Thank you, everyone, for your continuing support and interest in Hall v. Sebelius, the Medicare Lawsuit.

On June 14, 2010, our final brief will be filed with the US District Court of Washington, DC, after which, Judge Rosemary Collyer will schedule oral arguments and then render a decision on the issue of whether one may opt out of Medicare without foregoing Social Security benefits.

Please subscribe to our updates and follow the lawsuit as it reaches its conclusion in the US District Court.

~ Martha de Forest, Executive Director

Filed on Oct.9, 2008, in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Brian Hall, et al. v. Kathleen Sebelius, et al. charges the Social Security Administration (SSA) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) with improperly adopting illegal and coercive policies that deny otherwise eligible retirees their rightful Social Security benefits if those retirees choose not to enroll in Medicare.

Lead plaintiff Brian Hall and plaintiffs Richard “Dick” Armey, John Kraus, Lewis Randall, and Norman Rogers seek a restraining order and a temporary and permanent injunction prohibiting SSA and HHS from implementing policies that force American citizens to participate in Medicare, the federal government’s voluntary health insurance entitlement program.

In addition to the legal, due process, constitutional and discrimination issues raised in Hall v. Leavitt , the lawsuit also affects the freedom of individuals to choose the medical services that best meet their needs.  

The plaintiffs hope to secure that freedom both for themselves and for future retirees by pursuing this legal action. Help them achieve Medicare freedom by donating to support the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs believe the coercive rules deny individuals their civil liberties, violate their right to privacy, and deny them the right to make choices about their own health care.

In addition to the legal, due process, constitutional and discrimination issues raised by the Social Security Administration’s actions, which should concern all Americans, the plaintiffs also believe the rules are self-defeating from a financial perspective. Why? Because if even a small percentage of Medicare-eligible retirees were to opt out of the program it could save taxpayers about $1.5 billion per year now and $3.4 billion or more per year by 2017, relieving some of the financial pressure on the fiscally insolvent Medicare program.

According to the 2008 Annual Report of the Boards of Trustees of the Federal Hospital Insurance and the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Funds , Medicare expenditures reached almost $432 billion in 2007, or approximately 3.2 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP). With the retirement of the Baby Boomers, the first of whom (those born in 1946) will become eligible for Medicare after 2010, these expenditures will increase significantly in coming decades.

Indeed, using intermediate economic and demographic assumptions, the Medicare Trustees estimated that the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund will be insolvent by 2019.

If just 1 percent of current retirees chose not to participate in Medicare, Medicare expenditures would decrease by about $1.5 billion per year immediately and by approximately $3.4 billion per year by 2017. Program cost savings would continue to increase by greater amounts for several decades as the “Baby Boomers” retire.

We calculated this savings estimate using data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, and the annual report of the Medicare Trustees.

* For more information, read the complete Backgrounder.   PDF

Be a part of the most important lawsuit in the country right now. We are asking the District Court of Washington DC, “Do we have the constitutional right to choose our health insurance after signing up for Social Security?” We have drawn a line in the sand.

That’s right, we are asking, In a Free Country, Who Decides? The Fund for Personal Liberty wants to establish that you make the final decision on who provides your medical insurance during your retirement. We are underwriting the Medicare Lawsuit arguing that retirees should be able to opt-out of Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) without forgoing their Social Security benefits.

The Medicare Lawsuit has received extensive media coverage including the outlets listed above.

Would you help us fight in court rather than have to withdraw due to lack of funds? I want to donate NOW

In a nutshell we have the following:

• A lawsuit arguing a constitutional right to privately contract for health insurance after starting to draw on Social Security benefits.
• An attorney who lives and breaths the constitution and has pled our case since October.
• A David vs. Goliath situation that did not go unnoticed by the most recent judge.

Those are the plusses. On the other side of the balance sheet we have:

• A government with “infinite” resources to fight against your freedom.
• Short term expenses ranging from $30K – $80K and the potential for expenses ranging from $300K – $700K should this be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.

CONTRIBUTIONS

Surprisingly, we need small donations as much as we need large donations. But please don’t hold back knowing this. Fighting the jumbo bureaucracy known as the US Department of Health and Human Services is not for the faint-hearted.

I WANT TO DONATE NOW

I look forward to hearing from you!

Martha de Forest
Executive Director

P.S. During our first fiscal year ending May 31, 2009, 93.0% of spending was for the Medicare Lawsuit and 7.0% was for administration and fundraising combined. Thank you again for helping us litigate for your health freedom.

I WANT TO DONATE NOW