we are not able to maintain accurate medical records, but now we finally know.

And it’s a lucky thing that we only figured this out now, because we are finally reaching the stage where we are able to reliably record medical data: by encoding them into every living human body – in particular data about received vaccines.

There’s even a cute – no, more than cute: a heart warming acronym for this brilliant new record keeping method: OPMR.

The following quote is from an article in ‘Nature Materials’ from February 2025:

“We developed a robust on-patient medical record-keeping (OPMR) technology using a dissolvable microneedle patch (MNP) that delivers a quantum dot (QD)-based near-infrared (NIR) fluorescent dye encapsulated in poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) microparticles into the skin to encode medical information. This dye, once deposited into the dermis, is invisible to the naked eye, offering patient data privacy and anonymity, but provides discrete NIR signals that can be detected using a NIR imaging system.”

Isn’t it wonderful that we have found a way to not only make it impossible to lose medical records but to keep our medical records truly private and anonymous – and especially the number of vaccine microneedle patches we got administered? Nobody will ever know – except all the folks who detect the oh so discrete Near Infrared signals with the help of the NIR imaging system. And maybe it won’t be folks much longer who detect them but some friendly AI agent. Which makes it even more sublime.

We can also stop stressing about our medical records being unavailable when China or some other country cuts the subsea cables to crash the internet:

“By depositing the dye in a predefined pattern that correlates to a specific set of information, the technology can be imaged by healthcare workers to support next-dose decisions without requiring internet connectivity or the use of centralized databases.”

See? Internet connectivity is not required. Marvelous. Life-saving ‘next-dose decisions’ won’t be blocked ever – internet or not.

Keep reading

Obamacare Subsidies Led to Billions in Insurer Profits, CEOs Donated to Democrats

When Democrats shut down the federal government for 42 days, millions of Americans suffered. Veterans couldn’t access services, national parks closed their gates, and federal workers went without paychecks. Nice priorities, right? But the real reason for their obstinacy wasn’t principle—it was profit.

While you weren’t looking, a massive wealth transfer was taking place. While families struggled to make ends meet during the shutdown, Democrat donors in the insurance industry were protecting their golden goose: taxpayer-funded subsidies that have made them billions. The shutdown wasn’t about healthcare—it was about keeping the money flowing to the right pockets.

From ‘Just the News’:

The 42-day federal shutdown forced by Democrats thrust the economics of Obamacare into the limelight, and exposed an uncomfortable truth: An insurance industry whose executives are increasingly liberal donors has seen its earnings soar with the injection of taxpayer-funded subsidies that propped up Barack Obama’s signature health program from collapse.

The nation’s largest health insurance companies have seen good business since Obamacare was first passed in 2010 and fully implemented in 2014. This has come in no small part because of federal government subsidies to the insurance industry, which government estimates show totaled $1.8 trillion in 2023 alone.

This is outrageous. One-point-eight TRILLION dollars. In one year. Your money, their pockets.

The evidence is damning. Since Obamacare’s implementation, the four largest health insurance companies saw their profits explode by 216%. UnitedHealth Group, which dominates the industry, experienced the most dramatic windfall. Their stock prices didn’t just beat the market—they crushed it, growing 1,032% since the law passed, compared to just 251% for the S&P 500.

Keep reading

Obamacare Is A Disaster, Just As Expected

Just over 15 years ago, when the Democrat-controlled House and the Democrat-controlled Senate were debating the healthcare proposals offered by the Democrat president, nearly everyone on the political right was unified in opposition. It may well have been the last time the right was united on anything, but it was indeed unified and resolute.

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (MN) warned that “This monstrosity of a bill will not only destroy the private healthcare market, it will lead to massive increases in premiums and rationed care.” Congressman (and eventual vice-presidential nominee and Speaker of the House) Paul Ryan (WI) complained that “This bill is a fiscal Frankenstein. It’s a government takeover that will explode costs and kill jobs.” Senator (and Republican Leader) Mitch McConnell (KY) insisted that Americans “want reforms that lower costs, not a trillion-dollar government experiment.”

Right-leaning commentators like George Will and Charles Krauthammer agreed, not only with each other but with Republicans in Congress as well. Krauthammer, in particular, argued that President Obama’s promise to “bend the cost curve” down was pure, unadulterated, and extensively documented fantasy. National Review, much maligned among Trump supporters these days, dedicated most of an issue to exposing and forecasting Obamacare’s fiscal absurdities and the likelihood that it would result in lower quality of care, increased taxes, and exploding insurance premiums. Even the Heritage Foundation—in the news lately for purportedly exacerbating rifts in the conservative coalition—likewise agreed with everyone in the movement, insisting that Obamacare was a disaster waiting to happen and would keep none of the promises that it made, all while destroying what was good and valuable in the private insurance market.

More than a decade later, when it was clear that the system was in trouble and that only greater government intervention and spending could save it, Heritage (in the form of Robert Moffit, Edmund Haislmaier, and Nina Owcharenko Schaefer) took something of a victory lap, detailing Obamacare’s manifest failures and arguing that it was long past time to scrap the whole experiment.

Keep reading

The Governor, the CEO & the FBI: Scandal Threatens New York Hospital

After taking the helm at New York’s financially troubled Nassau University Medical Center late last year, Megan C. Ryan stumbled upon something baffling in the books: a two-decade-long series of transactions engineered by New York State that may have shortchanged the hospital by a staggering $1 billion in matching funds.

As a hospital primarily serving patients on Medicare, Medicaid, or who are uninsured, the medical center qualified for federal matching grants tied to state contributions. Ryan’s discovery indicated that the state was having the medical center itself post its share of the match – for around 20 years at $50 million per year – essentially cheating it out of the state’s matching dollars. “We just couldn’t wrap our heads around how a hospital that serves the poor would be forced to put up tens of millions of dollars” in place of state funds, Ryan told RealClearInvestigations.

Ryan says she called James Dering, previously general counsel of the New York Department of Health, for a legal opinion about the financial arrangement. That opinion indicated it was improper.

What seems like a local tussle over health care has all the trappings of a bigger partisan political fight in the run-up to one of the more important races for governor next year in New York. 

Keep reading