Let’s forget about the fact that a system like this costs an unbelievable amount of money to sustain, money we don’t have. What about the quality of patient care? With all the news we read about other nations who have universal healthcare, why would we even consider it a viable option?
Thousands of surgeries may be cut in Metro Vancouver due to government underfunding, leaked paper…
Over 45,000 NHS staff call in sick every day, which is lowering standards of patient care, according to the first national NHS Health and Wellbeing Review into staff habits.
The Office of National Statistics revealing that more than 30,000 people have died in England and Wales from hospital infections in just five years. Translated proportionately into American demographics, that would be 150,000 fatalities. Not the best advertisement for socialized health care.
Canada Sees Boom in Private Health Care Business
We don’t even have to look around the word to find examples of this at work. Look at the Massachusetts and Oregon healthcare plans. These sovereign states have the right to experiment with both socially and economically. The results of these experiments can then be looked to in order to discern whether or not these same experiments should be adopted by other states. They have failed (much like Medacare, Medacaid and Social Security have failed). Looking at these failed experiments, both at home and worldwide I’ll ask my question again. Why?? The answer is simple. This was never about healthcare, it’s not about helping people, it’s not about the poor. This is about the federal government expanding the power they have over our lives. Plain and simple. Clip those strings- I don’t believe they can run our lives better than we can.
Is anyone else as confused as I am over this new turn in the healthcare debate? First Obama said he wasn’t goining to sign any legislation that didn’t include a “public option” and now it’s not the most important part of the bill and people are losing site of the rest of the bill. In fact, the public option is just a sliver of the bill, perhaps much like “end of life counseling” is only a sliver.
So now we’ve moved on (maybe) to the coop option. What does that even mean? I get my milk from a coop; it’s the last place I would think about getting my healthcare plan. Edmund Haislmaier blogged on The Foundry…
If by health care “co-op,” Congress means allowing private associations to collectively buy health insurance for their members or operate a health insurance exchange, or allowing people to buy health insurance from a non-profit, member-owned private insurer, then those would be positive, pro-consumer developments.
However, simply slapping the word “cooperative” onto a new “insurer,” but then specifying that the government — not the policyholders — picks the board of directors (as Sen. Schumer wants), or that taxpayers will subsidize it, or that it has to pay doctors and hospitals at Medicare rates, would just be an exercise in trying to disguise a “public plan.”
Fresh from the co-op
So again, whether Sebelius misspoke or the media “missheard” the truth is, we’re not out of this thing yet. The devil, as they say, is in the details and we have to remember that there are still several things wrong with the bill as it currently stands. “The individual and employer mandates, the expansion and federalization of Medicaid, the creation of a new health czar, not to mention the trillion dollar cost of the new plan, are all still intact. If, as Sebelius insists, the White House wants health reform to increase “choice and competition” than there are a number of conservative alternatives in the House and Senate that do just that by pursuing health reform through a “patient-centered” approach.” (The Foundry
So in short, nothing has really changed and as Rush says, “it’s not the time to get giddy.”
WASHINGTON (AP) — About 60,000 senior citizens have quit AARP since July 1 due to the group’s support for a health care overhaul, a spokesman for the organization said Monday.
The membership loss suggests dissatisfaction on the part of AARP members at a time when many senior citizens are concerned about proposed cuts to Medicare providers to help pay for making health care available for all. But spokesman Drew Nannis said it wasn’t unusual for the powerful, 40 million-strong senior citizens’ lobby to shed members in droves when it’s advocating on a controversial issue.
AARP is strongly backing a health care overhaul, running ads to support it and hosting President Obama at an online forum recently to promote his agenda to AARP members. However, the group has not endorsed a specific bill and says it won’t support a plan that reduces Medicare benefits.
The White House is deploying an array of tactics to promote ObamaCare.
Here’s the list to date:
1. Warn about the cost of inaction.
2. Use Grandma to build empathy through association.
3. Accuse opponents of racial prejudice – play the race card.
4. Shift the focus of the debate.
5. When accused of having a controversial proposal, just say “No we don’t.”
6. Hide the plan.
7. Hide key congressional proponents.
8. Pretend to give up on controversial issues that were never acknowledged in the first place.
9. Hold pro-Obamacare pep rallies that profess to be open town hall-like events.
10. Blame the media for focusing on the opponents.
11. Demonize the opposition.
12. Make false claims for Obamacare.
Some of the stuff that comes out of the President’s mouth; it’s unbelievable! Remember the pediatricians (who don’t do surgery) cutting out kids tonsils to make some more money? Or the surgeons who we’re running around lopping of peoples feet for the grand prize of 50k per foot? Here’s what the American College of Surgeons had to say to Obama:
CHICAGO—The American College of Surgeons is deeply disturbed over the uninformed public comments President Obama continues to make about the high-quality care provided by surgeons in the United States. When the President makes statements that are incorrect or not based in fact, we think he does a disservice to the American people at a time when they want clear, understandable facts about health care reform. We want to set the record straight.
Yesterday during a town hall meeting, President Obama got his facts completely wrong. He stated that a surgeon gets paid $50,000 for a leg amputation when, in fact, Medicare pays a surgeon between $740 and $1,140 for a leg amputation. This payment also includes the evaluation of the patient on the day of the operation plus patient follow-up care that is provided for 90 days after the operation. Private insurers pay some variation of the Medicare reimbursement for this service.
Three weeks ago, the President suggested that a surgeon’s decision to remove a child’s tonsils is based on the desire to make a lot of money. That remark was ill-informed and dangerous, and we were dismayed by this characterization of the work surgeons do. Surgeons make decisions about recommending operations based on what’s right for the patient.
We agree with the President that the best thing for patients with diabetes is to manage the disease proactively to avoid the bad consequences that can occur, including blindness, stroke, and amputation. But as is the case for a person who has been treated for cancer and still needs to have a tumor removed, or a person who is in a terrible car crash and needs access to a trauma surgeon, there are times when even a perfectly managed diabetic patient needs a surgeon. The President’s remarks are truly alarming and run the risk of damaging the all-important trust between surgeons and their patients.
We assume that the President made these mistakes unintentionally, but we would urge him to have his facts correct before making another inflammatory and incorrect statement about surgeons and surgical care.
Remember to get out of the way when someone is self-destructing.
There’s no doubt that the whole of the US is on the edge of their seats waiting to see what will happen with the healthcare reform bill. Given the fact that Obama hasn’t even given his healthcare reform proposal, most of us are relying on HR 3200 for info (there are apparently 4 other bills right now in the Senate). And now, it appear we have won a small victory for freedom. Yesterday, Matt Drudge had a picture of a white flag signaling that perhaps the White House via comments made by Kathleen Sebelius was ready to abandon the “public option”. However, at no point does the Statist do an about-face.
Now, some are saying Sebelius “misspoke” or that perhaps the state-run media “misinterpreted”. Michelle Malkin isn’t buying the surrender, and as much as I would like to believe its true, I’ll have to side with Malkin on this one.
No, there is still plenty of life left in this one boys and girls. This Administration and Congress has show themselves to be totally unworthy of our trust. Whether they sneak an extra 300 pages on a bill at 3 am or they simply deny what is actually in the proposed legislation, shenanigans are sure to continue. That being said, we can’t let up- continue to put on the pressure. Any government restriction and encroachment, any power they seek to wield that is not provided them by our Constitution is a betrayal of the people and we are duty bound to opposed it. There’s a lot more work to do.
Mike Allen (Politico)-Following a furor over how the data would be used, the White House has shut down an electronic tip box — firstname.lastname@example.org — that was set up to receive information on “fishy” claims about President Barack Obama’s health plan.
E-mails to that address now bounce back with the message: “The e-mail address you just sent a message to is no longer in service. We are now accepting your feedback about health insurance reform via http://www.whitehouse.gov/realitycheck.”
The “flag” service was introduced Aug. 4, with a White House blog post saying: “There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to email@example.com.”
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said at a briefing shortly after the service launched: “We’re not collecting names from those e-mails. … All we’re asking people to do is if they’re confused about what health care reform is going to mean to them, we’re happy to help clear that up for you. Nobody is keeping anybody’s names.”
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, wrote a letter to Obama raising privacy concerns about what the senator called an “Obama monitoring program.”
“I can only imagine the level of justifiable outrage had your predecessor asked Americans to forward e-mails critical of his policies to the White House,” Cornyn wrote. “So I urge you to cease this program immediately.”
In a later statement, Cornyn said: “Of course the White House is collecting names. … It is inevitable. Anyone with access to the firstname.lastname@example.org account has access to the names and email addresses that are collected in that account. … How are they purging names and e-mail addresses from this account to protect privacy?”