Categories

Nov 21

Obamanocare Mandates A Government Commission That Will Ration Care and Restrict Treatment Options

Despite inexorable denials by Obama, Pelosi and Congressional Democrats, the basic fiscal tenet of Obamanocare is rationing of healthcare. Plain and simple. Ignore the prevarications about rationing, cost savings, compassionate care, keeping your own doctor who will make the healthcare decisions along with you, etc. These are all part of the nefarious scheming intended to deceive the public about their ultimate goal of government control of healthcare, transfer of wealth and further aggrandizement of government power.

The following editorial from The Wall Street Journal, delineates some of the inimical dictates of the legislation.

The Rationing Commission
Meet the unelected body that will dictate future medical decisions.

As usual, the most dangerous parts of ObamaCare aren't receiving the scrutiny they deserve—and one of the least examined is a new commission to tell Congress how to control health spending. Democrats are quietly attempting to impose a "global budget" on Medicare, with radical implications for U.S. medicine.

Like most of Europe, the various health bills stipulate that Congress will arbitrarily decide how much to spend on health care for seniors every year—and then invest an unelected board with extraordinary powers to dictate what is covered and how it will be paid for. White House budget director Peter Orszag calls this Medicare commission "critical to our fiscal future" and "one of the most potent reforms."

On that last score, he's right. Prominent health economist Alain Enthoven has likened a global budget to "bombing from 35,000 feet, where you don't see the faces of the people you kill."

As envisioned by the Senate Finance Committee, the commission—all 15 members appointed by the President—would have to meet certain budget targets each year. Starting in 2015, Medicare could not grow more rapidly on a per capita basis than by a measure of inflation. After 2019, it could only grow at the same rate as GDP, plus one percentage point.
The theory is to let technocrats set Medicare payments free from political pressure, as with the military base closing commissions. But that process presented recommendations to Congress for an up-or-down vote. Here, the commission's decisions would go into effect automatically if Congress couldn't agree within six months on different cuts that met the same target. The board's decisions would not be subject to ordinary notice-and-comment rule-making, or even judicial review.

Yet if the goal really is political insulation, then the Medicare Commission is off to a bad start. To avoid a senior revolt, Finance Chairman Max Baucus decided to bar his creation from reducing benefits or raising the eligibility age, which meant that it could only cut costs by tightening Medicare price controls on doctors and hospitals. Doctors and hospitals, naturally, were furious.

So the Montana Democrat bowed and carved out exemptions for such providers, along with hospices and suppliers of medical equipment. Until 2019 the commission will thus only be allowed to attack Medicare Advantage, the program that gives 10 million seniors private insurance choices, and to raise premiums for Medicare prescription drug coverage, which is run by private contractors. Notice a political pattern?

But a decade from now, such limits are off—which also happens to be roughly the time when ObamaCare's spending explodes. The hard budget cap means there is only so much money to be divvied up for care, with no account for demographic changes, such as longer life spans, or for the increasing incidence of diabetes, heart disease and other chronic conditions.
Worse, it makes little room for medical innovations. The commission is mandated to go after "sources of excess cost growth," meaning treatments that are too expensive or whose coverage will boost spending. If researchers find a pricey treatment for Alzheimer's in 2020, that might be banned because it would add new costs and bust the global budget. Or it might decide that "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller," as President Obama put it in June.

In other words, the Medicare commission would come to function much like the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, which rations care in England. Or a similar Washington state board created in 2003 to control costs. Its handiwork isn't pretty.

The Washington commission, called the Health Technology Assessment, is manned by 11 bureaucrats, including a chiropractor and a "naturopath" who focuses on alternative, er, remedies like herbs and massage therapy. They consider the clinical effectiveness but above all the cost of medical procedures and technologies. If they decide something isn't worth the money, then Olympia won't cover it for some 750,000 Medicaid patients, public employees and prisoners.

So far, the commission has banned knee arthroscopy for osteoarthritis, discography for chronic back pain, and implantable infusion pumps for pain not related to cancer. This year, it is targeting such frivolous luxuries as knee replacements, spinal cord stimulation, a specialized autism therapy and MRIs of the abdomen, pelvis or breasts for cancer. It will also rule on routine ultrasounds for pregnancy, which have a "high" efficacy but also a "high" cost.

Currently, the commission is pushing through the most restrictive payment policy in the nation for drug-eluting cardiac stents—simply because bare metal stents are cheaper, even as they result in worse outcomes. If a patient is wheeled into the operating room with chest pains in an emergency, doctors will first have to determine if he's covered by a state plan, then the diameter of his blood vessels and his diabetic condition to decide on the appropriate stent. If they don't, Washington will not reimburse them for "inappropriate care."

If Democrats impose such a commission nationwide, it would constitute a radical change in U.S. health care. The reason that physician discretion—not Washington's cost-minded judgments—is at the core of medicine is that usually there are no "right" answers. The data from large clinical trials produce generic conclusions that rarely apply to individual patients, who have vastly different biologies, response rates to treatments, and often multiple conditions. A breakthrough drug like Herceptin, which is designed for a certain genetic subset of breast-cancer patients, might well be ruled out under such a standardized approach.

It's possible this global budget could become an accounting fiction, like the automatic Medicare cuts Congress currently pretends it will impose on doctors. But health care's fiscal pressures will be even stronger than they are today if ObamaCare passes in anything like its current form. And that is when politicians will want this remote, impersonal and unaccountable central committee to do the inevitable dirty work of denying care.

The only way to take the politics out of health care is to give individuals more power to control medical dollars. And the first step should be not to create even more government spending commitments. The core problem with government-run health care is that it doesn't make decisions in the best interests of patients, but in the best interests of government.

URL   http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703792304574504020025055040.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 31

Congress Wants to Penalize Doctors If They Provide More Care To The Elderly Than The Government Deems Appropriate

"The Senate Finance Committee health bill released last week controls doctors by cutting their pay if they give older patients more care than the government deems appropriate. Section 3003(b) (p. 683) punishes doctors who land in the 90th percentile or above on what they provide for seniors on Medicare by withholding 5 percent of their compensation.

This withhold provision forces doctors to choose between treating their patients and avoiding government penalties. HMOs used the same cost-cutting device in the early '90s until it was deemed dangerous to patients and outlawed. Now, lawmakers want to use it against the most vulnerable patients, the elderly. This bill and four others under negotiation also would slash about $500 billion from future Medicare funding."

Do you really want the Government dictating your medical care?

Read: Treating seniors as clunkers'

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 28

The Government Should Not Be Running Healthcare…

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 26

7 Lies in Under 2 Minutes For Obama

If Obama were a product, we would be able to return him as it doesn’t do what it claims to do – false advertising.

If Obama were a security guard and claimed not to have committed any felonies or crimes on his employment application but he lied and actually did, he would lose his job.

If Obama were a professional, he could be sued for breach of contract which could then be invalidated.

If Obama were a surgeon who stated that he would perform one operation on a patient instead but performed a different one, he would not only be sued and lose big time but would probably have his surgical privileges taken away, be censured by the state board and even lose his license to practice medicine.

Well, Obama is President and has egregiously lied countless times, not doing what he claimed that he would do. If he were employed under the same rules that are required of those Americans who still have a job, he would probably lose his job. Since in a sense we are his employer, we should fire him:

IMPEACH OBAMA

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 20

Democrats Plan To Ram Their Healthcare Legislation Down The Sore Throats of Angry Americans

We vehemently oppose the Democrats’ actions on healthcare reform and even more egregiously, their contemptuous and dismissive responses to an angry American public strongly against the legislation. Obama and Congressional Democrats have stated in no uncertain terms that they will impose this healthcare reform on us no matter what.

We have dissected this reform in previous editorials. This bill is ostensibly about healthcare but in actuality IT IS NOT. It will not lower costs, increase quality, or provide universal coverage which is the Democrat’s mantra. Instead, it will result in skyrocketing insurance costs far in excess of what would occur if nothing were done at all as well as massive increases in taxes. It will also lead to rationing, long waits, poorer quality of care, loss of confidentiality or our healthcare records, withholding of care and therapeutic options, increased morbidity and mortality of Americans, etc. Shall we go on?

In its essence, this bill is a naked, corrupt power grab by the Federal government, comprising an additional 17% of our economy under its control for a sum total of 43%. Its covert intentions are to steal additional freedoms and rights from us and make us more subservient and under greater government control. If you have scrutinized what legislation is available for public examination, read fact supported commentary and parsed the Democrats’ ideology, you will realize unequivocally that these conclusions are not paranoid rants. THEY ARE FACT BASED REALITY.

WE MUST RELENTLESS FIGHT AGAINST PASSAGE OF THIS LEGISLATION!!



The following is an extremely important and trenchant editorial posted in the October 19th edition of Investors Business Daily that sums up the current dire situation:

Dems Go Nuclear

Health Care: Democrats seem set to use the "nuclear option" to ram their government health takeover into law. Bipartisanship already looked dead; now it looks extinct.

The health care revolution the Democratic Congress has planned — with its inevitable medical rationing, thousands of dollars in increased insurance premiums, and coverage of illegal aliens — may get placed on the familiar fast track used to spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars this year.

Instead of the 60 votes needed in the Senate if proper parliamentary rules were followed, passing this reshaping of the medical system as a "budget reconciliation" measure would mean only a simple majority was needed.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., accused of cheating on his taxes, last week held a hearing to let the House version of the health reform bill be passed this way. As the Washington weekly Human Events reports, Democratic leaders "have apparently invoked the 'nuclear option' to shut out Republicans and ensure the bill is passed before the end of the year."

So all those "town hells" during the summer, where senators and congressmen were given an earful about passing secretly written thousand-page bills without reading them, will be ignored.

In the age of the Internet, Congress refuses to post for computer access the most consequential legislation in history, as far as its effect on human lives (and deaths) is concerned, before voting on it.

The people will have to wait until it's all signed, sealed and delivered before finding out exactly how this government-imposed monster will devour health care as Americans have known it for all their lives.

And why? Because both congressional Democrats and the White House are afraid of the power of the people. Just as they are both afraid to give the opposing party a seat at the negotiating table.

Rangel didn't allow Republicans to offer amendments in committee. Why not? Fear that Democrats might be embarrassed by having to reject a Republican amendment to protect Medicare, for one thing. And fear in general that the people might catch wind of a few bipartisan ideas that sound more sensible than their big government solutions.

The magnitude of what Congress is about to do is staggering. The federal government is about to begin dictating Americans' behavior regarding the most intimate and vital area of life — health.

You play ball with Uncle Sam and pay thousands and thousands of dollars for far more expensive insurance than what you're now used to, or you get slapped with fines. And as yet we don't know how heavy those fines will be — or if noncooperation with the new system will mean more than fines.

Doesn't Congress owe it to us to provide time to mull this over before it takes force?
Shouldn't the exact wording of this radical transformation of our medical system be available on the Internet for weeks before a floor vote takes place?

And shouldn't medical experts, health care providers and legal analysts get the opportunity to read every word of such a bill carefully, then give their well-considered analysis to concerned Americans?

Apparently not, according to those now running Washington.

To them, this is a rare opportunity to take a giant step toward single-payer, European-style socialized medicine. And they have no intention of letting the people stop them.

URL: http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=509361

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 19

Healthcare For All Has Become Punishment For All

The following op-ed was written by well respected physician,  Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D. In it, Dr. Vliet delineates her vehement opposition to the present healthcare reform.

In the 2008 campaign, we heard healthcare in this country is “broken” and must be “reformed.” We heard “healthcare reform” would be the signature piece of an Obama Presidency. We were promised no new taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 per year. We heard promises of transparency in government. We heard promises of a White House that would listen to all. Now that President Obama and a Democratic majority are in office, what have we gotten?

The healthcare proposals have become a massive power grab to control your money, your health options, your businesses, your liberty, and ultimately your life. It is not about insuring the poor.We already have Medicaid to cover the poor.

What the Democratic majority is doing to healthcare in this country is a crime. Punishment won’t fall on Congress and the President, who are excluded from the healthcare proposals. Punishment falls on the American people, especially the elderly.

Word of a new “stealth” strategy to ram healthcare “reform” through the Senate raises even more cause for alarm and adds to the crime of this massive power grab. The plan appears to be for Senator Majority Leader Reid to merge the two Senate bills that have passed out of committee, and attach them as an amendment to a House TARP bill, already passed by the House but curiously gathering dust in the Senate. Once the Senate votes on this “TARP” bill with the healthcare amendment tucked neatly inside, the healthcare punishment is a “done deal” without further debate. Such an abuse of power and due process would be an unforgiveable crime against the American people, perpetrated by the very people elected to represent us.

Instead of “health insurance for all,” the House and Senate healthcare bills have become punishment for all. Here is the list of Americans who face the healthcare “reform” punishment:

- Punishment for the sick. Those who have medical expenses each year will no longer beable to deduct those expenses on taxes until the expenses reach 10% of adjusted gross income (AGI). The current deduction is set at expenses above 7.5% of AGI, so the Senate plan now ADDS a 2.5% tax on those who are already paying out of pocket for medical expenses. Clearly, if someone is spending more than 7.5% on medical costs,that person is ill. The Senate bill makes the sick even sicker from the stress of having to pay more taxes!

- Punishment for the elderly. Medicare cuts of 404 BILLION is the latest figure released by the Senate; earlier the White House budget office said $500 Billion – more than a full year’s Medicare budget – would have to be cut from Medicare. How can anyone begin to think these cuts will not penalize the elderly by delaying, rationing, or denying treatment?

- Punishment for young people. Young healthy people who do not buy government mandated insurance will be punished with the form of a excise tax – reported amounts have been from $1900 to $3800 per person.

- Punishment for anyone not paying the excise tax. The IRS fine for non-payment of tax can be $25,000 and a year in jail. So those who are punished by the new tax risk being accused of a tax crime if they don’t buy government-mandated insurance and who don’t pay the penalty tax.

- Punishment for insurance companies. Companies providing “generous health insurance plans” will be hit with a 35% tax.

- Punishment for consumers who buy “generous” health insurance policies, as the tax on insurance companies is passed on to purchasers.

- Punishment for those who buy their own health insurance…a new 40% tax. Does it really make sense to punish the responsible people who take care of their own healthcare bills?

- Punishment for low income seniors, Hispanics, and Blacks who will lose their Medicare Advantage program under the new proposals.

- Punishment for those with Health Savings Accounts – HSAs will be extinct.

- Punishment for specialists who serve mainly elderly patients, such as cardiologists and oncologists. Such specialists are slated to have their reimbursements for services slashed by 44% under the Senate bill.

- Punishment for medical device makers in the form of new taxes (a tax that will be passed on to consumers).

- Punishment for all doctors, who are required to purchase expensive new computersystems and software to convert to Electronic Medical Records to meet the 2014 mandates in the Stimulus Bill.

- Punishment for those who value their medical privacy. The Stimulus Bill requires all physicians, beginning in 2014, to send patients’ medical records directly to the federal health czar without further permission from patients.

- Punishment for all 50 State governments. Already running at a deficit with the recession, State governments face catastrophic increases in costs with Medicaid costs being shifted to them by the Federal government under the new proposals.

- Punishment for everyone, due to Speaker Pelosi’s proposal for a National Sales Tax (also called a VAT) to pay for healthcare reform. This new tax would hit everyone hard in a recession, and would be on TOP of existing state and local sales taxes.

- Punishments for all. All, that is, except the exempted elite: members of Congress, the President and his family, trial lawyers, and Unions (SEIU, AFL-CIO, and others). The exempted elite retain their private care while becoming the very ones who force more taxes, penalties, higher costs as punishment on the rest of us.

This reminds me of the Soviet Union when I visited there in 1974 and 1975. The Soviet ruling elite were the only ones with cars, comfortable apartments…and access to the best healthcare.

I understand at a personal and professional level the perils of government-run healthcare. I have patients in my practice who have come many countries with government run healthcare that doesn’t address women’s unique health needs. I live in a state with a large Native American population, whose healthcare under the Indian Health Service, run by the federal government, has been abysmal. I have personally had an emergency hospitalization in England. I am walking today because I had the best spine surgery care in the world at Johns Hopkins. If I had lived in Britain, or Canada, or Europe and had to wait for MRIs and surgery, I would paralyzed from the neck down.

I will never agree that nationalized healthcare anywhere provides better quality of care than we have in the United States. I am not alone. Recent polls by different organizations have found that 80-90% of M.D.’s and D.O.’s oppose government-controlled healthcare.

Don’t be fooled by the American Medical Associations endorsement of Obamacare. Only 17% of practicing physicians actually belong to the AMA. Last week’s “white coat” photo op at the White House was a carefully selected group of 2008 campaign donors “Doctors for Obama.” They were NOT anymore representative of practicing physicians across this country than the AMA.

The American people should be even more alarmed by a recent Investors Business Daily poll: 45% of doctors who responded said they would retire or resign from medicine rather than practice medicine under government control. Who will take care of patients then?

The proposed healthcare plans are the most massive transfer of power to the executive branch of government that has ever occurred or has even been contemplated. This concentration of power in the executive branch violates the Constitutional requirement for balance of power, and for separation of powers among the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government.

This crime against the American people is far worse than the Stamp Act levied by King George.

That was the final straw that set off the first American Revolution.

©Elizabeth Lee Vliet M.D. 10-12-2009

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 14

Obama Dishonestly Tries To Create The Illusion Of Physician Support For His Healthcare Legislation

Obama held a propaganda photo-op on the White House lawn October 5th, assembling 150 physicians decked out in white lab coats who support his reform plans. The purpose was to create the illusion of strong generalized physicians support for the healthcare legislation. Fortunately, the average American saw right through this deception.

Investigating this matter further revealed that these convened physicians contributed to Obama’s campaign. Many were part of the liberal group Doctors for America, supported by the Democratic National Committee. Assisting in this deception was the Center for American Progress, a far left group funded by George Soros.

No matter what study has been conducted, an overwhelming number of doctors are vehemently against Obama’s plans for socialized medicine. As a matter of fact, in an Investor Business Daily study conducted, 45% of physicians indicated that they would consider retiring early or leaving practice if the legislation went into effect. This translates into 360,000 doctors! Similar sentiments have been voiced by nurses as well. Obama’s disingenuous and dishonest rhetoric would have you believe otherwise.

See video:

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Oct 1

Passage of Obamanocare Threatens Your Benefits, Choices of Doctors and Plans and Medical Care in General

If Obamanocare is approved by Congress, you will be in for a startling discovery as paraphrased in the parlance of Congressional Democrats:

“'If you've got health insurance, you like your doctors, you like your plan, too f..king bad - you won’t necessarily see your doctor or maybe any doctor, for that matter, for a long time. And forget about your plan, we forced it into bankruptcy by our mandates and pricing policies."

Read: A Future With Fewer Health Benefits

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 17

Physicians Overwhelmingly Oppose Obamanocare Despite What Obama, Congress and the Media Would Have You Believe

Most of the news media, ideological adherents of the more liberal Democrats and staunch supporters of healthcare reform, would have you believe that a majority of physicians are in favor of Obamanocare. They use meretricious arguments with deceptive presentations of information and facts which often are knowingly false just to try to convince the public that doctor support the proposals so you should too.

A common tactic is to cite the AMA’s support of the changes while also speciously informing the public that it is “the association that represents American doctors” or that it is the “primary lobbying association for physicians”. This further “confirms” the public’s misconception of the role and importance of the AMA and adds credence to the posture these presentations are taking.

For most American doctors, the AMA is irrelevant and inconsequential. Despite the high level of importance that the media accords the AMA for purposes of their rhetoric, only 18% of American physicians are members and most belong for purposes other than lobbying. The AMA does some lobbying but that is not its primary purpose and furthermore, there is little physician support behind its positions. Many of the small minority of physicians who were members have been so outraged by the AMA’s public position that they are defecting and cancelling their memberships.

A recent IBD/TIPP Poll of 1376 randomly selected physicians revealed that two thirds opposed the present proposals. Even more significant is that 45% of physicians would consider leaving medicine or retiring early if one of these plans is passed. This extremely high percentage illustrates the immense dissatisfaction that physicians have with the present legislation and the grave consequences that the proposals would have on healthcare in general.

Read: 45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 14

Obama Shows Little Interest In Tort Reform

Although Obama claims he that he may “think about considering” some test programs regarding tort reform, his perfunctory attitude on this, ideology and the protection of his constituency do not support any serious commitment on his part. His habitual prevaricating justifies giving no credence to his comments until concrete and serious actions are taken.

Does Obama’s statement that "I don't believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I've talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs" convey a strong conviction that litigation is a problem or that he would champion reform? Definitely not! The word “may” in “may contribute” belies his verbal “commitment” to consider tort reform.

There is abundant and irrefutable evidence that defensive medicine practiced by physicians in attempts to avert malpractice suits comprises around twenty to thirty percent of healthcare costs translating into of tens of billions of dollars wasted annually. Even with trillions dollar budgets and deficits, this is still real money.

Read: Republicans Skeptical About Obama Pledge to Consider Tort Reform

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Sep 5

Waiting to See the Doctor…

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 30

A Physician’s Perspectives on Government Control of Healthcare Regarding Rationing and Effects on Quality and Outcome

The following article, written by a practicing physician, provides his perspectives on dealing with the government now and how this can provide insight into how severely healthcare will deteriorate in the future with the more restrictive and global Obamanocare. He cites several personal examples from his practice and applies these experiences to the broader picture.

What we also see is that government mandates and control create “unintended consequences”. He cites an interesting example where the federal government seeks gender parity for individuals being accepted to medical schools (independent of whether or not there is parity in desiring in becoming a physician) so that there are relatively equal numbers of men and women training to become doctors. Because women work far fewer hours and retire years earlier than men, the result is a relative shortage of physician services for a given number of physicians trained.

We can extrapolate consequences like this using many of the mandates and provisos of the proposed healthcare legislation and realize that we are in deep trouble if this gets enacted.

Read: ObamaCare and me

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 29

Tort Reform NEEDS to be Addressed As Part of Healthcare Legislation

Decisive and effective tort reform is desperately needed in this country. Our uncontrolled legal system lottery has wreaked havoc on Americans, American industries, innovations and on healthcare and healthcare costs. Physicians frequently order tests that would otherwise be unnecessary for patient care just to cover all bases in attempting to reduce the risk of a lawsuit. This is also called practicing defensive medicine and may cost our country at least $200 billion dollars annually. Then there are the direct costs of defending frivolous lawsuits which add billions of dollars more.

There are also the indirect costs such as discouraging otherwise capable individuals from pursuing a career in medicine. Those who decide to become physicians may avoid training and later practicing in very high risk specialties such as Neurosurgery, Cardiac Surgery and Obstetrics, areas where there are already a shortage of providers. Then there are the extremely dedicated, experienced and wise physicians who have been in medicine for many years who no longer want to contend with these stresses and issues and either limit their practices to lower risk procedures or retire from medicine altogether. This translates into losing some of the best and most experienced doctors from the healthcare system, an undesirable and patently avoidable situation.

With this only being part of the total story, consider the arrogance and chutzpah that Obama had when he addressed the AMA on June 15th. Despite being cognizant of the exorbitant and unnecessary costs that liability issues add to the overall price of healthcare, he stated in no uncertain terms that tort reform was not presently a negotiable issue. Of course, this should come as no surprise to anyone as attorneys are among his biggest supporters. With one of his stated goals being to reduce the cost of healthcare cost, it is imperative that he needs to seriously and effectively address tort reform.

Read: Tort Reform Is Key To Health Reform

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 28

Prominent Physician’s Group Sues the White House Over Free Speech and Intimidation Tactics

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc. (AAPS) and the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE) filed a lawsuit on August 27th against the Office of the President and other White House officials charging that the White House has “unlawfully collected information on political speech,” used its position and power to suppress opposition to health care reform. Despite some changes that were made in the White House website designed to serve as a repository of “fishy” comments about Obamanocare sent in by snitching Americans, the Plaintiffs note that there is still this “unlawful pattern and practice to collect and maintain information” on the exercise of free speech, which “continues in violation of the Privacy Act and First Amendment even if the Defendants terminate a particular information-collection component due to negative publicity.”

The following news release briefly enumerates the issues and concerns of the lawsuit. There is also a video of Stuart Varney interviewing Kathryn Serkes of the AAPS.

Read and View: White House Sued Over Free Speech Violations in healthcare battle

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 27

A Physician’s Assessment of the Obamanocare Legislation

We wonder how many of our Congressional Representatives and Senators have actually read the Healthcare Reform Bill personally rather than having their staff provide them with a synopsis. If consistent with their previous history of presumptuously not reading legislation that they have written and sponsored (Cap and Trade and Porkulus Spending bills, etc.), we surmise that a majority of Democrats have no clue what is contained in the Obamanocare legislation. Fortunately, many Americans have made the prodigious and heroic effort to scrutinize the bloated and arcane 1017 page bill and what they have uncovered has been shocking to say the least. What has been discovered are provisos that often have nothing to do with healthcare delivery or quality but instead with such inimical dictates as wealth redistribution, affirmative action, rationing, and unwarranted government intrusiveness and control. These are dangerous for America and Americans. We have dissected many of these issues here in previous articles.

The following is a letter to Senator Bayh written by Dr. Stephen Fraser, an Anesthesiologist practicing in Indianapolis, who pored through the entire document and enumerated several areas of concern. Many of these issues have been intentionally and dishonestly denied by Obama, Pelosi and the Congressional Democrats. You can check them out for yourself to vouch for their validity.

July 23, 2009

Senator Bayh,
As a practicing physician I have major concerns with the healthcare bill before Congress. I actually have read the bill and am shocked by the brazenness of the government's proposed involvement in the patient physician relationship. The very idea that the government will dictate and ration patient care is dangerous and certainly not helpful in designing a healthcare system that works for all. Every physician I work with agrees that we need to fix our healthcare system, but the proposed bills currently making their way through congress will be a disaster if passed.

I ask you respectfully and as a patriotic American to look at the following troubling lines that I have read in the bill. You cannot possibly believe that these proposals are in the best interests of the country and our fellow citizens.

Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self insure!!

Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.

Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!

Page 42 of HC Bill:The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits for you. You have no choice!

Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise

Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued!

Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to you ur banks accounts for elective funds transfer.

Page 65 Sec 164: is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community organizations: (ACORN).

Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the Exchange.

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications for of Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration your Healthcare!

Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. Example - Translation: illegal aliens.

Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.

Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed.

Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid Eligible Individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. No choice.

Page 124 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monopoly.

Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what you can make! (salary)

Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE!

Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.

Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option pays 8% tax on all payroll.

Page 150 Lines 9-13: Business's with payroll btw 251k & 401k who doesn't provide public option pays 2-6% tax on all payroll.

Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.

Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay)

Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans finances /personal records.

Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that!

Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors, low income and poor are affected.

Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors, doesn't matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same!

Page 253 Line 10-18: Govt sets value of Doctor's time, proffession, judgment etc. Literally value of humans.

Page 265 Sec 1131: Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries.

Page 268 Sec 1141: Federal Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs.

Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!

Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever Govt deems preventable re-admissions.

Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors, treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -Govt will penalize you.

Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Govt tells Doctors what/how much they can own!

Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand.

Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required. Can u say ACORN?!!

Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: Govt mandates establishment of outcome based measures. HC the way they want. Rationing.

Page 341 Lines 3-9: Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing people into Govt plan.

Page 354 Sec 1177: Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs people! Unbelievable!

Page 379 Sec 1191: Govt creates more bureaucracy - Tele-health Advisory Comittee. Can you say HC by phone?

Page 425 Lines 4-12: Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life patients.

Page 425 Lines 17-19: Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney. Mandatory!

Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: Govt provides approved list of end of life resources, guiding you in death. (assisted suicide)

Page 427 Lines 15-24: Govt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt has a say in how your life ends.

Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced care planning consultant" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates.

Page 429 Lines 10-12: "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOVT!

Page 429 Lines 13-25: The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.

Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life!

Page 469: Community Based Home Medical Services = Non profit organizations. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?

Page 472 Lines 14-17: PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORIGINATION. 1 monthly payment 2 a community-based organization. Like ACORN?

Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt into your marriage.

Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, rationing those services.

I guarantee that I personally will do everything possible to inform patients and my fellow physicians about the dangers of the proposed bills you and your colleagues are debating.

Furthermore, if you vote for a bill that enforces socialized medicine on the country and destroys the doctor/patient relationship, I will do everything in my power to make sure you lose your job in the next election.
Respectfully,

Stephen E Fraser MD

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 26

Various Medical Specialties Weigh In On the Healthcare Legislation

Despite the potentially grave consequences that Obamanocare will have on Americans, a little humor is always welcomed.

The following is an assessment of the healthcare legislation derived from polls taken of the members of various medical societies:

The Allergists voted to scratch it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves.

Gastroenterologists had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.

The Obstetricians felt they were all laboring under a misconception.

Ophthalmologists considered the idea shortsighted

Pathologists yelled, "Over my dead body!" while the Pediatricians said, "Oh, grow up!"

The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the Radiologists could see right through it.

Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing. The Internists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the Plastic Surgeons said, "This puts a whole new face on the matter."

The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea..

Anesthesiologists thought the idea was a gas, and the Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.

In the end, the Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the assholes in Congress.

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Aug 23

Candian Healthcare System “Sick” and “Imploding” Yet Democrats Want to Emulate It

The president elect of the Canadian Medical Association, Dr. Anne Doig, stated that Canada’s health care system is “sick” and “imploding”. She also went on to say that that Canada’s universal health care system is not giving patients optimal care and that “the system that we have right now — if it keeps on going without change — is not sustainable" .

These are not strong words of support by the future leader of the Canadian Medical Association for a healthcare system that Obama and the Democratic Party are using as a model for government controlled healthcare in America. The rationing of care, long waits to be seen by a physician, and markedly increased mortality rates of many diseases compared to here, and unsustainable costs are indisputable.

So why do Obama and the Democrats want to establish a similar system here when they know it is failing everywhere it has been implemented? It is politics, wealth transfer, arrogance and greater government control over the lives of Americans.

Read: Canadian Health Officials: Our Universal Health Care Is 'Sick,' Private Insurance Should Be Welcomed

More:

Print This Post Print This Post
Subscribe to Our RSS Feed Follow Us on Twitter
To Contact Members of Congress To Contact Media News Editors Government Run Health Care

Archives

Copyright © 2009 SaveYourRights.com