There Are Those Who Still Believe....In Obamacare

Facts can be pretty stubborn things. Someone finally took a look at the facts and it wasn't pretty.


Paul Ryan: Actually, Obamacare Will Increase Budget Deficit by $700 Billion Over 10 Years
1:02 PM, JAN 6, 2011 • BY JOHN MCCORMACK

Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan said this afternoon that contrary to claims that Obamacare will reduce the deficit, it will actually increase the deficit by roughly $700 billion.


Ryan said this afternoon at the National Press Club that the only reason a Congressional Budget Office letter claims the national health care law will reduce the deficit--i.e. bring in more revenue through tax hikes and Medicare cuts than it spends on Obamacare--is because "the books have been severely cooked"--not by the CBO but by the Democrats who wrote the bill.

"CBO has to score what you put in front of them," Ryan explained. "And if you put a bill in front of them that ignores the discretionary cost of the $115 billion you need to spend to run this new Obamacare program, that double counts the Medicare savings, that double counts the CLASS Act revenue, that double counts the Social Security revenue, that does not count the "Doc Fix"--you add all that stuff up, net it out, we're talking about a $701 billion hole--deficit."

"So if you actually do real accounting, get away the smoke-and-mirrors, get away the budget gimmicks, this thing is a huge deficit-increaser. And so we're not interested in enshrining, and endorsing, and accepting all the budget gimmicks the Democrats used to cram this thing through [Congress]," Ryan continued. "Mark my words: this thing will not reduce the deficit. I am very confident in saying that. They have a piece of paper from CBO that they contorted to suggest that it does. But that's not reality."

What's Really Wrong with the Healthcare Industry

I have pointed to many issues with healthcare here on this blog over the last several years. I have written countless articles to help everyone get a full view of the issues. We need healthcare reform. We don't need what we had forced upon us. Perhaps another point of view will help drive this point home.


What's Really Wrong with the Healthcare Industry by Vijay Boyapati

On May 3, 2010, I gave a talk to a class of students studying public health policy at the University of Washington. I began the talk by asking the students how many of them believed that the current healthcare system in America was flawed; everyone in the class raised their hand. I then asked how many of them believed that the recently passed healthcare legislation, supported by President Obama, was a step in the right direction in reforming America's healthcare system. Once again, everyone raised their hand.

While I agreed with the students on the first point, I disagreed that the recently passed legislation was a step in the right direction. My aim in giving the talk was to present the students with a consistent, libertarian, free-market perspective on healthcare reform, covering both the morality and the economics of why it would be desirable to eliminate government interference in the market.

The Morality of Healthcare Reform

One of the most important factors animating the libertarian rejection of public policy in general is the recognition that any state action must ultimately resort to the use or threat of aggression. As Ludwig von Mises observed,

It is important to remember that government interference always means either violent action or the threat of such action. Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.[1]


Libertarians who value justice and recognize that the use of aggression cannot be logically justified must reject all state action in principle – this includes the use of aggression in implementing healthcare policy.[2]

Go Read the rest.

Healthcare Still Losing Traction

The American people stood up and told our representatives that we don't want the healthcare they were determined to pass. You saw people attending meetings and gatherings attempting to sway their political leaders into stopping this bill. To no avail, the bill was passed.

The Obama Administration assured politicians that the opposition would pass. That people would warm up to the bill as more is learned about it. Instead, the more the people learn the stronger the opposition has become.

The Political Class continues to be a strong supporter of the plan, however. While 67% of Mainstream voters believe the plan will be bad for America, 77% of the Political Class disagree and think it be good for the country.(Rasmussen Polling)

This vast disconnect is causing a major shift in how people are seeing their leaders and the upcoming elections. Right now, the Healthcare Bill is facing a 63% desire to repeal it. We are finding that the more we learn the less we like the bill. Recently the Political Class has been pointing to how this bill will be a boon to insurance companies by requiring all to buy insurance. What hasn't been noted is that the requirements of the plan force such detailed and inclusive insurance policies that many will not be able to afford it. We have recently noted large companies pointing to the increased costs they will have to pay under the plan. Everyone knows that increased costs means greater unemployment and higher product costs. Not only are we facing the personal burden of cost increases for healthcare, we are also facing increased costs for products we commonly use and need.

Wasn't the key issue moving this before congress in the first place the ever increasing cost? We all wanted cost containment and preferred cost reductions in healthcare. Instead, we got even greater cost for healthcare and everything else we use or buy. This is not the plan America wants and it needs to be repealed as soon as possible.

Should They Decide When

Anyone remember Logan's Run? This was a movie from the 70's that got a TV series. Set in the 23 century, an ideal society is created and maintained by a government. Here is a quick view of the movie.




Are we heading for this? Perhaps Thomas Sorwell has a better perspective of our current situation.

A 'Duty to Die'?
By Thomas Sowell
May 11, 2010

One of the many fashionable notions that have caught on among some of the intelligentsia is that old people have "a duty to die," rather than become a burden to others.

This is more than just an idea discussed around a seminar table. Already the government-run medical system in Britain is restricting what medications or treatments it will authorize for the elderly. Moreover, it seems almost certain that similar attempts to contain runaway costs will lead to similar policies when American medical care is taken over by the government.

Make no mistake about it, letting old people die is a lot cheaper than spending the kind of money required to keep them alive and well. If a government-run medical system is going to save any serious amount of money, it is almost certain to do so by sacrificing the elderly.

There was a time-- fortunately, now long past-- when some desperately poor societies had to abandon old people to their fate, because there was just not enough margin for everyone to survive. Sometimes the elderly themselves would simply go off from their family and community to face their fate alone.

But is that where we are today?

Read The Rest Here

Who should decide when your day has come? In Logan's Run the magic day was your thirtieth birthday. Will the current line be drawn at 65 or 70? Maybe the available cash after the government siphons off their unfair share would be more like 50 or 55.

Is it the duty of the old to die to spare the expense for the young? Who will decide when they have spent enough on you?

We Knew

Here we go. The fallout from the new healthcare bill is starting to become noticed. The White House is weaving and dodging. The Democrats are spinning and the CBO(congressional Budget Office) is making it a hard pill to swallow. We even find stories about White House cover ups.

The fun is only just begun. November is still far enough off for the truth to come out and really hurt.

Nullification

Looking for a way out of the "Forced Down Our Throats" Obamacare plan. States and citizens are acting. States are filing suit and citizens are starting to look at nulification.

REBELLION IN AMERICA
Health-care mandates could be 'null and void'
Citizens launch drive to put feds back in their constitutional place

A group of Americans who believe the federal government overstepped its constitutional bounds in passing the recent health-care legislation is rallying allies to a bold and controversial initiative: state nullification of the federal law.

"Now that health-care reform has been signed into law, the question people ask most is, 'What do we do about it?'" said Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, in a statement. "The status-quo response includes lobbying Congress, marching on D.C., 'voting the bums out,' suing in federal court and more. But the last 100 years have proven that none of these really work, and government continues to grow year in and year out."

Instead, the Center is reaching back into the history books to suggest states take up "nullification," a controversial measure that would essentially involve states saying to the federal government, "Not in our borders, you don't. That law has no effect here."

The Center is partnering with WeRefuse.com to announce release of model nullification legislation for states, called the Federal Health Care Nullification Act, and a call for 100,000 Americans to join a state-by-state petition to prompt legislators into action.

Now you can join nearly 15,000 Americans and 100 members of Congress in declaring your independence from Obamacare by signing Rep. Michele Bachmann's Declaration of Health Care Independence.

"Nullification will allow Americans to stop the overreaching federal government now, not years from now," said Trevor Lyman of WeRefuse.com in a statement. "We can make our biggest waves in local politics. Our state governments understand the impact of a vocal and irate minority, and they simply need to hear from us.

"WeRefuse.com and the Tenth Amendment Center's Federal Health Care Nullification Act give our state legislators their marching orders," he continued.

The question of whether nullification is a legal and permissible step, however, has been battled over since the ink was still wet on the U.S. Constitution.

The controversy stems largely from Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, which reads in part: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land."

Many scholars today point to the Article VI "Supremacy Clause" as evidence that federal laws (such as the health-care legislation) override state laws (such as any proposed nullification act).

But not so fast, say nullification advocates, pointing to a different interpretation offered by some of America's Founding Fathers, based on the phrase in Article VI that suggests only federal laws made "in pursuance" of the Constitution are supreme.

In 1788, Alexander Hamilton wrote to the people of the state of New York in Federalist No. 33, arguing that the yet unratified Constitution limited the Supremacy Clause to only constitutional acts, and that federal laws that strayed outside those bounds deserved to be treated by "the smaller societies," meaning states, as "usurpation."

"It will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land," he wrote (all italics in the original). "These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such. … It will not, I presume, have escaped observation, that it expressly confines this supremacy to laws made pursuant to the Constitution."

Ten years later, when faced with the unpopular Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison penned the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, respectively, which asserted that the Acts had infringed on powers reserved "solely and exclusively to the respective states" and were therefore "altogether void and of no force."

In 1822, the General Court of Massachusetts blasted a federal embargo as "usurpation" and "oppression."

Read the rest Here

State Congresses are even getting into the act of Filing suit.

Oklahoma lawmakers to sue over federal health reform

House Speaker Chris Benge and Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn Coffee, both Republicans, said they plan to sue the U.S. Congress, president and U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services to prevent provisions of the act Obama signed into law last month from taking effect.

Their announcement follows the refusal earlier this month of Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson to join a multi-state lawsuit led by Florida's attorney general. Edmondson, a Democrat, said he would join the lawsuit if required by legislative action.

"Our concern is that the attorney general's effort would be lackluster, at best. We have an obligation to our citizens to challenge this unconstitutional bill, which will lead to unprecedented control of a large portion of the U.S. economy," Benge said in a statement. "The high taxes required in the law will be a burden that we cannot afford."

A resolution authorizing the legislative leaders to file the lawsuit and allowing Oklahoma residents to opt out of mandated health insurance is heading toward final passage.

Read the rest here

With all that going on, Democrats on the hill are still not happy with the power they have stolen from the people and are now attacking insurance companies directly.

Democrats seek greater control over health insurance rates

Legislation would allow federal regulators to step in to stop premium increases when state agencies fall short.

Congressional Democrats have begun pushing legislation giving government regulators greater authority to block big increases in health insurance premiums, kicking off what is expected to be a years-long process of revising and expanding their major healthcare overhaul.

The move, which comes less than a month after President Obama signed the healthcare legislation, is aimed at giving all states the power to stop premium hikes deemed excessive and allowing the federal government to step in if the states don't act.

"This is a gaping hole in our regulatory system, and it is unacceptable," Senate Health Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said Tuesday as he opened a hearing on the proposed change to the healthcare bill, the first since the legislation was enacted.

Responsibility for regulating insurers has traditionally fallen to the states, but insurance commissioners' ability to control rate hikes currently varies widely from state to state. Senior Democrats on Capitol Hill, backed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, are exploring ways to standardize that authority.

Read the rest here

Do you need anymore proof that our congress is out of control? They have denied their oath of office and are looking to confiscate even more power. Now they wish to take state authority away.

When will any of these lawmakers actually read the constitution they have sworn to uphold?

This year may drag on forever as we wait to see the clash of epic proportion that ultimately will establish this country on the constitution it was founded on, or make it wholly and completely something different. A new and conservative congress can right the course and toss Obamacare or will the battle be in the courts?

Government Employment is Going UP-- Way Up

It has been recently pointed out to me that the new Healthcare program will vastly increase employment in the government sector. I stumbled upon a list of new government programs and agencies that will need to be created to fulfill the healthcare plan. Anytime a new government body is created the costs only go up. My guess is the estimated cost is only the tip of the iceberg.


New Government Boards and Commissions created in ObamaCare bill:
1. Grant program for consumer assistance offices (Section 1002, p. 37)
2. Grant program for states to monitor premium increases (Section 1003, p. 42)
3. Committee to review administrative simplification standards (Section 1104, p. 71)
4. Demonstration program for state wellness programs (Section 1201, p. 93)
5. Grant program to establish state Exchanges (Section 1311(a), p. 130)
6. State American Health Benefit Exchanges (Section 1311(b), p. 131)
7. Exchange grants to establish consumer navigator programs (Section 1311(i), p. 150)
8. Grant program for state cooperatives (Section 1322, p. 169)
9. Advisory board for state cooperatives (Section 1322(b)(3), p. 173)
10. Private purchasing council for state cooperatives (Section 1322(d), p. 177)
11. State basic health plan programs (Section 1331, p. 201)
12. State-based reinsurance program (Section 1341, p. 226)
13. Program of risk corridors for individual and small group markets (Section 1342, p. 233)
14. Program to determine eligibility for Exchange participation (Section 1411, p. 267)
15. Program for advance determination of tax credit eligibility (Section 1412, p. 288)
16. Grant program to implement health IT enrollment standards (Section 1561, p. 370)
17. Federal Coordinated Health Care Office for dual eligible beneficiaries (Section 2602, p. 512)
18. Medicaid quality measurement program (Section 2701, p. 518)
19. Medicaid health home program for people with chronic conditions, and grants for planning same (Section 2703, p. 524)
20. Medicaid demonstration project to evaluate bundled payments (Section 2704, p. 532)
21. Medicaid demonstration project for global payment system (Section 2705, p. 536)
22. Medicaid demonstration project for accountable care organizations (Section 2706, p. 538)
23. Medicaid demonstration project for emergency psychiatric care (Section 2707, p. 540)
24. Grant program for delivery of services to individuals with postpartum depression (Section 2952(b), p. 591)
25. State allotments for grants to promote personal responsibility education programs (Section 2953, p. 596)
26. Medicare value-based purchasing program (Section 3001(a), p. 613)
27. Medicare value-based purchasing demonstration program for critical access hospitals (Section 3001(b), p. 637)
28. Medicare value-based purchasing program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 3006(a), p. 666)
29. Medicare value-based purchasing program for home health agencies (Section 3006(b), p. 668)
30. Interagency Working Group on Health Care Quality (Section 3012, p. 688)
31. Grant program to develop health care quality measures (Section 3013, p. 693)
32. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (Section 3021, p. 712)
33. Medicare shared savings program (Section 3022, p. 728)
34. Medicare pilot program on payment bundling (Section 3023, p. 739)
35. Independence at home medical practice demonstration program (Section 3024, p. 752)
36. Program for use of patient safety organizations to reduce hospital readmission rates (Section 3025(b), p. 775)
37. Community-based care transitions program (Section 3026, p. 776)
38. Demonstration project for payment of complex diagnostic laboratory tests (Section 3113, p. 800)
39. Medicare hospice concurrent care demonstration project (Section 3140, p. 850)
40. Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 982)
41. Consumer Advisory Council for Independent Payment Advisory Board (Section 3403, p. 1027)
42. Grant program for technical assistance to providers implementing health quality practices (Section 3501, p. 1043)
43. Grant program to establish interdisciplinary health teams (Section 3502, p. 1048)
44. Grant program to implement medication therapy management (Section 3503, p. 1055)
45. Grant program to support emergency care pilot programs (Section 3504, p. 1061)
46. Grant program to promote universal access to trauma services (Section 3505(b), p. 1081)
47. Grant program to develop and promote shared decision-making aids (Section 3506, p. 1088)
48. Grant program to support implementation of shared decision-making (Section 3506, p. 1091)
49. Grant program to integrate quality improvement in clinical education (Section 3508, p. 1095)
50. Health and Human Services Coordinating Committee on Women?s Health (Section 3509(a), p. 1098)
51. Centers for Disease Control Office of Women?s Health (Section 3509(b), p. 1102)
52. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Women?s Health (Section 3509(e), p. 1105)
53. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Women?s Health (Section 3509(f), p. 1106)
54. Food and Drug Administration Office of Women?s Health (Section 3509(g), p. 1109)
55. National Prevention, Health Promotion, and Public Health Council (Section 4001, p. 1114)
56. Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion, and Integrative and Public Health (Section 4001(f), p. 1117)
57. Prevention and Public Health Fund (Section 4002, p. 1121)
58. Community Preventive Services Task Force (Section 4003(b), p. 1126)
59. Grant program to support school-based health centers (Section 4101, p. 1135)
60. Grant program to promote research-based dental caries disease management (Section 4102, p. 1147)
61. Grant program for States to prevent chronic disease in Medicaid beneficiaries (Section 4108, p. 1174)
62. Community transformation grants (Section 4201, p. 1182)
63. Grant program to provide public health interventions (Section 4202, p. 1188)
64. Demonstration program of grants to improve child immunization rates (Section 4204(b), p. 1200)
65. Pilot program for risk-factor assessments provided through community health centers (Section 4206, p. 1215)
66. Grant program to increase epidemiology and laboratory capacity (Section 4304, p. 1233)
67. Interagency Pain Research Coordinating Committee (Section 4305, p. 1238)
68. National Health Care Workforce Commission (Section 5101, p. 1256)
69. Grant program to plan health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(c), p. 1275)
70. Grant program to implement health care workforce development activities (Section 5102(d), p. 1279)
71. Pediatric specialty loan repayment program (Section 5203, p. 1295)
72. Public Health Workforce Loan Repayment Program (Section 5204, p. 1300)
73. Allied Health Loan Forgiveness Program (Section 5205, p. 1305)
74. Grant program to provide mid-career training for health professionals (Section 5206, p. 1307)
75. Grant program to fund nurse-managed health clinics (Section 5208, p. 1310)
76. Grant program to support primary care training programs (Section 5301, p. 1315)
77. Grant program to fund training for direct care workers (Section 5302, p. 1322)
78. Grant program to develop dental training programs (Section 5303, p. 1325)
79. Demonstration program to increase access to dental health care in underserved communities (Section 5304, p. 1331)
80. Grant program to promote geriatric education centers (Section 5305, p. 1334)
81. Grant program to promote health professionals entering geriatrics (Section 5305, p. 1339)
82. Grant program to promote training in mental and behavioral health (Section 5306, p. 1344)
83. Grant program to promote nurse retention programs (Section 5309, p. 1354)
84. Student loan forgiveness for nursing school faculty (Section 5311(b), p. 1360)
85. Grant program to promote positive health behaviors and outcomes (Section 5313, p. 1364)
86. Public Health Sciences Track for medical students (Section 5315, p. 1372)
87. Primary Care Extension Program to educate providers (Section 5405, p. 1404)
88. Grant program for demonstration projects to address health workforce shortage needs (Section 5507, p. 1442)
89. Grant program for demonstration projects to develop training programs for home health aides (Section 5507, p. 1447)
90. Grant program to establish new primary care residency programs (Section 5508(a), p. 1458)
91. Program of payments to teaching health centers that sponsor medical residency training (Section 5508(c), p. 1462)
92. Graduate nurse education demonstration program (Section 5509, p. 1472)
93. Grant program to establish demonstration projects for community-based mental health settings (Section 5604, p. 1486)
94. Commission on Key National Indicators (Section 5605, p. 1489)
95. Quality assurance and performance improvement program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6102, p. 1554)
96. Special focus facility program for skilled nursing facilities (Section 6103(a)(3), p. 1561)
97. Special focus facility program for nursing facilities (Section 6103(b)(3), p. 1568)
98. National independent monitor pilot program for skilled nursing facilities and nursing facilities (Section 6112, p. 1589)
99. Demonstration projects for nursing facilities involved in the culture change movement (Section 6114, p. 1597)
100. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1619)
101. Standing methodology committee for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1629)
102. Board of Governors for Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (Section 6301, p. 1638)
103. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund (Section 6301(e), p. 1656)
104. Elder Justice Coordinating Council (Section 6703, p. 1773)
105. Advisory Board on Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation (Section 6703, p. 1776)
106. Grant program to create elder abuse forensic centers (Section 6703, p. 1783)
107. Grant program to promote continuing education for long-term care staffers (Section 6703, p. 1787)
108. Grant program to improve management practices and training (Section 6703, p. 1788)
109. Grant program to subsidize costs of electronic health records (Section 6703, p. 1791)
110. Grant program to promote adult protective services (Section 6703, p. 1796)
111. Grant program to conduct elder abuse detection and prevention (Section 6703, p. 1798)
112. Grant program to support long-term care ombudsmen (Section 6703, p. 1800)
113. National Training Institute for long-term care surveyors (Section 6703, p. 1806)
114. Grant program to fund State surveys of long-term care residences (Section 6703, p. 1809)
115. CLASS Independence Fund (Section 8002, p. 1926)
116. CLASS Independence Fund Board of Trustees (Section 8002, p. 1927)
117. CLASS Independence Advisory Council (Section 8002, p. 1931)
118. Personal Care Attendants Workforce Advisory Panel (Section 8002(c), p. 1938)
119. Multi-state health plans offered by Office of Personnel Management (Section 10104(p), p. 2086)
120. Advisory board for multi-state health plans (Section 10104(p), p. 2094)
121. Pregnancy Assistance Fund (Section 10212, p. 2164)
122. Value-based purchasing program for ambulatory surgical centers (Section 10301, p. 2176)
123. Demonstration project for payment adjustments to home health services (Section 10315, p. 2200)
124. Pilot program for care of individuals in environmental emergency declaration areas (Section 10323, p. 2223)
125. Grant program to screen at-risk individuals for environmental health conditions (Section 10323(b), p. 2231)
126. Pilot programs to implement value-based purchasing (Section 10326, p. 2242)
127. Grant program to support community-based collaborative care networks (Section 10333, p. 2265)
128. Centers for Disease Control Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
129. Health Resources and Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
130. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
131. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
132. Food and Drug Administration Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
133. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Office of Minority Health (Section 10334, p. 2272)
134. Grant program to promote small business wellness programs (Section 10408, p. 2285)
135. Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2289)
136. Cures Acceleration Network Review Board (Section 10409, p. 2291) 137. Grant program for Cures Acceleration Network (Section 10409, p. 2297)
138. Grant program to promote centers of excellence for depression (Section 10410, p. 2304)
139. Advisory committee for young women’s breast health awareness education campaign (Section 10413, p. 2322)
140. Grant program to provide assistance to provide information to young women with breast cancer (Section 10413, p. 2326)
141. Interagency Access to Health Care in Alaska Task Force (Section 10501, p. 2329)
142. Grant program to train nurse practitioners as primary care providers (Section 10501(e), p. 2332)
143. Grant program for community-based diabetes prevention (Section 10501(g), p. 2337)
144. Grant program for providers who treat a high percentage of medically underserved populations (Section 10501(k), p. 2343)
145. Grant program to recruit students to practice in underserved communities (Section 10501(l), p. 2344)
146. Community Health Center Fund (Section 10503, p. 2355)
147. Demonstration project to provide access to health care for the uninsured at reduced fees (Section 10504, p. 2357)
148. Demonstration program to explore alternatives to tort litigation (Section 10607, p. 2369)
149. Indian Health demonstration program for chronic shortages of health professionals (S. 1790, Section 112, p. 24)*
150. Office of Indian Men?s Health (S. 1790, Section 136, p. 71)*
151. Indian Country modular component facilities demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 146, p. 108)*
152. Indian mobile health stations demonstration program (S. 1790, Section 147, p. 111)*
153. Office of Direct Service Tribes (S. 1790, Section 172, p. 151)*
154. Indian Health Service mental health technician training program (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 173)*
155. Indian Health Service program for treatment of child sexual abuse victims (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 192)*
156. Indian Health Service program for treatment of domestic violence and sexual abuse (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 194)*
157. Indian youth telemental health demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 204)*
158. Indian youth life skills demonstration project (S. 1790, Section 181, p. 220)*
159. Indian Health Service Director of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Treatment (S. 1790, Section 199B, p. 258)*
*Section 10221, page 2173 of H.R. 3590 deems that S. 1790 shall be deemed as passed with certain amendments.


With that many different government offices all having a say and sway into how this will turn out, how can anyone figure out what this nightmare will really cost?

All This Is Now Yours

That's right America, all this is now yours.

Obamacare from the people who don't care.

Oaths Don't Mean Much in DC

The Oath of Office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

This apparently means nothing to some.




Notice how offended he becomes when someone challenges his reading the entire bill. He claims to have read it three times. The bill wasn't even available long enough to read it three times.

Let us look at the math. 2600 pages at 1 minute a page and reading it 3 times.
2600 x 3 = 7800 or 7800 minutes
7800 / 60 = 130 equaling 130 hours
130 / 24 = 5.41666 That is 5 days and 10 hours
Now if you slept 6 hours a day showered and dressed each day giving 7 hours for those activities.(discounting bathroom breaks and other interruptions) that would stretch this out to 7 days and 11 hours. Let's toss in an additional 10% for shear board um. That would push this out to 8 days 12 hours.

The bill wasn't even available for a week before the vote was taken. Perhaps the representative from Illinois is a speed reader and he was able to hide from the democratic vote whipping machine.

Another honest representative serving our nation.

Here is a clear reason to vote out all who forced healthcare upon us. Honesty and Americanism needs to be restored to our government. We need the best and the brightest who have high regard for the constitution and those who brought it to us. Let us use our power to vote wisely. Don't choose a party choose a candidate that fits the qualities that will return America to greatness.


Thanks Joe for pointing out this video.

The Doctors Don't Like It

I reported to you long ago that the doctors don't like this plan. Well the doctors are making their opinion loud and clear. Perhaps a lawsuit straight from those who's lives are going to be changed dramatically by a stroke of the pen.

Medical Society Files Lawsuit to Block Health Care Overhaul

First, do no harm. Second, sue the government.

With the president's ink barely dry on the health care overhaul's final fixes, a group of nearly 5,000 American physicians is filing suit to stop the mammoth new law dead in its tracks.

"I think this bill that passed threatens not only to destroy our freedom in medicine but to bankrupt the country," said Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.

The Arizona-based medical coalition filed suit on March 26, arguing that congressional reforms illegally coerce individuals into buying insurance from private companies.

Starting in 2014, anyone who chooses not to buy health insurance faces a small federal penalty, but in 2016 the fine jumps to $695 a year per person or 2.5 percent of overall income, whichever is greater. That means that anyone earning more than $27,800 would be subject to increasing penalties, with a maximum fine of $2,085 per family.


Supporters of the law call it a simple tax meant to shore up coverage nationwide; but the AAPS says the mandate is an "unprecedented overreach" — an unconstitutional grab that rewards insurance companies and allows the federal government to seize private property in violation of the 5th Amendment.

Insurers "will have millions of new, unwilling customers that they wouldn't have gotten," said Orient, an internist based in Tuscon. "They're counting on getting all this new money."

Though legal challenges to the new law are popping up nationwide, the conservative-leaning AAPS is the only medical society to file suit against the health care package. The American Medical Association, the largest physicians' group in the U.S., supported the health care overhaul and lobbied on its behalf.

Orient says she hopes more groups will join her suit, and predicts a shortage of doctors as the medical community adjusts to the new law.

"We need to get back to the old-fashioned style of medicine where doctors worked for their patients and patients paid their doctors," she said.

Link

We have only just begun to reap the nightmares that will come with the implementation of this healthcare bill. Nothing has been done to lower the cost, which is what Americans really needed. Plenty has been done to raise the cost Now they plan on taking more and penalizing you if you don't buy what they are selling. We can still get this bill stopped. We need to boot out of office everyone who forced this horrible bill upon us. Start preparing for elections and supporting real conservative candidates.

How Are Your Health Dollars Spent

Since everyone is talking healthcare, why don't we look at how it breaks out.



Let's take the big slices, hospital care and Physician and Clinical Services. The size of these two slices make up 52% of the cost of healthcare. If we can find a small percentage of savings in these areas, we will have significant savings overall.

I pointed out a video when I wrote "The Real Reason Healthcare is so High". We have Illegals flooding our healthcare system. How many hospitals have closed or filed for bankruptcy due to the vast cost of providing Medical care to illegals. Once they are here we become obligated, so keeping them out should be a priority when discussing ways to cut the cost of healthcare.

Doctors and even some of their staff spend large sums of money on malpractice insurance. They lose time and effectiveness by practicing protective medicine as well as battle lawsuits and the large settlements that often result. Instant wealth opportunities and gold diggers are not foreign to any business activity but they are far more prevalent in the medical industry. Simply knowing that doctors have multi-million dollar malpractice policies makes them all the more ripe for the picking. These insurance bodies often settle for large sums to avoid long battles and vast jury awards that ultimately drive up the cost of insurance for all medical personnel.

Increasing the number of doctors would help make healthcare more accessible and perhaps more affordable. The current enrollment in medical schools have dropped and the caliber of student is also suffering. Gone are the days when medicine was a lucrative practice. There is more money and less risk in so many other fields that perhaps we need an incentive system to draw in quality candidates. I know when I was attending pre-med classes there wasn't anything motivating me to finish. In fact the opposite was often more common.

HMOs have radically changed the medical profession. Their formularies and reimbursement programs take control out of the patient and doctors hands and put it in the hands of bureaucrats. This system of healthcare management has focused the industry on cost instead of outcome. The goal of the doctor patient relationship was the health and well being of the patient. Under the HMO system the goals are based on uniformity instead of best health outcome. Patients have the impression that they should have it all given the high cost of the program, while insurances try to give them the minimum they feel they need leaving doctors in the middle to negotiate the end result or fail to be reimbursed for their efforts. The HMO system has created another problem. The co-pay system takes away any incentive for the patient to learn or do basic care. The medical facility is forced into a bad guy roll by denying some level of care.

Placing the price tag back out in plain sight and allowing the patient to use their money to buy what they need would restore the patient doctor relationship as well as contain costs. The doctor only naturally will perform to the buyers level of acceptance. Third party buyers such as insurance companies and government programs take the focus off the real issue that brought this group together in the first place. Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are a great way to put things back in order. The Personal Medical Savings Account is a far superior method for restoring some of the accountability back into the system. If someone had to actually pay for the requested service even knowing they would be reimbursed for a qualified medical visit, they would spend some time verifying and learning how to qualify. If there was the possibility that they would foot the bill they would be absolutely sure they needed to go. On the flip side if the medical facility was paid by the patient and not some formulary centered third party, they would be more prone to quality customer service. The incentive to please and help the patient would be returned to the health care industry. It would also be easier to focus on care when only patients with real needs came, hence education.

Once again a simple review of the problems with healthcare and its cost help us find ways to improve the system without having to resort to something as drastic as Obamacare. I recently wrote every senator to give them these very suggestions before they voted for Obamacare. I still haven't received a response from anyone. They sent me a generic thanks for writing letter.

The answer isn't bigger government. Looks like many got this test question wrong and failed America. It is time we a least shrunk government by every name on the "yes" side of Obamacare.

They Brought You Obamacare Without Any Understanding Of Insurance

They don't know what they voted for because no one read the 2600 pages. Now they make a list of so called benefits of the plan and fail to recognize the ultimate outcome. Here is an article that gives you the benefits with a brief explanation

The Top Ten ‘Benefits,’ Seven of Which Aren’t [Avik S. A. Roy]
Democrats, such as Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), say they are eager to campaign against Republicans who seek to repeal their health-care legislation. "The Republicans will have to stand up and say we want to repeal those things and I think that will be hard, because people will begin to realize these are commonsense changes," said Durbin.

Indeed, as Grace-Marie Turner mentioned on these pages, Democrats have posted a list of the "Top Ten Immediate Benefits" that they argue that individuals will gain from the legislation.

But there is no such thing as a free lunch, and many of these "benefits" are accompanied by unmentioned costs. If you require that every restaurant serve Kobe beef instead of USDA Choice, diners might see that as a "benefit" — until their waiter gives them the check.

Let's go through the Democrats' top ten, point-by-point:

Prohibit pre-existing condition exclusions for children in all new plans. This will increase the cost of insurance for everyone else. Net negative.

Provide immediate access to insurance for uninsured Americans who are uninsured because of a pre-existing condition through a temporary high-risk pool. High-risk pools are a good way to improve coverage of those with pre-existing conditions, which is why John McCain advocated them in the 2008 Presidential campaign. Unfortunately, the Democratic bill doesn't do enough to make them feasible. Net neutral to positive.

Prohibit dropping people from coverage when they get sick in all individual plans. Insurers shouldn't drop people when they get sick, unless they have an extremely good reason, such as misrepresentation of a pre-existing condition. The onus should be on insurance companies, therefore, to investigate these things up front before taking consumers' money. This mandate will have the side effect of making applications for insurance more onerous. Net positive.

Lower seniors' prescription-drug prices by beginning to close the donut hole. As a flat-out subsidy, yes, this will appear to seniors to be a straightforward benefit. But it is accompanied by a far larger cut: the obliteration of Medicare Advantage. Net negative.

Offer tax credits to small businesses to purchase coverage. The tax credits will not be enough to compensate for two things: (1) an Obamacare-driven acceleration in the rise of the cost of health insurance; (2) the employer mandate, which requires that any small business with more than 50 employees provide health insurance to every employee or pay a fine equal to $2,000 multiplied by the entire number of employees in that company. Net negative.

Eliminate lifetime limits and restrictive annual limits on benefits in all plans. Yet another mandated "benefit" that will drive up the cost of health insurance. Net negative.

Require plans to cover an enrollee's dependent children until age 26. See #7, though if this provision increases the number of young people with health insurance, it could improve the risk pool and have a salutary effect on insurance costs. Net neutral to positive.

Require new plans to cover preventive services and immunizations without cost-sharing. See #7. Another clumsy mandate that will drive up the cost of insurance. Most plans already encourage prevention — but prevention has no impact on long-term health care costs, since we all have to eventually die of something. Net negative.

Ensure consumers have access to an effective internal and external appeals process to appeal new insurance plan decisions. Yeah, except that a new government agency, the Independent Medicare Advisory Board, is now empowered to bar reimbursement for any insurance claims it deems fit. And its decisions, enacted by unelected bureaucrats, can't even be appealed by Congress, let alone consumers. We know from experience that once Medicare stops reimbursing for something, private insurers usually follow. Net negative.

Require premium rebates to enrollees from insurers with high administrative expenditures and require public disclosure of the percent of premiums applied to overhead costs. Once again, this is a mandate that will only drive up insurance costs. If an insurer is required to spend 85 percent (say $850 of every $1,000) of premiums on patient care (hence $150 in "overhead"), but the company needs to spend $200 on administrative costs to ensure that its plans run effectively, they will simply raise premiums by $333 in order to ensure that the percentage of premiums spent on overhead remains the same. Net negative.

So, of the Democrats' top ten "benefits," seven have direct, opposing costs of an even greater magnitude. The remaining three provisions, if we're lucky, might work out. But we haven't even gotten started with all of the other mandates and tax increases in the law for which there are no upsides.

The Democrats' list demonstrates that we have a long way to go before our political class understands the very basics of how insurance works. One of the projects of conservatism over the next few years must be to rectify this problem.

Healthcare Reminder

I know you haven't seen or heard enough about healthcare so I thought that this video may be a nice reminder. John has such a great way of laying it all out so that it makes sense.

They are determined to force through healthcare. Maybe it is your voice that will be the straw that breaks the camel's back of Obamacare. Use the contact link on the side bar to do just that.

So Clear Just Add Music

Ray Stevens did just that.



I have seen this in a couple of places, but I had to put it here.

Soon No One Will Accept Medicare

Medical clinics and hospitals are starting to refuse Medicare patients. The current "Public Option" is failing miserably and more failure is on the way.

Why Doctors Are Abandoning Medicare
By C.L. Gray - FOXNews.com
Physicians will not be bullied into bankruptcy. Our system needs reform, but what's being hammered out in Washington is not the answer.

Two weeks ago the Mayo Clinic shocked the nation when it closed the doors of one of its Arizona clinics to patients on Medicare. Just this past June President Obama himself praised Mayo as a model of medical efficiency noting that Mayo gives “the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm.” If Mayo feels compelled to walk away from this government-run program, others will surely follow. The nation must understand why.

Doctors are leaving Medicare for two reasons: one obvious, the other more concealed.

The first is simple—the math:

1) For the past decade Medicare consistently paid physicians 20% less than traditional insurance companies for identical service.

2) On January 1, 2010 Washington made hidden cuts to Medicare by altering its billing codes.


3) Medicare will cut physician reimbursement by another 21% on March 1. The CBO said this cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”

4) Even more, Congress pledged to cut Medicare by yet another $500 billion. Again, the CBO said this additional cut must take place if the Senate healthcare bill was to “reduced the deficit.”
Many physicians were operating at a loss even before this series of massive cuts. In 2008, Mayo Clinic posted an $840 million loss in caring for Medicare patients. No businesses can survive when patient care expenses exceed revenue.

The second is more ominous—Washington’s increasingly abusive posture toward physicians.
President Obama reflected this attitude last summer. On national television, he stated as fact a surgeon is paid between $30,000 and $50,000 for amputating a patient’s foot.

In reality, a surgeon is paid between $740 and $1,140 to perform this unfortunate, but often life-saving procedure. This reimbursement must cover a pre-operative evaluation the day of surgery, the surgery, and follow-up for 90 days after surgery—not to mention malpractice insurance, salaries for clinic nurses, and clinic overhead. It is frightening to think our president is so wildly misinformed even as he stands on the cusp of overhauling American health care. But it gets worse.

Read The Rest

Few would deny that Healthcare needs reform. The problem is our leaders don't have a clue as to what is needed. Worse yet, they refuse to listen to those who do.

Loud and Clear

I have lost count on the number of times I have written on healthcare. I am sure this won't be the last. In each of my writings I have tried to bring forth the actual wishes of the American People. The key issue that has kept Americans pushing on our leaders has been the cost. The cost of healthcare keeps rising higher and higher. If we are to afford healthcare, then something has to be done to stop this rise.

Our congressional leaders in all their wisdom have completely avoided all possible solutions that would cut costs and instead chose to further increase the cost burden. To make it even more felonious, they have chosen to take money in advance of any future services further increasing the burden on us all. We not only have to pay for todays health needs but now through additional taxes and fees, cuts in benefits and medical rationing, we will be paying for future benefits that will be even less then our current system.

They have attempted to hide the fact that we will pay this burden. Businesses pass on taxes and fees in increased cost of goods sold and cut backs in payroll and employment. Each of us is struggling to make ends meet now. How will you afford the cost increases you will have on daily need items? The market is far to fluid for only one group to bare this burden. It will ultimately be shared by all. The question is, how much is our share?

Enough is enough, tell them to dump this travesty and start over. Could we try incorporating some of the cost savings measures we have asked for and stop the power grab.

Write them again. If you don't have it memorized, use the tool on my side bar.

What Are They Doing?

The Senate passed its version of Healthcare. There was a lot of posturing and back room deals. Did Americans win or lose?

The healthcare industry has been estimate at one sixth of our total economy. The size and continued rising costs made this a hot button for many years. Americans from every walk of life have been staggering under the weight of medical costs. They begged for some relief and many looked to congress to provide it.

Has anyone seen anything in these bills that will actually produce the results the people asked for? Here are the key points that would make healthcare cheaper.

Cost of Illegal Immigration to our healthcare system
Tort Reform - Frivolous and Record Breaking Awards
Education and Personal Health Responsibility
Freeing up Health Professionals to Deal with actual Health issues
Doctor Availability and the lack of new doctors entering the market
3rd party payer healthcare places incentives in the wrong area (HMOs and the real cost)

Reality is that the current bills passed by both houses don't do anything to contain costs or (What we really need.) reduce the cost to Americans. Instead we have regulations and manipulation of the marketplace that may eventually end up in cost overruns and future bailouts to fix the system that wasn't really broken in the first place. Not once were the issues above addressed in any real way that would actually reduce the burden on the healthcare system and in turn reduce the cost. If congress would have focused on enticing more of our finest into the medical field the issue of coverage and doctor availability would have solved itself in the ten year projections given to the current nightmares going before congress now.

I know Americans want something done about healthcare. Each and everyone of us feel the pain of costs and access, but does anyone honestly think that these bills and the compromises that will take place meet the needs we so desperately need met? We are looking at increases in bureaucracy and regulation that will change every area of healthcare for the worse.

It isn't too late. You can write or call your representatives and let your position be known. You still have the final say at the ballot box. They haven't taken that from you yet.

What About Cutting the Cost

Americans wanted someone to do something about healthcare because the costs are through the roof. The average family pays almost as much as a car payment for healthcare. The costs keep rising and what do we hear from our leaders? The costs will be going up so they can take it over. That's right. We can't afford it now but according to congress we can pay more. The issues that I and others have outlined that raise the cost of healthcare and could be addressed to lower it, haven't even been discussed. It doesn't seem to matter what the people need.

After looking over the current offering, the people are starting to run. The polling numbers are quickly turning against congress.

Poll: Americans no longer believe in health 'crisis'
Support for government solution plummets from only months ago

A poll released today shows Americans' belief in the current health care system has risen dramatically in the last year, and support for a socialized solution to a health care "crisis" has nearly evaporated.

The latest results from Rasmussen Reports show 49 percent of Americans now rate the quality of U.S. health care system as good or excellent, to only 27 percent that still argue it's poor.

The favorable numbers reflect a 20-point jump from prior to the presidential election, when a June 2008 Rasmussen poll showed only 29 percent rated the health care system so well and 37 percent rated it poor.

Furthermore, the more government reform of health care has been in the national spotlight, the more Americans have grown to appreciate a private health care industry.

The 49 percent rating the U.S. system as good or excellent reflects a rise from 29 percent last year, to 35 percent in May and 44 percent at the beginning of October.

"Those opposed to Mr. Obama's reform appear to have momentum on their side," writes pollster Scott Rasmussen in a Wall Street Journal editorial. "It appears that the prospect of changing health care has made the existing system look better to a lot of people."

Read the rest


Have you let your congress critters know where you stand on healthcare?

Have you made up your mind about healthcare?

I have made 27 posts about Healthcare since June. I have pointed to real issues and solutions as well as mistakes and problems. There has been some things worthy of a good laugh and other things that have made me very mad. We have seen bills passed in congress that nobody read. Do we really want to make a change of this size with no trial period and no evidence that it would work?

Shouldn't we test out something this big? I want proof it works. I question if congress even has any authority under the constitution to do this. I can find no grounds for such an action. Some have pointed to the preamble as there authority.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I see promote as a synonym for encourage or press for. I don't see it as take over and force. We should also note that this was written as a focus on state unity under a common government and not personal unity and needs as some would wish it to suggest. The US constitution was written to help a small group of independent states defend and promote themselves. The federal government was carefully crafted as a balance of state interests and populous needs. We have moved a long way away from the government envisioned by our founders.

It might be your last chance to speak your peace about healthcare reform. Use the button on my side bar to write your senator and tell them and there staff what you think should be done about healthcare. Encourage them to actually read the bill. encourage them to push for a amendment that tests this proposal before it goes nation wide. I think this will ultimately cost us more and give us less. Tell me why you think I am right or wrong.

This and That

First, I would like to offer my sympathies to the families of those effected by the Fort Hood Shooting. There appears to be much blame to go around, so we will need to wait and see how it all comes out.

For those of you completely overwhelmed by the shootings, the house passed the Healthcare Reform bill 220-215. All Republicans except the freshman from New Orleans voted against it. It looks like it will be extremely tough in the senate. Start your emailing and phone calls.

The DC Sniper finally got what he deserved. Lethal injection may be far to easy for a murderer of this caliper. He tormented millions yet leaves in relative peace.

The White house tossed another under the bus, Anita Dunn. How many America Haters has Obama placed in his staff? We the people are having to vet the staff because BO wont.

Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., called Monday for an international coalition to block gasoline deliveries to Iran because of its rejection of a U.N. plan to curb its enriched uranium stockpile. Since a major portion of Iran's gas is refined outside the country, why not use this for leverage. None of the other sanctions seem to have any effect. Perhaps this will cause enough pain to get them to the negotiating table.

I have been working long and crazy hours. Things need to be repaired and schedules need to be kept up. Hopefully, with all the changes, we will find a way to make it all work.