The Federal Reserve's brain trust sees a slow recovery and high unemployment the next two years, according to the minutes of its meeting earlier this month.

Fed officials foresee the jobless rate - currently 10.2% - ranging between 9.3% and 9.7% next year and easing in 2011 to around 8.6%. That's slightly better than its outlook earlier this year.

Inflation is likely to remain below the Fed's projections, but there's concern that low interest rates may be encouraging investors to indulge in "excessive" speculation.

Instead of improving the economy to generate more jobs, President Obama is hurting it, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee tells Newsmax. Although Obama's efforts have been well intentioned, they have been “horrible,” Huckabee says.

“It’s just a lack of understanding of how the economy and the private sector work,” Huckabee says. “I think he believes he’s helping a lot, but any time when you even raise the threat of raising taxes and the cost of doing business and perhaps unionizing the employees of a business, nobody wants to hire.”

At this point, “Businesses are not hiring, they’re not spending, and they really can’t afford to, because they don’t know if their costs are going to go up dramatically with healthcare, tax increases, cap and trade, unionization of employees,” Huckabee says. “You put all those things out in front of them and tell them that’s what they may be facing, and they know they can’t exist now under the current employee load they have. So they certainly aren’t going to be adding new employees if they can avoid it.”

In the meantime, asked what Republicans should avoid, Huckabee says, “They have to avoid being part of a policy agenda that defies Republican principles. That’s one thing that hurt them before: big government, major spending, deficit spending.” Republicans also need to avoid “being narrowly partisan and just opposing everything just because they didn’t come up with it,” Huckabee says. “They should vigorously oppose things like the healthcare policy and cap and trade.” At the same time, Republicans “need to not only come up with an alternative, but they need to find things that they can compliment.”

The federal subsidies, offered to laid-off workers and their dependents and needed to be able continue health coverage from their previous employer, expired on November 30, 2009. Laid-off workers will not be able to continue the so called "Cobra" healthcare plan and will join the ranks of the uninsured.

The cost of Cobra premiums for a family vary from state to state- ranging from $979 in Idaho to $1826 in Washington. Under ARRA( American Recovery and Reinvestment Act), the federal subsidies for COBRA family coverage average $722 per month or about 65% of the cost.

The first recipients, who began receiving subsidies in March, the subsidies expired on November 30. For those who started receiving subsidies after March, the expiration will be nine months after their start-up date.

The Obama healthcare initiative will be the biggest unfunded federal mandate on the states in history. It will force dozens of states, particularly in the South, to abandon their low-tax ways and to move toward dramatically higher rates of taxation. It may even force Florida and Texas to impose an income tax!

In the Senate version of the bill, states must expand their Medicaid eligibility to cover everyone with an income that is 133 percent of the poverty level.

The House bill brings it up to 150 percent. But a host of states have kept their state taxes low precisely by so limiting eligibility for Medicaid that it essentially is only for seniors needing long-term care and not for poor younger people who require acute care.

For example, Texas covers only those who make 27 percent of the poverty level or less. Florida covers only 55 percent. Pennsylvania covers only 36 percent. Arkansas covers only 17 percent. North Dakota covers only 62 percent. Nebraska covers only 58 percent. Louisiana covers only 26 percent. Indiana covers only 26 percent.

The revenue required to bring these states up to the 133 percent level in the Senate bill or the 150 percent level in the House would be enormous. Even California only covers up to 106 percent of the poverty level.

All states except for Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Vermont and Wisconsin (plus the District of Columbia) will have to raise their eligibility for Medicaid under the Senate healthcare bill. And they will have to pay for part of the cost. Under the House bill, with a higher Medicaid eligibility standard, Massachusetts and Vermont would also have to pay more.

The Medicaid expansion provisions of the Senate bill are complex. In the first year of the program (2013), states must enroll anyone who earns less than 133 percent of the poverty level in their programs. For a family of four, the national average poverty level in 2009 is $22,000 a year. So any family that size that makes less than $29,000 would be eligible for Medicaid.

For the first three years of the program (2013-2015) the federal government would pay for all of the costs of the Medicaid expansion. But starting in the fourth year of operation -- 2016 -- states would be obliged to pay 10 percent of the extra cost.

While Obama has often spoken about how he won't raise taxes on the middle class, his healthcare legislation will require the governors to do so.

Particularly in those states with Democratic governors, it is easy to see how the backlash against these new taxes could fundamentally alter state politics.

The following table is a rough calculation of the cost each state will have to bear once it has to pick up 10 percent of the cost. These calculations are based on guidelines laid down for me by the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee. There has been no official data yet generated on how much the Senate or House provisions will cost the taxpayers in each state.

STATE SPENDING INCREASES IN MEDICAID REQUIRED BY SENATE HEALTH BILL

Alaska $39M Ariz. $217M Ark. $402M Calif. $1,428M Colo. $163M Del. $35M Fla. $909M Ga. $495M Hawaii $41M Idaho $97M Iowa $77M Ind. $586M Kan. $186M Ky. $199M La. $432M Md. $194M Mich. $570M Miss. $136M Mo. $836M

Mont. $29M Neb. $81M Nev. $54M N.H. $59M N.M. $102M N.C. $599M N.D. $14M Ohio $399M Okla. $190M Ore. $231M Pa. $1,490M S.C. $122M S.D. $33M Texas $2,749M Utah $58M Va. $601M Wash. $311M W.Va. $132M Wyo. $25M

These estimates were obtained by calculating the increase in Medicaid spending in each state to bring it up to the 133 percent level specified in the Senate bill. Then I applied the percentage of Medicaid spending in each state on acute care (mainly for the poor) as opposed to long-term care (mainly for the elderly). Finally, I took 10 percent of the increased state share of spending and listed it in the table above.

Long ago, the leaders of Britain and Canada set up socialized healthcare and then — BIG SURPRISE — found out they couldn't pay for what they had promised . . .

The British politicians relieved the country's financial burden in the traditional socialist way — they rationed care and specifically denied quality care to their nation's sickest citizens (mostly the elderly).

They justified this action by reasoning the sickest 5% would otherwise use up 50% of all healthcare dollars, which they said was "unfair."

The Canadians ran into the same problem and went to rationing, too. But at least some Canadians had a way out — they could get quality care in the United States. And that's how U.S. health insurance policies came to be the biggest sellers in Canada.

Now, these socialist steps could be taken in America . . .

• The new system will rely on severe progressive rationing . . .
• Many medical services will be denied, especially to the elderly . . .
• The elderly will be encouraged to die to save healthcare dollars . . .
• Doctors who provide too much care — or offer services not approved by the government — will be fined and even have their licenses revoked!

Shocking? Yes, but all of these steps have been taken in every socialist medical care system in the world. And that's been justified in the name of providing "universal healthcare."

I can't say this too strongly — Learn to take care of yourself and your family now. Download your FREE copy of Your Healthcare Is in Jeopardy — Protect Yourself to learn about these dangers and what you can do to protect your family!

Right now, we're short 16,000 primary-care physicians in this country and much more than that-nurses, and if Obama extends coverage to nearly everybody, that shortfall will double overnight!

• More government control is coming!
• Obamacare is rationed care!

If you think we've got problems with our healthcare system now, just wait until you see what your government has in store for you . . .

President Obama is pushing nationalized health insurance via the so-called public option, which is the first step toward socialized medicine.

All Republicans and at least a few Senate Democrats will vote against this now. But the compromise legislation will almost certainly include a "trigger" to adopt the public option in just a few years!

This is a sneaky backdoor way into socialized medicine.

This "trigger" will force the establishment of a government-run plan after the insurance companies fail to meet impossibly high standards for expanded coverage and reduced costs.

And that opens the door for the government takeover!

The loons behind this scheme actually believe a government takeover of healthcare will lower costs, even as it improves quality and expands coverage to all!

Of course that's impossible, and Medicare should be the obvious proof of that!

The Senate ObamaCare creates a new marriage penalty by imposing a tax on individuals who make $200,000 annually but hitting married couples making just $50,000 more.

If you have insurance, you get taxed. If you don't have insurance, you get taxed. If you need a life-saving medical device, you get taxed. If you need prescription medicines, you get taxed.

Voters Reject ObamaCare's Central Objective The Single-Payer Option AKA Government Run Socialized ObamaCare. Only 27% of voters nationwide favor a single-payer health care system (Government Run ObamaCare) where the federal government provides coverage for everyone.
Single-payer refers to one entity acting as administrator, or "payer." In the case of ObamaCare, a single-payer system would be setup such that one entity - a government run organization - would collect all health care fees, and pay out all health care costs.

Reid's Senate version of ObamaCare calls for:

• Hiding the $2.8 Trillion price tag by not accounting for actual costs.
• Major reductions in Medicare befits to seniors.
• Major Tax Increases on every American to pay for it all.
• Reid called for increasing the Medicare payroll tax

The Senate ObamaCare creates a new marriage penalty by imposing a tax on individuals who make $200,000 annually but hitting married couples making just $50,000 more.

If you have insurance, you get taxed. If you don't have insurance, you get taxed. If you need a life-saving medical device, you get taxed. If you need prescription medicines, you get taxed.