Scott Brown leads Martha Coakley by one point in MA Senate race

Story here on the American Spectator. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

The much-anticipated Public Policy Polling survey shows Republican Scott Brown leading Democrat Martha Coakley 48 percent to 47 percent in the Massachusetts special election campaign to replace the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy. Republicans are more enthusiastic about turning out than Democrats by 66 percent to 48 percent; Brown leads among independents by 63 percent to 31 percent; Brown’s favorability among unaffiliated voters is 70 percent. Independents oppose the Democratic health care plan 59 percent to 27 percent. Brown has a net favorable rating of 32 points.

The full poll results are here (pdf).

Are Democrats seeking to register criminals and illegal aliens to vote?

Article from the Washington Times.

Excerpt:

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, have plans to ram through legislation that will produce universal voter registration. No matter what they claim, the rule changes will make it possible for illegal aliens to register to vote and for others to register multiple times.

The proposal is to register everyone on every welfare list, everyone getting unemployment insurance, everyone with a driver’s license, everyone who has had run-ins with the legal system, everyone owning any property – basically everyone on every list the government keeps. People will be registered to vote whether or not they want to be registered. If individuals are on any public record, they will be automatically registered.

Obviously a lot of illegal aliens have driver’s licenses, and many get other government benefits. Quite a few have rap sheets. People’s names and other identification information are frequently recorded differently across these different lists, which means that one could be registered a separate time for every slight variation in how their personal information is kept on file.

The legislation is also expected to give felons the right to vote.

This may be their way of insulating themselves from the wrath of law-abiding voters. We’re not out of the woods yet.

Prestigious Mayo Clinic will no longer accept Medicare patients

Story from the Wall Street Journal.

Excerpt:

President Obama last year praised the Mayo Clinic as a “classic example” of how a health-care provider can offer “better outcomes” at lower cost. Then what should Americans think about the famous Minnesota medical center’s decision to take fewer Medicare patients?

Specifically, Mayo said last week it will no longer accept Medicare patients at one of its primary care clinics in Arizona. Mayo said the decision is part of a two-year pilot program to determine if it should also drop Medicare patients at other facilities in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota, which serve more than 500,000 seniors.

Mayo says it lost $840 million last year treating Medicare patients, the result of the program’s low reimbursement rates. Its hospital and four clinics in Arizona—including the Glendale facility—lost $120 million. Providers like Mayo swallow some of these Medicare losses, while also shifting the cost by charging more to private patients and insurers.

Of course, only governments can lose that much money and pretend they don’t have to change. “Mayo Clinic loses a substantial amount of money every year due to the reimbursement schedule under Medicare,” the institution said. “Decades of underfunding and paying for volume rather than value in Medicare have led us to this decision.”

If the government cannot deliver services for patients on Medicare, then why should we give them control of all of health care? It doesn’t make any sense.