ALL OT's REPORT TO PAC- called to action now!

Ted

Gold Meritorious Patron
What does the Church of Scientology have to do with a health bill?


The bill would actually help SO and org staffs more than they are being helped now.

The church opposition to the bill is just a ruse to collect more money for some other purpose.

LRH had a penchant for positioning against things that most people would themselves reject: world war, nukes, inflation, Communism, authority, and more. The church is just following his lead in that regard.
 

Div6

Crusader
what if the regging is really collecting money to help stop the new bill Obama is soon to pass?
wouldn't the Co$ have to insure their staffers?


http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

"To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."

Can you say "Illegal"? I thought you could....
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

"To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates."

Can you say "Illegal"? I thought you could....

No. Influencing legislation is not a substantial part of the CofS's activities. There was a small amount of campaign activity re Jeff Stone as discovered by Anon Orange, but they don't obviously do a lot of that.

Paul
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
The bill would actually help SO and org staffs more than they are being helped now.

Yeah? Which part of it?

All 1018 pages are in this PDF file: http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

I'm glancing through it, but if you know where to look it might save me some time and I would be very grateful. :)

EDIT: I electronically skimmed through it. I didn't see anything relevant to the CofS in terms of auditors being classified as "healthcare providers."

Paul
 
Last edited:

Div6

Crusader
No. Influencing legislation is not a substantial part of the CofS's activities. There was a small amount of campaign activity re Jeff Stone as discovered by Anon Orange, but they don't obviously do a lot of that.

Paul



Using "Obama's Health Care legislation" as a pretense to raise money for the IAS doesn't raise red flags for you? It appears to me to be a prima facie example of abuse of the 501(c)3 charter...
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Using "Obama's Health Care legislation" as a pretense to raise money for the IAS doesn't raise red flags for you? It appears to me to be a prima facie example of abuse of the 501(c)3 charter...

SUBSTANTIAL, it says, substantial. Read the law again. Influencing legislation is not a substantial part of their activities, at least in my estimation.

Whether or not I think they should be doing it at all is neither here nor there. And if they are doing it fraudulently, again that is something else.

Paul
 

shadow

Patron with Honors
Small bits from the bill:

Employers including non profits (pg 52/53), must offer emp. health plans that have minimum requirements within 5 years (pg 17). Automatic enrollment is required and the employee must opt out of the plan if they do not want it, so there will be records. The employer must contribute a percent of the premiums (Pg 143-146) based on individual (72.5%) or family (65%). Employers may offer coverage from insurance companies or be self insured, but self insured employers will be studies for solvency, etc (pg 22). Employers may opt out of offering coverage by paying 8% of the annual payroll amount (pg 149). There may be no salary reduction for coverage (pg 147).

There are whistleblower protections (page 51)- these never really help the individual in reality, but opens a path for the disgruntled to complain. Penalties for employer non-compliance is $100/affected employee/day (pg 162).

Individuals must have insurance or be taxed at 2.5% of adjusted gross income (pg 167). Individuals that are low income can get affordability credits and this involves state medicaid (pg 130).

They will not be able to just send the SO for care under Medicaid like they do now.

There is an exemption in the tax code 59B, 1402g1 for certain religious sects where they have to object to any support on the basis of religion and have been established prior to the end of 1950.

Bonus: Includes access for drug abuse help help (pg 23), but all medical care that is covered applies to generally accepted standards of medical practice (pg 27). Narconon is not generally accepted as a standard of practice and will get more scrutiny that before.

that is enough...:coolwink:
 

Ted

Gold Meritorious Patron
Yeah? Which part of it?

All 1018 pages are in this PDF file: http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

I'm glancing through it, but if you know where to look it might save me some time and I would be very grateful. :)

EDIT: I electronically skimmed through it. I didn't see anything relevant to the CofS in terms of auditors being classified as "healthcare providers."

Paul


Oh, god. The bill is too long to read. Let's just vote on it!

Supposedly there are 45 million people in the US who are not covered by any insurance. I can only suppose SO and org staffs would be included in that 45 million as it includes illegal aliens as well as citizens.

Abortions, covered!

Illness, covered!

Black eyes, broken bones, abrasions, contusions, covered!

If you are staff, what's not to like about that?

If you are elite management, well...
 

everfree

Patron Meritorious
what if the regging is really collecting money to help stop the new bill Obama is soon to pass?
wouldn't the Co$ have to insure their staffers?

Sadly no. Insuring or otherwise caring for their staffers has never been a concern for the church.
 

shadow

Patron with Honors
The bill specifically excludes undocumented aliens for federal affordability credits (section 246). They cannot participate in employer plans if they cannot be legally employed. I am not sure how undocumented aliens will benefit from this bill. They will still get some medical treatment from non-profit places that treat the indigent and undocumented, it is not addressed in this health bill.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Sadly no. Insuring or otherwise caring for their staffers has never been a concern for the church.

Insuring gets done when it is expedient or inescapable. CSI had Workers Comp insurance at PAC in 1996, for example. Maybe they had it nationwide for 20 years, but that specific I gave I am sure about.

Paul
 

everfree

Patron Meritorious
I may be alone here, but I really don't see this email as a sign of particular desperation on the part of the church: semi-hysterical "calls to action" and the like are par for the course.

In CofS, everything is ~always~ vitally important - especially to the poor staffer who will undoubtedly be up all night and have to cancel the libs she had planned unless a $ quota is met. Just as every event is always "the biggest news ever".

This is just another attempt to scare the public into giving more money or otherwise provide support. Ho hum.
 

everfree

Patron Meritorious
Insuring gets done when it is expedient or inescapable. CSI had Workers Comp insurance at PAC in 1996, for example. Maybe they had it nationwide for 20 years, but that specific I gave I am sure about.

Paul

Is that right? Good to know. I have no knowledge of the church's worker's comp history - but I can say that I never heard of a staffer putting in a claim. Do you know of any who have? I'd be interested in hearing about it.

The church does as little towards insurance as it can possibly get away with. In PAC, I believe it is usual for a staffer needing medical attention to get a welfare medical coupon as an indigent. I know of a heart patient staffer who had to be seen an hour away from PAC because a catholic hospital was the only place that would take him on as a charity case.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
Is that right? Good to know. I have no knowledge of the church's worker's comp history - but I can say that I never heard of a staffer putting in a claim. Do you know of any who have? I'd be interested in hearing about it.

I only knew about it because the woman who did my Leaving Sec Check on the RPF's RPF — actually an old friend from Saint Hill — had been getting many, many chiropractic treatments after a work injury and they were being paid by Workers Comp.

Paul
 

everfree

Patron Meritorious
I only knew about it because the woman who did my Leaving Sec Check on the RPF's RPF — actually an old friend from Saint Hill — had been getting many, many chiropractic treatments after a work injury and they were being paid by Workers Comp.

Paul

So the injury was a result of work performed as a staffer and not an outside job? Wow.

It just doesn't sound like the CofS to me to: 1. admit that anything within CofS could ever be so imperfect that someone could get injured. 2. Willingly be involved with a government agency, especially one that could conceivably inspect working conditions. 3. Allow something to be reported if it were to possibly cost them more money. 4. Regularly allow a staffer time of post for, well, anything, let alone chiro treatment.... actually, none of it sounds like the happy happy group of cold hearted bastards I've come to know and love as the CofS.

Oh well, sometimes I forget most Scientologists are actually nice people who want to help others, so I shouldn't be utterly surprised something humane happened.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
So the injury was a result of work performed as a staffer and not an outside job? Wow.

It just doesn't sound like the CofS to me to: 1. admit that anything within CofS could ever be so imperfect that someone could get injured. 2. Willingly be involved with a government agency, especially one that could conceivably inspect working conditions. 3. Allow something to be reported if it were to possibly cost them more money. 4. Regularly allow a staffer time of post for, well, anything, let alone chiro treatment.... actually, none of it sounds like the happy happy group of cold hearted bastards I've come to know and love as the CofS.

Oh well, sometimes I forget most Scientologists are actually nice people who want to help others, so I shouldn't be utterly surprised something humane happened.

I don't know the details of it at all. For contrast, here's a personal experience:

A year or so earlier I was on the decks in PAC. It was after Christmas, and Winter Wonderland was being dismantled. There were only a couple of people there at this time. I walked out onto a flat piece of plywood flooring, 12' above the concrete ground. I had stood in the middle of this the previous day. This time, the support under it had been almost entirely removed, and it collapsed. I ended up landing on my back 12 feet below. The heavy plywood sheet, one corner down, missed me.

It was a very interesting experience, one I can't fully explain. It really was 12', as I measured it. That is a long way to fall onto concrete and land on your back. I was pretty relaxed as I fell, just the way it turned out, not that I had trained in how to fall or anything. My body went smack and my head hadn't hit yet. I knew it would SMASH into the ground. It went bump — I hardly felt it at all. That was really strange. And you know how you stub your toe, say, and there's that sickening half second before the pain registers, when you know it's going to hurt like hell but it hasn't quite got there yet? So I sort of flinched and waited for the pain from the broken legs and arms to register . . . nothing happened. I cautiously wriggled my extremities and everything felt OK and nothing hurt.

I lay there for a minute getting my bearings, then slowly rolled over and stood up. By this time one of the others had arrived. She was an auditor and saying nothing. I told her she could speak as it was fine, I wasn't anaten at all. She still kept her mouth shut for about ten minutes.

I had the most amazing bruises on my back, all colours of the rainbow, and it was tender for a bit, but no obvious permanent damage, or internal bleeding etc. I got a touch assist, whoopee. But no x-ray, or doctor visit, or any interest whatsoever. That was much more like the normal CofS reaction to injury. I think what annoyed me the most was not the lack of attention to the physical injuries but the lack of care regarding the criminal negligence of whoever had left that unsupported flooring like that, an accident just waiting to happen.

Paul
 
Top