Red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He stepped down from Mount Olympus at the Democrat National Convention.
Television news anchors felt tingles running up their legs.
Oprah cried.
MSNBC called him God-like.
Lewis Farrakhan called him the Messiah.
Colonel Gaddafi suggested the “Son of Africa” should be President for Life.
Some think he will replace their kitchen and pay their rent.
And now, New Jersey children are taught to think of Barack Hussein Obama when they hear the words of a children’s Bible School song:
Red, yellow, black or white
They are precious in his sight
Jesus loves the little children of the world
Here are the complete lyrics and a link to the video of New Jersey children singing the song in a public school.
Video of Elementary School Children Singing "Mm, mmm, mm!"
Lyrics Taught in a New Jersey Elementary School
Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
Yes!
Mmm, mmm, mm
Barack Hussein Obama
My stomach churns. Never before have I felt physically sick over any political event; angry, yes; disappointed, yes; afraid for my country, yes; physically sick, no!
Something is seriously wrong with people who buy into this stuff.
Few political leaders in recorded history have claimed to be God. Some Roman emperors made the claim. The emperors of Japan claimed descent from their primary Gods. But not even Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, or Mao made that claim. Kings and queens in Europe claimed they ruled by Divine right but they didn’t claim God-ship. Emperors of China claimed to rule with the favor of Heaven but they knew the favor could be withdrawn.
Iran’s mullahs say they for speak for God but, as far as I know, not even North Korea’s Kim Jung Il claims to BE God.
Obama and his supporters have created a cult that seems to literally worship him. And this in the United States of America whose ambassadors refused to bow to kings; whose flag is not dipped in deference to royalty.
Who are these people?
Are they the people who burned in Waco?
Are they the ones who drank Jim Jones’ Kool Aid?
Are they Moonies in linen robes selling flowers on street corners?
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
Who ARE these people?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1k6tTyRiXME&feature=player_embedded
Link to Featured Posts
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
The Land of the Free & the Home of the Brave
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Francis Scott Key wrote these words referring to a specific banner flying over a specific fort that was then under bombardment by the British Navy with whom we were at war.
Today there many thousands of star spangled banners flying all over this great land. But the question is still a good one.
Does that star spangled banner yet wave over the land of the free and the home of the brave?
The banner waves – but is the land free?
Does a Constitution still limit the powers of government? Are we citizens or are we subjects? Do we own property or does the government allow us to hold it? Are we responsible for our own lives or is the government responsible for us?
Are the powers of the federal government limited and enumerated or are they whatever Congress and the Supreme Court say they are? Are powers not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution reserved to the States and to the People?
The banner waves – but does it yet wave over the home of the brave?
Will we stir ourselves to restore limited Constitutional government of the people, by the people, and for the people? Are we willing enough – brave enough – to do what is necessary?
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Links to Other Posts in the Special Report: Liberty is Radical
Link to Featured Posts
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Francis Scott Key wrote these words referring to a specific banner flying over a specific fort that was then under bombardment by the British Navy with whom we were at war.
Today there many thousands of star spangled banners flying all over this great land. But the question is still a good one.
Does that star spangled banner yet wave over the land of the free and the home of the brave?
The banner waves – but is the land free?
Does a Constitution still limit the powers of government? Are we citizens or are we subjects? Do we own property or does the government allow us to hold it? Are we responsible for our own lives or is the government responsible for us?
Are the powers of the federal government limited and enumerated or are they whatever Congress and the Supreme Court say they are? Are powers not specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution reserved to the States and to the People?
The banner waves – but does it yet wave over the home of the brave?
Will we stir ourselves to restore limited Constitutional government of the people, by the people, and for the people? Are we willing enough – brave enough – to do what is necessary?
O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?
Links to Other Posts in the Special Report: Liberty is Radical
Link to Featured Posts
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Special Report: Universal Health Care
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
"Build a Health Care Bill" Content Index
Build a Health Care Bill: We Can Do It Better Than Congress
Death by Rationing
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 1
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 2
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 3
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 4
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 5
Small Business Disincentives
47 Million Uninsured
Health Care Reform Simplicity
"Build a Health Care Bill" Content Index
Build a Health Care Bill: We Can Do It Better Than Congress
Death by Rationing
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 1
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 2
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 3
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 4
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored - Part 5
Small Business Disincentives
47 Million Uninsured
Health Care Reform Simplicity
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored – Part 5
This series on ObamaCare (as embodied by the July 14th, 2009 version of H.R.3200) has been overtaken by events. President Obama in his speech before Congress on 9/9/2009 asserted a willingness to make changes to “his plan”. He reiterated many portions of H.R.3200 but indicated a reluctant willingness to make changes to get a bill that can pass.
As a result, I will curtail my analysis of H.R.3200 and instead discuss reforms that could improve health care and health insurance for some without screwing it up for everyone else; Reforms in the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath, “First, do no harm.”
The Ignored
1. Increasing Supply: - If between 10,000,000 and 50,000,000 people not currently insured become insured after some fashion, the demand for health care will increase. Yes, they already get health care thru hospital emergency rooms, but their consumption of health care will increase after they are insured. That’s the point of giving them insurance coverage in the first place.
Regardless of the form taken, the eventual health care reforms will cause rationing unless the supply of health care is increased. Prices will go up or waiting times will lengthen.
What it needful is an intentional opening up of medical schools of all types and encouragement for people to go into medical fields.
Identification of best practices and assistance in communicating them throughout the medical community will also help increase the net supply by making existing capacity more productive
2. Tort Reform: - Putting caps on civil malpractice judgments will not only reduce the direct costs of health care providers by reducing their liability insurance premiums. It will also increase available medical capacity by reducing the amount of unnecessary “defensive medicine”.
Tort reform does not mean eliminating malpractice suits. It does mean eliminating or capping punitive judgments over and above actual damages. Wronged patients must be compensated for their real damages including lost wages, but a malpractice suit should not be equivalent to winning the lottery.
3. Increase Health Insurance Competition: - Positively authorizing interstate commerce in health insurance will immediately create a market of between 1,000 and 1,500 health insurers competing against each other in all 50 states. Today, individual state regulations require insurers to be licensed by the state of the insured. They also require certain unique sets of coverage in each state. For these reasons most state health insurance markets have only 5 to 25 licensed health insurance competitors.
Increasing competition from 25 companies to 1,000 companies will assure real competition, real price pressure, and real productivity improvements. Increasing competition by one “public option” competitor will have little effect as competition (not counting the effects of the proposed tax incentives that would encourage employers to drop private health insurance plans in favor of paying an 8% additional payroll tax).
Still more ignored but actually useful reforms remain for future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
As a result, I will curtail my analysis of H.R.3200 and instead discuss reforms that could improve health care and health insurance for some without screwing it up for everyone else; Reforms in the spirit of the Hippocratic Oath, “First, do no harm.”
The Ignored
1. Increasing Supply: - If between 10,000,000 and 50,000,000 people not currently insured become insured after some fashion, the demand for health care will increase. Yes, they already get health care thru hospital emergency rooms, but their consumption of health care will increase after they are insured. That’s the point of giving them insurance coverage in the first place.
Regardless of the form taken, the eventual health care reforms will cause rationing unless the supply of health care is increased. Prices will go up or waiting times will lengthen.
What it needful is an intentional opening up of medical schools of all types and encouragement for people to go into medical fields.
Identification of best practices and assistance in communicating them throughout the medical community will also help increase the net supply by making existing capacity more productive
2. Tort Reform: - Putting caps on civil malpractice judgments will not only reduce the direct costs of health care providers by reducing their liability insurance premiums. It will also increase available medical capacity by reducing the amount of unnecessary “defensive medicine”.
Tort reform does not mean eliminating malpractice suits. It does mean eliminating or capping punitive judgments over and above actual damages. Wronged patients must be compensated for their real damages including lost wages, but a malpractice suit should not be equivalent to winning the lottery.
3. Increase Health Insurance Competition: - Positively authorizing interstate commerce in health insurance will immediately create a market of between 1,000 and 1,500 health insurers competing against each other in all 50 states. Today, individual state regulations require insurers to be licensed by the state of the insured. They also require certain unique sets of coverage in each state. For these reasons most state health insurance markets have only 5 to 25 licensed health insurance competitors.
Increasing competition from 25 companies to 1,000 companies will assure real competition, real price pressure, and real productivity improvements. Increasing competition by one “public option” competitor will have little effect as competition (not counting the effects of the proposed tax incentives that would encourage employers to drop private health insurance plans in favor of paying an 8% additional payroll tax).
Still more ignored but actually useful reforms remain for future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored – Part 4
In Part 1 of this series I listed things in the house version of ObamaCare (H.R.3200) that I think are conceptually good and also some conceptually bad. Parts 2 & 3 highlighted parts of H.R.3200 that are downright ugly. Part 4 extends the list of the ugly.
The Ugly - Continued
8. Squeezing Hospitals: - Section 1103 requires acute care hospitals, nursing facilities, long-term care hospitals, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, hospice facilities, and psychiatric hospitals to reduce costs annually based on a nation-wide business productivity improvement index. This will motivate these providers to cut corners, reduce services, reduce capital investment (to reduce depreciation expense) and tempt them to reduce the quality of health care overall.
9. Limitation on Physicians’ Services to those Covered in a Fee Schedule: - Section 1121 limits the services for which physicians will be paid by Medicare to a list of specific approved services that are to be detailed on a Physicians Fee Schedule. This is yet another method of preventing doctors from using their own judgment in recommended treatment options to you – the patient.
10. Establishment of Limits on the Rate of Increase in Payments for Services: - Section 1121 establishes a target growth rate in the payment of services. The target will be calculated in a manner that cannot be determined by reading the H.R.3200 but the target will be used to limit payments to providers so that the overall rate of increase in the aggregate payments will rise at a rate less than or equal to the target rate. This will further squeeze payments to doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers forcing them to reduce costs, services provided, and quality of care.
11. “There Shall be NO Administrative or Judicial Review”: - Six times in H.R.3200 groups of decisions to be made by new government agencies established by H.R.3200 are removed from ANY form of review. They will not be subject to review by the courts nor will any administrative body be established to review these decisions – they are absolute.
12. Limitation on Hospital Expansion: - Section 1156 limits, and in some cases prohibits, the expansion in the number of hospital operating rooms, procedure rooms, and beds. The rules applying to these limitations cannot be determined by reading H.R.3200. The effect of such limitations is inevitable rationing by bureaucratic command or by lengthy waits for service.
There’s still more ugly to report in future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
The Ugly - Continued
8. Squeezing Hospitals: - Section 1103 requires acute care hospitals, nursing facilities, long-term care hospitals, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, hospice facilities, and psychiatric hospitals to reduce costs annually based on a nation-wide business productivity improvement index. This will motivate these providers to cut corners, reduce services, reduce capital investment (to reduce depreciation expense) and tempt them to reduce the quality of health care overall.
9. Limitation on Physicians’ Services to those Covered in a Fee Schedule: - Section 1121 limits the services for which physicians will be paid by Medicare to a list of specific approved services that are to be detailed on a Physicians Fee Schedule. This is yet another method of preventing doctors from using their own judgment in recommended treatment options to you – the patient.
10. Establishment of Limits on the Rate of Increase in Payments for Services: - Section 1121 establishes a target growth rate in the payment of services. The target will be calculated in a manner that cannot be determined by reading the H.R.3200 but the target will be used to limit payments to providers so that the overall rate of increase in the aggregate payments will rise at a rate less than or equal to the target rate. This will further squeeze payments to doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers forcing them to reduce costs, services provided, and quality of care.
11. “There Shall be NO Administrative or Judicial Review”: - Six times in H.R.3200 groups of decisions to be made by new government agencies established by H.R.3200 are removed from ANY form of review. They will not be subject to review by the courts nor will any administrative body be established to review these decisions – they are absolute.
12. Limitation on Hospital Expansion: - Section 1156 limits, and in some cases prohibits, the expansion in the number of hospital operating rooms, procedure rooms, and beds. The rules applying to these limitations cannot be determined by reading H.R.3200. The effect of such limitations is inevitable rationing by bureaucratic command or by lengthy waits for service.
There’s still more ugly to report in future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored – Part 3
In Part 1 of this series I listed things in the house version of ObamaCare (H.R.3200) that I think are conceptually worthwhile and also some conceptually bad. Part 2 highlighted parts of H.R.3200 that are downright ugly. Part 3 adds to the downright ugly list.
The Ugly - Continued
4. Health Choices Administration: - Section 203 requires the Health Choices Administration to “specify the benefits to be made available under Exchange-participating health benefits plans”.
5. Coercion of Employers: - Section 313 requires additional payroll taxes of 8% of payroll on employers that do not provide qualified health insurance (QHBP). This tax is to be paid to the Health Choices Administration.
6. Advanced Care Planning Consultation: - Section 1233 requires “advance care planning consultations” if the patient has not had such a consultation with a health care practitioner in the past five years. “Advance care planning consultations” include
7. Patient Decision Aids: - Section 1236 establishes a demonstration project in which health care providers “shall routinely schedule Medicare beneficiaries for a counseling visit after the viewing of such a patient decision aid … and to assist the beneficiary in thinking through how
their preferences and concerns relate to their medical care”.
The wording of this section seems harmless but it is mandated, the results are to be recorded and submitted to a government agency - the Health Choices Administration, and the overarching purpose is to reduce the cost of health care. This adds up to a conceptually useful tool that is likely to used as a weapon to convince, cajole, and shame Medicare patients into “taking a pill instead of having the operation” in President Obama’s words.
There’s still more ugly to report in future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
The Ugly - Continued
4. Health Choices Administration: - Section 203 requires the Health Choices Administration to “specify the benefits to be made available under Exchange-participating health benefits plans”.
5. Coercion of Employers: - Section 313 requires additional payroll taxes of 8% of payroll on employers that do not provide qualified health insurance (QHBP). This tax is to be paid to the Health Choices Administration.
6. Advanced Care Planning Consultation: - Section 1233 requires “advance care planning consultations” if the patient has not had such a consultation with a health care practitioner in the past five years. “Advance care planning consultations” include
“An explanation by the practitioner of the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice, and benefits for such supports that are available …”
7. Patient Decision Aids: - Section 1236 establishes a demonstration project in which health care providers “shall routinely schedule Medicare beneficiaries for a counseling visit after the viewing of such a patient decision aid … and to assist the beneficiary in thinking through how
their preferences and concerns relate to their medical care”.
Patient Decision Aid is defined as “an educational tool (such as the Internet, a video, or a pamphlet) that helps the patients (or, if appropriate, the family caregiver of the patient) understand and communicate their beliefs and preferences related to their treatment options, and to decide with their health care provider what treatments are best for them based on their treatment options, scientific evidence, circumstances, beliefs, and preferences.”
Shared Decision Making is defined as “a collaborative process between patient and clinician that engages the patient in decision making, provides patients with nformation about trade-offs among treatment options, and facilitates the incorporation of patient preferences and values into the medical plan.
The wording of this section seems harmless but it is mandated, the results are to be recorded and submitted to a government agency - the Health Choices Administration, and the overarching purpose is to reduce the cost of health care. This adds up to a conceptually useful tool that is likely to used as a weapon to convince, cajole, and shame Medicare patients into “taking a pill instead of having the operation” in President Obama’s words.
There’s still more ugly to report in future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored – Part 2
In Part 1 of this series I listed things in the house version of ObamaCare (H.R.3200) that I think are worthwhile in concept if not in their implementation. I also presented elements of the proposed legislation I considered bad in concept. Part 2 highlights some things in H.R.3200 that are downright ugly.
Some have said there is no bill simply because nothing has yet been passed. In response, I point out that H.R.3200, as posted on the Internet prior to the Congress’ August recess, is the bill President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid pushed to pass and sign into law BEFORE leaving Washington for the recess.
H.R.3200 may be modified after Congress returns in September, but the version dated July 14, 2009, is the version they want.
The Ugly -
1. Losing Your Current Insurance: - Section 102 allows current health insurance plans to be “grandfathered” so “you can keep your current insurance if you like it”. However, paragraph (a) (2) reads as follows:
“Limitation on Changes in Terms or Conditions – Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1.”
This paragraph seems to require conversion to a “qualified” plan if anything changes in your current health insurance. If you have insurance through a private employer you are aware that health insurance coverage is renegotiated annually. So unless your employer elects to keep the current plan literally forever you will be forced into a “qualified” plan – probably as early as the year following enactment of ObamaCare (Y1).
2. Squeezing Insurance Companies: - Sections 141, 142 and 161 combined turn health insurance into a true commodity. Section 141 establishes a “Health Choices Administration”. Section 142 requires that the “Health Choices Administration create a standard benefits package that defines a “Qualified” plan or QHBP. And Section 161 establishes a limit on how profitable a health insurance company can be by requiring rebates to policy holders when profitability exceeds a predefined level. Insurance companies would effectively become “mutual insurance companies” and stock holders will need to find other investments. Capital will become a problem and a couple of years with higher than expected claims may force companies out of business.
3. Insurance for Illegal Aliens: - Section 301 theoretically precludes illegal aliens from getting taxpayer-paid public option health insurance. It does not preclude them from buying public option health insurance that will almost certainly be subsidized for all. It will also be entirely moot if President Obama and the Democrat Congress are able to push through their desired “comprehensive immigration reform”. Once passed the illegals would be illegal no more and hence eligible for taxpayer-paid public option health insurance after all.
There’s plenty more ugly to report in future posts.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
Monday, August 17, 2009
ObamaCare: The Good, the Bad, the Ugly, and the Ignored – Part 1
Most people acknowledge that reform of our health insurance system is needed but they do not agree on the nature and scope of reform.
The version of President Obama’s health care bill now before the House of Representative is H.R.3200 titled “America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009”. It is, of course, very controversial. The link in the previous sentence will take you to an on-line copy of the 1,017 page bill with hyperlinks to each section. You can also download the entire bill in PDF format. Be warned, it is very difficult reading. Representative John Conyers spoke the truth when he said he would need two days with two lawyers to interpret what the bill means.
Representative Conyers used that as an excuse for why he hasn’t read the bill. But, the fact that Congressmen are willing to vote for and pass a piece of legislation they not only have not read but are unable to understand is sufficient reason to show them the door. If the Congress that writes and votes for a bill cannot understand its own work – who can – who will? The logical implication is that the courts will decide what the bill means since no one else knows.
Still, many people have now read the bill and interpreted what is in it - and what is not - as best they can. Below, I have summarized the most important findings – the good, the bad, the ugly, and the ignored.
The Good
Availability and Renewability: Section 112 requires insurers to make insurance available and renewable except for non-payment of premiums and Section 111 prohibits exclusion of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
Covering those Who Cannot Afford Insurance: Section 242 provides coverage for people who are not eligible for Medicaid but earn less than 400% of the official poverty level.
Covering Pre-existing Conditions when Switching Insurance: Section 111 prohibits exclusion of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
The Bad
Higher Federal Deficits: The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill will add $1.6 trillion to the Federal debt burden over the next ten years.
Higher Payroll Taxes: Sections 312 and 313 require all employers with payrolls exceeding $250,000 per year to contribute to the health insurance of their employees directly or indirectly through a sliding scale of additional payroll taxes. This means that employers that do not currently provide health insurance for their employees will be forced to do so one way or the other. Marginally profitable businesses will go out of business or layoff workers because of this increased expense.
Citizen Coercion – Section 401 imposes an income tax penalty of 2.5% of adjusted gross income upon anyone who is not covered by a qualified health insurance plan. This penalty will be enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Ugly and The Ignored still to come.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
The version of President Obama’s health care bill now before the House of Representative is H.R.3200 titled “America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009”. It is, of course, very controversial. The link in the previous sentence will take you to an on-line copy of the 1,017 page bill with hyperlinks to each section. You can also download the entire bill in PDF format. Be warned, it is very difficult reading. Representative John Conyers spoke the truth when he said he would need two days with two lawyers to interpret what the bill means.
Representative Conyers used that as an excuse for why he hasn’t read the bill. But, the fact that Congressmen are willing to vote for and pass a piece of legislation they not only have not read but are unable to understand is sufficient reason to show them the door. If the Congress that writes and votes for a bill cannot understand its own work – who can – who will? The logical implication is that the courts will decide what the bill means since no one else knows.
Still, many people have now read the bill and interpreted what is in it - and what is not - as best they can. Below, I have summarized the most important findings – the good, the bad, the ugly, and the ignored.
The Good
Availability and Renewability: Section 112 requires insurers to make insurance available and renewable except for non-payment of premiums and Section 111 prohibits exclusion of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
Covering those Who Cannot Afford Insurance: Section 242 provides coverage for people who are not eligible for Medicaid but earn less than 400% of the official poverty level.
Covering Pre-existing Conditions when Switching Insurance: Section 111 prohibits exclusion of coverage for pre-existing conditions.
The Bad
Higher Federal Deficits: The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill will add $1.6 trillion to the Federal debt burden over the next ten years.
Higher Payroll Taxes: Sections 312 and 313 require all employers with payrolls exceeding $250,000 per year to contribute to the health insurance of their employees directly or indirectly through a sliding scale of additional payroll taxes. This means that employers that do not currently provide health insurance for their employees will be forced to do so one way or the other. Marginally profitable businesses will go out of business or layoff workers because of this increased expense.
Citizen Coercion – Section 401 imposes an income tax penalty of 2.5% of adjusted gross income upon anyone who is not covered by a qualified health insurance plan. This penalty will be enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Ugly and The Ignored still to come.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Death by Rationing
The various health care bills before Congress this summer, if enacted, will kill your mother. Regardless of what President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, or the other Democrat leaders say, their legislation will ration health care.
Consider:
- They say there are 47 million uninsured Americans. If true, and if they are all covered by the new universal health care program then 47 million people will soon consume much more health care than they consume now. Demand for health care nationally should increase by more than 20% but the number of doctors, nurses, clinics, and hospital beds will remain roughly constant.
- The program makes no secret of its intention to squeeze doctor’s pay in the name of efficiency and eliminating abuse. But if a job pays less then less people want the job. Less pay will result in fewer doctors.
These situations will produce higher demand for a shrinking supply of service. Normally, prices would go up but, under universal heath care, prices will be controlled. This will produce lines of people waiting for service; like the lines at gas pumps when the price of gas was controlled in 1973; like the lines at controlled price Soviet food stores when a rumor circulated that the store had fresh fruit.
It will result in months-long waits for certain tests and treatments; kind of like the waits in Canada and the United Kingdom under their current universal health care administrations.
People will die waiting for treatment.
Consider: - The bills would establish a “Federal Health Board” empowered to approve procedures & medications based on their cost and typical effectiveness. Health care providers would be prohibited from administering disapproved treatments. Your doctor, your mother’s doctor, would not be allowed to prescribe the treatment he believes is necessary or best in your mother’s individual case. He would be constrained to prescribe only the treatments allowed by the “Federal Health Board”.
- It is said that 90% of health care expenses are incurred in the last 6 months of life. That could be understood to mean 90% of the cost of your personal medical care under today’s circumstances is, on average, expended in the last six months of your life.
- The program diverts $200 billion net from Medicare to help fund the currently uninsured. Proponents say the cuts will extend the life of the Medicare “trust fund” by five years.
- Elderly people will be required by the program to undergo periodic “End of Life Counseling” encouraging death (hospice or assisted suicide) instead of treatment.
- Proponents of “universal health care” describe calculating a value of expected remaining quality life - for use in treatment approval decisions for elderly or terminal patients.
These thoughts imply a predilection toward estimating the remaining life of the patient if effective treatment is administered; when the estimate is six months or less then treatment would be cut off. As President Obama put it, “you might be better off just taking a pain pill”.
Depending on exactly how the calculation of a “value of expected remaining quality life” works, that six month cut off time for treatment could be much longer. After all, once they chop off the last six months of your mother’s life they will quickly find that 90% of the remaining health care costs are incurred in the last six months of your mother’s new and shorter life. And so they will be tempted to chop off another six months, and another, and another?
Health care cost can indeed be controlled. Demand can be brought back in balance with supply.
All that is needed is death by rationing.
Links to Other Topics in the Special Report: Universal Health Care
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Any of Us Would be Angry
President Obama said in his 7/22/2009 press conference that “any of us would be angry” if, like his friend Henry Gates, the police knocked on our door investigating a “break-in in progress” at our home.
In the event, Mr. Gates apparently did break into his own home and was seen doing so by a neighbor who called the police. Mr. Gates became belligerent when the police officer asked for identification. He was arrested for “disorderly conduct” and the charges were later dropped.
One aspect of the incident that’s received little attention is the President’s assertion that “anyone would be angry”.
If I broke into my own house, and I have, I most assuredly would NOT be angry if the police came to investigate a reported break-in.
I would be careful to make certain that the police knew who I was and that I was not a threat. I would be thankful that my neighbor noticed the “break-in” and that the police responded to the report. I would feel just a bit more confident in the competence and reliability of my local police department.
It seems to me that only someone with a huge chip on his shoulder would get angry in this situation. Perhaps that describes both Mr. Gates and President Obama.
Link to Featured Posts
In the event, Mr. Gates apparently did break into his own home and was seen doing so by a neighbor who called the police. Mr. Gates became belligerent when the police officer asked for identification. He was arrested for “disorderly conduct” and the charges were later dropped.
One aspect of the incident that’s received little attention is the President’s assertion that “anyone would be angry”.
If I broke into my own house, and I have, I most assuredly would NOT be angry if the police came to investigate a reported break-in.
I would be careful to make certain that the police knew who I was and that I was not a threat. I would be thankful that my neighbor noticed the “break-in” and that the police responded to the report. I would feel just a bit more confident in the competence and reliability of my local police department.
It seems to me that only someone with a huge chip on his shoulder would get angry in this situation. Perhaps that describes both Mr. Gates and President Obama.
Link to Featured Posts
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
